In a military context, individual readiness refers to the ability of an individual member to be deployed, within a specified notice period, on operations, potentially in a combat environment, to perform the specific skills in which he or she has been trained. Individual readiness is the foundation on which military preparedness is built. Maintenance of a specified level of individual readiness in peacetime (along with other factors such as equipment readiness and collective training) influences the speed with which personnel can deploy on operations. The objective of this audit is to ensure that members can be deployed on operations, potentially in a combat environment, to perform their specific skills within a notice period of 30 days.

The objective of the current audit was to assess Army's progress in implementing the ANAO recommendations and to examine and assess any developments in relation to AIRN since the 1999?2000 audit report and the 2001 JCPAA report. Army updated AIRN policy in 2001 and 2004, and the ANAO has assessed, where appropriate, the implementation of the 1999?2000 audit recommendations for these two policy reissues.

The objective of this audit was to examine whether Army effectively administers the Army Individual Readiness Notice to support the achievement of its purpose.

The audit examined the relationship between the strategic guidance and capabilities provided by Army, through analysis of the Army capability management and reporting framework. The objectives of the audit were to: Assess Army capability management and reporting processes; determine whether these processes efficiently and effectively manage resources to provide Army capability; and accurately indicate the capability provided by Army.

The Navy Operational Readiness audit examined the systems that Navy uses to manage readiness and concludes coverage of Navy: readiness organisation and management structures (as well as the interface between these systems and Defence enabling operations); management and maintenance of operational readiness (covering personnel, collective training and other components of operational readiness); and readiness performance information processes. The objective of the audit was to provide assurance to Parliament concerning the progress that Navy has made in the development of operational readiness management and evaluation systems and to identify areas for improvement in these systems.

The objective of this audit was to assess Army's progress in addressing the issues previously identified in Defence reviews and ANAO audits as affecting the Army Reserve's capability; and Identify the extent that the Army Reserve is capable of contributing to contemporary Australian Defence Force capability requirements through fulfilling its assigned roles and tasks.

The objective of the ANAO audit was to identify possible areas for improvement in the Australian Defence Force's management of its Reserve forces. The audit focused on major aspects of the Reserves including roles and tasks, force structure, capability, training, individual readiness, equipment, facilities, recruitment, retention, conditions of service and administration. The audit covered the Australian Naval Reserve, the Australian Army Reserve and the Royal Australian Air Force Reserve. However, due to its size and cost, the Army Reserve was a major focus of the audit activity.

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 reviewed the High Wealth Individuals Taskforce, a comprehensive compliance program with the Australian Taxation Office. The objective of the audit was to examine and report on the management and operations of the taskforce. In doing so, the audit reviewed the Australian Taxation Office's own evaluation of the taskforce and assessed whether, and to what extent, the taskforce delivered the outcomes specified by the Government.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness and appropriateness of the Department of Defence's management of its public communications and media activities.

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 objective of the audit was to provide an independent assurance on the effectiveness of Defence and DMO's management of the acquisition of the ASLAV capability to Army. The audit examined the initial capability requirements and approval process, the contract negotiation process, and the management of the Project and Contracts by DMO.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence is effectively managing the delivery of health services to ADF personnel in Australia (chiefly Garrison Health Services).

The objective of the audit was to examine processes used by Defence and the DMO to procure explosive ordnance for the ADF, with an emphasis on Army requirements. The audit reviewed the extent to which the DMO effectively translated the explosive ordnance requirements of the ADF, and particularly of Army, into procurement and through life support arrangements.

The report summarises the audit and other related activities of the ANAO in the period January to June 2001. Key issues arising from performance audits tabled in this period are summarised against ANAO themes of:

• corporate governance including human resource management, financial management, and performance information;
• service delivery including the impact of e-government;
• procurement and contract management; and
• information technology.

Appendix 1 of the Activity Report provides a short summary of each of the performance audits tabled between 1 January 2001 and 30 June 2001.

