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 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 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 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.

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 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.

The audit objective was to examine whether selected entities in the Health and Education portfolios implemented the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit and other parliamentary inquiry report recommendations and agreed ANAO performance audit recommendations.

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 objective of the audit was to assess the selected entities’ progress in implementing the corporate planning requirements under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 and related PGPA Rule 2014.

This audit assessed corporate plans for the 2016–17 reporting period, and complements the report published in August 2016 which assessed corporate plans for the 2015–16 reporting period.

This edition of Audit Insights is targeted at Australian Government officials who have responsibility for overseeing or preparing performance information under the Commonwealth Performance Framework. The aim of Audit Insights is to communicate lessons from our audit work and to make it easier for people working within the Australian public sector to apply those lessons. This edition is drawn from audit reports tabled from 2015–16 to 2022–23 into the implementation of the corporate planning and annual performance statements requirements.

This edition of Audit Insights considers the approaches entities are taking to implement parliamentary and ANAO recommendations to improve public administration practices and outcomes. It updates and replaces the edition published in November 2019 and draws on audit reports released since then.

Parliamentary committee inquiries and ANAO performance audits identify risks to the successful delivery of outcomes and generally provide recommendations to address them. Tabling an agreed response to a parliamentary committee recommendation formalises government or entity commitment to the Parliament to implement the agreed action. Similarly, ANAO performance audit reports are prepared for presentation to Parliament and agreement to implement a recommendation made in an ANAO report is therefore a commitment to the Parliament.

The audit objective was to assess Defence’s implementation of the five recommendations in  ANAO Report No.19 2014-15 Management of the Disposal of Specialist Military Equipment and the related recommendation in JCPAA  Report 449 Review of Auditor-General's Reports Nos. 1-23 (2014-15).

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.

The major projects report (MPR) is an annual review of the Department of Defence’s major defence equipment acquisitions, undertaken at the request of the Parliament’s Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA).

The purpose of the MPR is to provide information and assurance to the Parliament on the performance of selected acquisitions as at 30 June 2021. This is the 14th MPR since its commencement in 2007–08.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of monitoring arrangements (by the Accreditation Agency) and compliance activities (by DoHA) put in place to achieve residential aged care homes’ compliance with the Accreditation Standards and their other, related, responsibilities under the Act and its associated instruments.

The ANAO’s assessment considered whether:

— a sector-wide compliance strategy was in place and aligned with effective monitoring and compliance activities at the operational level;
— there was a clear articulation of the separat but complementary roles and responsibilities of DoHA and the Accreditation Agency; and
— performance information gathered by both agencies to support public reporting and business improvements was useful and enabled comparison of performance over time.

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 general objectives of the audit were to:

• obtain and report quantitative and qualitative benchmarks of performance in the public sector; and
• compare the public sector benchmarks with equivalent international data to identify better practices and highlight opportunities for improvement.

In relation to internal audit, given the three-year duration of the study, these generic objectives have been extended to include an analysis of trends in internal audit over the past three years.

In 1997-98, the ANAO audited the Child Support Agency (CSA), making 12 recommendations to improve its operational performance. A related report by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit supported the general findings of the ANAO audit and reinforced three ANAO recommendations in its own report. The audit examined client service in the CSA by following-up the CSA's implementation of the recommendations contained in these two previous reports and more broadly assessing whether the CSA had improved the management and delivery of its client service sine the previous ANAO audit.

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.

Quality in the delivery of the ANAO’s audit services is critical in supporting the integrity of our audit reports and maintaining the confidence of the Parliament and public sector entities. The ANAO Corporate Plan 2023–24 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. This quality management framework and plan complements the corporate plan. It describes the ANAO’s system of quality management and reflects the ANAO’s responses to quality risks for the coming year.

The ANAO Quality Management Framework is the ANAO’s established system of quality management to provide the Auditor-General with reasonable assurance that the ANAO complies with the ANAO Auditing Standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and reports issued by the ANAO are appropriate in the circumstances.

The quality management framework and plan component of this document identifies the ANAO’s quality objectives and key responses to address identified quality risks and to provide the Auditor-General with confidence that those responses are implemented and operating effectively.