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 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 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.

The ANAO’s performance audit program is one of the main assurance functions of the Auditor-General. The purpose of this information report was to provide analysis of 2023–24 performance audits.

This report summarises audit and other related activities of the Australian National Audit Office in the period January to June 2000.

The objective of this report is to provide the Auditor-General’s independent assurance over the status of selected Major Projects, as reflected in the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) prepared by the DMO, and the Statement by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) DMO. Assurance from the ANAO’s review of the preparation of the PDSSs by the Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) is conveyed in the Auditor-General’s Independent Review Report, prepared pursuant to the endorsed Guidelines, contained in Part 3.

The objective of this performance audit was to assess the effectiveness and consistency of risk management processes undertaken by the Australian Taxation Office in administering individual taxpayer refunds.

The objective of this report is to provide comprehensive information on the status of selected Major Projects, as reflected in the Project Data Summary Sheets prepared by the DMO, and the Statement by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the DMO, and including the ANAO’s review of the preparation of the PDSSs by the DMO.

The report summarises performance audit, financial statement audit and other related activities for the ANAO for the period July to December 2003. The key issues arising from performance audits tabled in this period are summarised against the ANAO themes. The report also summarises financial audits and other financial audit activities conducted by the ANAO during the period July to December 2003. It discusses significant issues such as the: consolidated financial statements and the final budget outcome; harmonisation of Australian Generally accepted accounting practices and Government Finance Statistics; adoption of International Financial Reporting Standards; timing for Financial Statements Preparation; and the audit of the CFS 2002-03.

This first Assurance Report on the status of selected Defence equipment acquisition projects, which has the support of the Parliament and the Government, represents a substantial step towards improving transparency and public accountability in major Defence procurement projects. It is the pilot of an annual Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) Major Projects Report, and was developed in conjunction with the DMO. It covers the cost, schedule and capability progress achieved by nine DMO projects, which had an approved budget totalling $13.535 billion as at 30 June 2008.

This report is organised into three parts. Part 1 comprises an ANAO overview and Auditor–General's Foreword. Part 2 comprises the Major Projects Report prepared by DMO, including an overview reflecting DMO's perspective on their business and on the nine projects included in the. Part 3 incorporates the Auditor-General's Review Report, the statement by the CEO DMO, and the information prepared by DMO in the form of standardised Project Data Summary Sheets covering each of the nine pilot projects.

In the next 12 months, the ANAO will review 15 DMO projects planned for inclusion in the 2008-09 DMO Major Projects Report, with the number of projects rising to 30 projects in subsequent years. The ANAO will also work with DMO to refine the approach adopted for providing assurance on each project's progress toward achieving Final Operational Capability. The ANAO will also consider the inclusion of an analysis of each project's emerging trends, as appropriate, to complement DMO's intention to provide improved analysis of project management performance regarding all projects included in the Major Projects Report.

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 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 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 objective of the audit was to assess the progress of the M113 Upgrade Project (Defence Project: Land 106), including progress in the development of operational capability resulting from the introduction of the upgraded vehicles into service. The high-level audit criteria used to assess the project’s progress and Defence’s effectiveness in administering the M113 Upgrade Project were:

• the degree to which the schedule for the production and delivery of upgraded M113 vehicles to Defence had been recovered in accordance with Defence’s response to the 2008–09 audit report and contractual requirements, as negotiated over the life of the contract;
• Defence’s measurement and allocation of the total cost of the upgrade project; and
• the development of capability arising from the upgrade project.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2010. It includes a foreword by the Auditor-General, an overview including the role and responsibilities and vision of the Office, a report on performance, details about management and accountability, and the financial results.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2004. It includes highlights and areas of focus for the year; an introduction by the Auditor-General; an overview of the report; a report on performance; details about management and accountability, and the financial statement for the year.