The ANAO reports on the audit quality indicators that measure the ANAO’s performance against target benchmarks in the annual audit quality report published on the ANAO website. The audit quality report also provides transparency with respect to the implementation and operation of the responses to address quality risks for each component of the ANAO’s system of quality management.

Quality in the delivery of the ANAO’s audit services is critical in supporting the integrity of our audit reports and maintaining the confidence of the Parliament and public sector entities. The ANAO Corporate Plan 2025–26 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 activities and performance measures by which we will be held to account.

This Quality Management Framework and Plan complements the Corporate Plan. It describes the ANAO’s system of quality management and reflects the ANAO's responses to quality risks for the coming year.

The ANAO Quality Management Framework is the ANAO’s established system of quality management to provide the Auditor-General with reasonable assurance that the ANAO complies with the ANAO Auditing Standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and reports issued by the ANAO are appropriate in the circumstances.

The Quality Management Strategy and Plan component of this document identifies the ANAO’s quality objectives and key responses to address identified quality risks and to provide the Auditor-General with confidence that those responses are implemented and operating effectively.

The ANAO reports on the audit quality indicators that measure the ANAO’s performance against target benchmarks in the annual Audit Quality Report published on the ANAO website. The Audit Quality Report also provides transparency with respect to the implementation and operation of the responses to address quality risks for each component of the ANAO’s system of quality management.

Quality in the delivery of the ANAO’s audit services is critical in supporting the integrity of our audit reports and maintaining the confidence of the Parliament and public sector entities. The ANAO Corporate Plan 2024–25 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 activities and performance measures by which we will be held to account. This Quality Management Framework and Plan complements the Corporate Plan. It describes the ANAO’s system of quality management and reflects the ANAO's responses to quality risks for the coming year.

The ANAO Quality Management Framework is the ANAO’s established system of quality management to provide the Auditor-General with reasonable assurance that the ANAO complies with the ANAO Auditing Standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and reports issued by the ANAO are appropriate in the circumstances.

The Quality Management Strategy and Plan component of this document identifies the ANAO’s quality objectives and key responses to address identified quality risks and to provide the Auditor-General with confidence that those responses are implemented and operating effectively.

The ANAO reports on the audit quality indicators that measure the ANAO’s performance against target benchmarks in the annual Audit Quality Report published on the ANAO website. The Audit Quality Report also provides transparency with respect to the implementation and operation of the responses to address quality risks for each component of the ANAO’s system of quality management.

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.

Quality in the delivery of the ANAO’s audit services is critical in supporting the integrity of our audit reports and maintaining the confidence of the Parliament and public sector entities.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) Corporate Plan is the ANAO’s key strategic planning document. It guides our operating environment and sets out how we will deliver on our purpose. The Quality Assurance Framework and Plan complements the Corporate Plan.

The ANAO Quality Assurance Framework is the system of quality control that the ANAO has established to provide the Auditor-General with reasonable assurance that the ANAO complies with the ANAO standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements, and reports issued by the ANAO are appropriate in the circumstances.

This Audit Quality Report demonstrates the ANAO assessment of the implementation and operating effectiveness of the elements of the ANAO Quality Assurance Framework. The report provides transparency in respect of the processes, policies, and procedures that support each element of the ANAO Quality Assurance Framework, and outlines audit quality indicators measuring ANAO performance against target benchmarks. This report also includes the achievement of the quality assurance strategy and deliverables set out in the Quality Assurance Framework and Plan 2021–22.

While recognising the diversity of administrative requirements for different special payments, the audit provides a basis for comparison of performance across 14 different agencies in 1997-98 and progress made since the then Joint Committee of Public Accounts report 342 The administration of specific purpose payments. The objectives of the audit were to:

• identify and benchmark current practices in the management of performance information within SPP agreements;
• document the lessons learned including better practice from different agencies;
• provide a longitudinal analysis of progress since 1995; and
• provide practical guidance for the development and implementation of appropriate performance information systems and accountability.

The ANAO may collect personal information in the course of undertaking its audit program and for operational purposes not related to its audit work. This policy outlines our personal information handling practices, how we handle specific types of personal information and the information collected online by the ANAO.

The Australian Border Force (ABF) is responsible for management of onshore detention centre contracts through its contracted service providers. According to Home Affairs public reporting, as of 31 December 2023 there were 872 people in immigration detention facilities (inclusive of 859 people in immigration detention centres and 13 in alternative places of detention).

The Department of Home Affairs publicly reports on the number of critical incidents in immigration detention facilities. In 2022–23, Home Affairs reported that there were 73.6 critical incidents per 1,000 detainees, compared to 46.8 per 1,000 detainees during 2021–22. A performance audit would examine the effectiveness of the Australian Border Force’s management of critical incidents in detention.

The objective of the audit was to report to Parliament on the progress Defence has made since June 2001 in implementing appropriate strategies for recruiting, developing and retaining skilled IT personnel. The audit focused on management of specialist information system skills and did not examine skills needed by users of information systems, although the latter is of obvious importance for overall performance. In June 2001, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA), after reviewing the ANAO's Audit Report No. 11 Knowledge System Equipment Acquisition Projects in Defence, commented that its major concern about Defence's ability to develop a knowledge edge with adequate coherence, centred on Defence's ability to recruit, develop and retain skilled individuals needed in all parts of the DIE. The JCPAA recommended that the ANAO conduct an audit of Defence's strategies for recruiting, developing and retaining skilled IT personnel.

The audit was undertaken following advice from the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) to the Auditor-General that assurance that ABC programming adequately reflects the ABC's Charter was an audit priority of Parliament. The objective of the audit is to provide Parliament with this assurance. The focus of the audit was on the governance arrangements of the ABC Board and management that enable the ABC to demonstrate the extent to which it is achieving its' Charter obligations, and other related statutory requirements, efficiently and effectively. The scope of the audit was as follows:

• Review the ABC's corporate governance framework against better practice models. The ANAO had regard to the ABC's unique role as a national public broadcaster established as a budget funded Commonwealth statutory authority subject to the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997.
• Examine the ABC Board's approach to the interpretation of the Charter requirements of the ABC and the setting of strategic directions, and management's administrative arrangements for implementing the strategic directions established by the Board.
• Examine the ABC's performance information framework, the development, documentation and use of performance measures in relation to targets and/or objectives, the monitoring and reporting of performance and its' inter-relationship with the corporate planning and budgetary processes, particularly in relation to the strategic directions set by the Board.

The audit did not examine the overall management of the ABC. In keeping with the audit scope, the audit examined ways in which the ABC aligns its' strategic directions with its' Charter requirements for programs broadcast on radio, television and on-line and assures itself, and Parliament, about the achievement of its' Charter obligations. Further, the audit did not examine the operations of ABC Enterprises or symphony orchestras that operate as ABC-owned subsidiary companies.

Pursuant to a request from the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee and the Auditor - General's response to the Committee, the objective of this performance audit was to examine and report on the selection of the preferred tenderer in the Health Group IT outsourcing process. In particular, the audit examined the circumstances surrounding OASITO's administration of the: - disclosure to a tenderer of information provided by other tenderers; - subsequent acceptance of a late re-pricing offer from a tenderer: and - advice to the decision- maker leading to the selection of the preferred tenderer. The audit focused particularly on assessing the administrative processes undertaken in the selection of the preferred tenderer for the Health Group. Audit emphasis was placed on the management of the probity aspects of the tender process, particularly in regard to events that occurred between June 1999, when the tenderers provided their penultimate pricing, and the selection of the preferred tenderer in September 1999.

The ANAO concluded that DHAC's administration of the National Cervical Screening Program is generally sound. The ANAO found that the department has a key role in the Program by providing secretariat services and other support to the NAC, which provides policy advice to AHMAC, and by supporting initiatives to further develop the Program. Some areas of DHAC's administration of the Program provide examples of good practice. Related examples are the early identification of the need to monitor the Program, the early identification of possible data sources for monitoring, and the use of an independent body to provide advice, through the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, on performance indicators and data sources. A further example is DHAC's administration of the provision of cervical screening funding assistance to the States and Territories through Public Health Outcome Funding Agreements, which complies with the principles for sound Specific Purpose Payments program administration advocated by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in their Report 362. On the other hand, the ANAO has identified areas for improvement in quality assurance for the analysis of Pap smears by pathology laboratories.

The audit will examine the effectiveness of the Workplace Gender Equality Agency’s (WGEA’s) management of compliance with the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012 (the Act).

The Act requires non-public sector employers with 100 or more employees to submit an annual report containing data on workplace gender equality to the WGEA. Employers with 500 or more employees must also comply with minimum standards for gender equality. Employers that fail to comply with the Act may be publicly named by the WGEA and may be excluded from tendering for Australian Government contracts, receiving Australian Government grants, or tendering for contracts with some state governments. On 30 March 2023, the Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Closing the Gender Pay Gap) Bill 2023 was passed, which requires the WGEA to publish employer gender pay gaps for private sector and Commonwealth public sector employers, and from 2024, employees will have access to information about their employer’s performance on pay parity.

The audit may examine the WGEA’s use and assurance of data, identification and monitoring of non-compliant employers, and certification of compliance. The audit may also examine whether non-compliant employers have been awarded Australian Government contracts and grants.

This audit would examine the effectiveness of the Department of Health, Disability and Ageing’s (Health’s) implementation of star ratings for residential aged care.

The star ratings system was introduced in December 2022. An overall star rating and star ratings in four categories (compliance, residents’ experience, staffing and quality measures) are assigned to residential aged care services on a public facing website (My Aged Care) operated by Health. The star rating system aims to help older Australians and their representatives make more informed choices about their care and to help aged care providers to see where they are performing well and how they can improve. In October 2024 the Commonwealth Ombudsman made a public statement expressing a view that star ratings were not sufficiently meaningful to help people make informed decisions about their aged care. From November to December 2024 Health ran a consultation process on planned design changes to star ratings. Health has stated that an evaluation report was expected to be provided to the Australian Government in early 2025.

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

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 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.

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.

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 whether APS agencies had sound approaches to recruitment, to assist in providing the workforce capability to deliver government programs effectively. Sound approaches to recruitment involve agencies:

• establishing and implementing strategic approaches to recruitment to address current and future workforce priorities and goals;
• managing and supporting recruitment activities through the provision of expert advice and support, legislative and procedural guidance material, and training for staff involved in recruitment activities;
• conducting recruitment activities effectively and in compliance with legislative and administrative requirements; and
• systematically monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of recruitment strategies, policies and activities.

The objective of the audit were to assess the extent to which agencies' performance management systems, strategies and plans are consistent with the strategic framework set out in the Managment Advisory Committee Report; provide assurance that the administration of performance managment is being implemented efficiently and effectively in accordance with better practice principles; provide assurance that performance linked remuneration reported in anual reports complies with the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet Requirements for Annual Reports; and quantify the cost of performance linked remuneration, both performance bonuses and performance linked advancements (salary increments), across the APS.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the procurement and contracting associated with:

• the design, development and delivery of government advertising campaigns by Commonwealth departments; and
• the operation of the Central Advertising System (CAS).

The objective of this audit was to assess the Tax Office's implementation of the nine recommendations of Audit Report No.19 2004–05 Taxpayers' Charter, having regard to any changed circumstances affecting the implementation of the recommendations. This involved an examination of the Tax Office's:

• systems and processes used to develop, maintain and update the Charter;
• strategic commitment to implementing the principles of the Charter;
• integration of Charter principles with its business processes;
• systems for resolving disputes according to Charter principles; and
• monitoring and reporting of its performance against commitments in the Charter.

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 audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DIAC's administration of the health requirement of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). To achieve this objective, the ANAO examined whether DIAC was setting and implementing the health requirement in accordance with the Act, the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations), and DIAC's own guidelines.

The audit objective was to assess how well agencies manage their websites. Particular attention was given to the audited agencies' website purposes, risk management and planning, policies, content management procedures, and performance monitoring and reporting. These elements provide the framework for the design, implementation and operation of websites.

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 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 the effectiveness of the administration, by DoHA and the Commonwealth partners, of the 2008 and 2011 Heads of Agreement for the management, operation and funding of the Mersey Community Hospital (The Commonwealth partners for this audit were the Tasmanian Government Department of Health and Human Services and the Tasmanian Health Organisation – North West).

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Human Services' management of Medicare compliance audits.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to review Centrelink's progress in implementing the findings and recommendation relating to Centrelink's Customer Charter from Audit Report No.32
2004–05, Centrelink's Customer Charter and Community Consultation Program. This audit covers Centrelink's Customer Charter only and does not follow-up on the findings and recommendation on the Community Consultation Program aspect of the 2004–05 audit report.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s administration of the Northern Australia Quarantine Strategy. The ANAO examined whether the department had established effective:

• administrative and governance arrangements to support NAQS;
• processes for identifying biosecurity risks and conducting scientific activities to address identified risks;
• arrangements for managing the quarantine aspects of Torres Strait border movements; and
• public awareness activities that reflect identified biosecurity risks and support the program’s objectives.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DEEWR‘s administration of the initial phases of the NP ECE. The high-level criteria used to make this assessment were the appropriateness of DEEWR‘s:

• establishment of a sound foundation for implementation, including implementation plans, monitoring arrangements and an Indigenous strategy for universal access; and
• ongoing monitoring and support activities, including assessing progress reports, making payments, maintaining relationships, improving data quality and public reporting.

The objective of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) was to examine how the ATO manages its responsibilities under the Taxpayers' Charter as an important element of its performance. This involved an examination of the ATO's: systems and processes used to develop, maintain and update the Charter; strategic commitment to implementing the principles of the Charter; integration of Charter principles with its business processes; and monitoring and reporting of its performance against commitments in the Charter.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the department's administration of general recurrent grants paid to the States and Territories for government schools. To achieve this, the ANAO assessed whether the department:

• paid the correct amount of general recurrent grants to the States and Territories;
• effectively managed the agreements with the States and Territories; and
• monitored progress towards achieving the National Goals for Schooling in the Twenty-First Century.

The objective of this audit was to assess and report on the progress being made by Government agencies in achieving better practice in green office procurement and sustainable office management. The scope of the audit included agencies incorporated under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 as well as a sample of bodies incorporated under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. Sixty-three agencies were included in an audit survey. Detailed validation was carried out in nine of these agencies.

Annual Performance Reporting, No 11 2003-04 The audit reviewed the 2001-02 annual reports of the departments of : Communications, Technology and the Arts; Education, Science and Training; Employment and Workplace Relations; Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and the Australian Customs Service. The objectives of this audit were to determine whether agencies had: established a sound annual reporting performance information framework; developed arrangements to ensure performance information is accurate and coherent; and appropriately analysed performance information in their annual reports.

The audit objective was to assess the Department of Employment’s management of the effectiveness and quality of employment services delivered by Job Services Australia providers.

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.

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 whether DIMIA's information systems and business processes are effective in supporting APP to meet its border security and streamlined clearance objectives. In particular, the audit focused on the following: Mandatory APP - Stage 1 (MAPP1) project management; MAPP1 IT development and system performance; APP performance reporting; contract management; and financial management.

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 effectiveness of the Parliamentary Budget Office in conducting its role since being established in July 2012.

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 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 this audit was to assess how effectively FaHCSIA and DEEWR have undertaken their roles and responsibilities for specialist disability employment services under the current (third) CSTDA.

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.

The objective of this audit is to examine the effectiveness of the TGA’s administration of complementary medicines regulation in Australia. The primary focus is on listed complementary medicines, which comprise about 98 per cent of these medicines.

The objective of the audit was to assess FSANZ's administration of its food standard functions, as specified in the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act, 1991 (last amended 2007).
Particular emphasis was given to whether:

• FSANZ's performance management and reporting provided effective support and ensures accountability;
• FSANZ effectively administered its food standard development and variation function, including its stakeholder management; and
• FSANZ effectively monitored the implementation of its standards and coordinates relevant jurisdictions to address market failures.

The objective of the audit was to assess if DBCDE had effectively managed the ABG program, and the extent to which the program was achieving its stated objectives. The audit examined DBCDE's activities supporting the planning, implementation, monitoring and performance reporting for the ABG program from its commencement in April 2007 to June 2010.

The audit objective was to assess whether agreements between Australian Government (Commonwealth) agencies reflect sound administrative practices. To meet this objective, the audit reviewed current government policy and a range of better practice guidelines, conducted interviews with agencies and examined cross-agency agreements, to formulate suitable audit criteria and subsequently develop better practice principles.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of ARPANSA’s management of the regulation of Commonwealth nuclear, radiation facilities and sources, including ARPANSA’s compliance with its legislative requirements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the management practices undertaken by APS agencies to achieve value for money and transparency in dealing with contracts for non-APS workers. The focus of the audit was on circumstances where agencies had a significant reliance on a non-APS workforce to assist in achieving their core functions. Regular reporting by agencies of expenditure on non-APS workers was outside the scope of this audit.

The audit objective was to report on the administration of the Australia Network tender process and to identify lessons learned from the conduct of the process to inform future procurement activities.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DEEWR's administration of the National Partnership Agreement on Literacy and Numeracy (LNNP). The three high-level audit criteria used to form a conclusion examined the extent to which DEEWR:

• established sound administrative and payment arrangements consistent with government policy, including through its negotiation of bilateral agreements, implementation plans and reform targets;
• properly managed administrative and payment arrangements; and
• effectively monitored and reported on delivery and outcomes.

As an element of the arrangements implemented to support the role of the ANAO in reviewing campaigns' compliance with the Guidelines announced on 2 July 2008, the ANAO advised the chair of the JCPAA that the ANAO will provide regular summary reports to Parliament. Section 25 of the Auditor-General's Act 1997 provides for the tabling of such reports.

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 objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education’s (DIISRTE’s) administration of the Education Investment Fund grants program.

(DIISRTE was the department that had responsibility for the administration of the EIF grants program during the course of the audit. The recommendations and suggestions for improvement are, however, directed to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education because this department now has responsibility for the administration of the program).

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 the follow-up audit was to assess how well the ATO has implemented the recommendations of Audit Report No.3 of 2001-2002, The Australian Taxation Ofiice's Administration of Taxation Rulings. As part of the audit we also considered the ATO's progress in addressing the JCPAA's suggestions resulting from its review of Report No.3 of 2001-2002.

The objectives of this performance audit were to: - review the governance and accountability framework for the Scheme, and - assess the efficiency and effectiveness of Treasury's implementation and management of that framework.

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 was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing's support for improved access to integrated GP and primary healthcare services through its administration of the Primary Care Infrastructure Grants (PCIG) program.

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 determine whether Australian Government agencies were implementing appropriate policies and processes to identify and manage conflicts of interest.

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 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 audit were to:

• examine whether the appointment of CMAX Communications Pty Ltd as a provider of communications support and advice for the 2020 Summit was consistent with the Commonwealth procurement framework and sound principles of public administration; and
• assess the effectiveness of the administration of the CMAX Communications contract by PM&C.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether DEWR's management and oversight of Job Placement and matching services is effective, in particular, whether: DEWR effectively manages, monitors and reports the performance of JPOs in providing Job Placement services; DEWR effectively manages the provision of matching services (including completion of vocational profiles and provision of vacancy information through auto-matching) to job seekers; Job seeker and vacancy data in DEWR's JobSearch system is high quality and is managed effectively; and DEWR effectively measures, monitors and reports Job Placement service outcomes.

The objective of the audit was to examine the investment of public funds by selected entities, including: compliance with relevant legislation, delegations and instructions; the value for money of investment strategies; and reporting of investment activities. Six entities were selected for audit, comprising three FMA Act agencies and three Commonwealth authorities. The six entities had aggregrate investments of $1.64 billion as at 30 June 2004 and realised investment earnings of some $80.4 million during 2003/04.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of agencies’ arrangements for monitoring and implementing ANAO performance audit recommendations.

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 audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of physical security arrangements in selected Australian Government agencies, including whether applicable Australian Government requirements are being met.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Centrelink's approach to investigating and responding to external fraud. The ANAO's assessment was based on four key criteria. In particular, the ANAO assessed whether Centrelink:

• had established a management framework, business systems and guidelines, that support the investigation, prosecution and reporting of fraud;
• had implemented appropriate case selection strategies and controls to ensure resources are targeted to the cases of highest priority;
• complied with relevant external and internal requirements when investigating fraud and referring cases for consideration of prosecution; and
• had implemented an effective training program that supports high quality investigations and prosecution referrals.

The objective of this audit was to assess key aspects of Australian Government agencies' fraud control arrangements to effectively prevent, detect and respond to fraud, as outlined in the Guidelines. The scope of the audit included 173 agencies subject to the FMA Act or the CAC Act.

The objective of this audit was: to form an opinion on the adequacy of selected agencies' approaches to monitoring and evaluation of government programs and services delivered on the Internet; and to identify better practices and opportunities for improvement. In order to achieve this objective, the audit examined the websites and Internet-delivered services of five agencies.

The objective of the audit is to assess the effectiveness of the ADF’s mechanisms for learning from its military operations and exercises. In particular, the audit focused on the systems and processes the ADF uses for identifying and acting on lessons, and for evaluating performance. The ANAO also examined the manner in which information on lessons is shared within the ADF, with other relevant government agencies, and with international organisations. Reporting to Parliament was also considered.

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 this audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs’ administration of the National Partnership Agreement on Homelessness (NPAH), including monitoring and reporting of progress against the objective and outcomes of the agreement.

The objective of the audit was to examine Defence's management of leases that have resulted from property sale and leaseback transactions. Leases subject to review were for a period of ten or more years and included the following six properties: the Defence Plazas in Sydney and Melbourne; the Hydrographic Office Wollongong; DNSDC Moorebank; Campbell Park Offices in Canberra; and ADC Weston Creek in Canberra. The audit examined the process for identifying the properties for sale and leaseback and the sale approval process. The audit sought to determine the basis on which the properties were proposed for sale and leaseback and the financial impact for the Government. The audit also reviewed the lease terms and conditions to determine whether they protect the Government's interests, and examined Defence's management of commitments arising from the leases.

The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the AEC’s implementation of the recommendation made in ANAO Audit Report No. 28 2009–10 relating to the transport and storage of completed ballot papers.

The audit objective was to provide independent assurance to the Parliament on the effectiveness of Australian Public Service organisations in the use and management of the HRIS to satisfy mandatory reporting requirements, as well as provide meaningful information to management. The audit also considered the use of employee self service facilities offered by the HRIS, which has the capacity to provide staff with access to their personal information, reduce manual processing and streamline processing.

The objective of the audit was to report on the effectiveness of Defence’s approach to the acceptance into service of Navy capability, and to identify where better practice may be used by CDG, DMO and Navy.

A performance audit of the management of the Detention Centre Contracts was listed in the 2003-04 Audit Work Program as a potential audit. The audit work program proposed that the audit would be conducted in two parts. The first part would focus on DIMIA's management of the detention centre contracts with the then detention service provider, GEO Australia. The second part would concentrate on how well any lessons learned from the first contract, were translated into improvements with the new contract. The original objective of this second ANAO audit was to assess DIMIA's management of detention services through the Contract, including the tender process, transition period and implementation of lessons learned from the previous contract.

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 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 appropriateness of the use and reporting of confidentiality provisions in Australian Government contracts for 2011.

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

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 Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), a division of the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing, is responsible for the regulation of the manufacture and supply of therapeutic goods. The objective of the audit was to assess the TGA's regulation of non-prescription medicinal products. In particular, it reviewed the TGA's systems, procedures and resource management processes used to approve new manufacturers, monitor ongoing manufacturer and product compliance with mandated requirements, and manage non-compliance. The audit made 26 recommendations designed to improve the transparency, quality and reliability of regulatory decisions taken by the TGA and improve its accountability mechanisms by enhancing its management information systems.

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 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.

This audit was designed to identify the methods used by selected agencies to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of their delivery of services through the Internet, and to evaluate the adequacy of these methods. ANAO also identified better practices, lessons learned and opportunities for improvements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the ACMA's effectiveness in operating, managing and monitoring the Register, including compliance with legislative requirements.

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.