The objectives of this audit were to assess the progress of the M113 Armoured Personnel Carrier Upgrade Project against stated schedule, cost and technical performance objectives; and Defence Materiel Organisation's (DMO's) progress in implementing the recommendations and addressing the findings of ANAO Audit Report No. 3 2005–06, Management of the M113 Armoured Personnel Carrier Upgrade Project.

The Service Chiefs of Navy, Army and Air Force are accountable to the Chief of the Defence Force for the way that equipment is used by their Service. They are also accountable for the safety, fitness for service and environmental compliance of the equipment. The audit report deals with the way that the Service Chiefs are assured of the safety and suitability for service of the Australian Defence Force's (ADF's) ordnance systems. Ordnance systems include munitions such as missiles, shells and mines, and the auxiliary material necessary to aim, launch and guide munitions.

This audit followed up the ANAO's 2000 performance audit report on retention of military personnel (Audit Report No.35 1999-2000 Retention of Military Personnel), which focused on examining whether ADF personnel management practices to retain personnel were commensurate with the cost of recruiting and training new personnel, or whether more cost- effective steps could be taken to reduce the separation rates of desirable personnel. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess Defence's implementation of recommendations made in the original audit report and their effectiveness in helping Defence control the flow of trained personnel from the Services.

This audit followed up the ANAO's 1997 performance audit report on ADF health services (Audit Report No.34 1996-97 Australian Defence Force Health Services), which focused on the delivery of non-operational health services to entitled members. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess Defence's implementation of recommendations made in the original audit report and their effectiveness in improving ADF health services.

The objective of this report is to provide a formal conclusion on the review of the Project Data Summary Sheets by the Auditor-General, including comprehensive information on the status of projects as reflected in the PDSSs prepared by the DMO.

The objective of this report is to provide comprehensive information on the status of projects as reflected in the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) prepared by DMO, and a review by the ANAO.

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 reviewed the construction of facilities for the Australian Defence Force and the Department of Defence by the Defence Estate Organisation. The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and administrative effectiveness of the Organisation's project delivery function, highlighting effective practice and, where appropriate, making practical recommendations to enhance facilities project management. The main projects examined were the facilities required for the Army Presence in the North and the Russell Hill Redevelopment.

This report complements the Interim Report on Key Financial Controls of Major Entities financial statement audit report published in May 2023. It provides a summary of the final results of the audits of the Consolidated Financial Statements for the Australian Government and the financial statements of 243 Australian Government entities for the period ended 30 June 2023.

The objectives of this follow-up audit were to:

• examine the ATO's implementation of the ten recommendations in The Australian Taxation Office's Management of its Relationship with Tax Practitioners (Audit Report No.19, 2002–03), having regard to any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting implementation of those recommendations; and
• identify scope for improvement in the ATO's management of its relationship with tax practitioners.

Follow up audits are recognised as an important element of the accountability processes of Commonwealth administration. Parliament looks to the Auditor General to report, from time to time, on the extent to which Commonwealth agencies have implemented recommendations of previous audit reports. Follow up audits keep Parliament informed of progressive improvements and current challenges in areas of Commonwealth administration that have previously been subject to scrutiny through performance audits.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2011. It includes a foreword by the Auditor-General, an overview including the role and vision of the Office, a report on performance, details about management and accountability, and the financial results.

The objective of the audit was to provide assurance to Parliament concerning the adequacy of Defence preparedness management systems and to identify possible areas for improvement. The audit focused on the systems and processes that Defence uses to manage preparedness. We did not review the preparedness levels of specific capabilities, nor did we cover capital acquisition processes. The audit included coverage of: - preparedness systems architecture; - control and direction of preparedness; - coordination among contributors to preparedness; and - performance management and preparedness.

The objective of this report is to provide information, prepared by both the ANAO and DMO, on the performance of major projects as well as providing the Auditor-General’s formal conclusion on the review of the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) prepared by DMO and contained in this report.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Navy’s strategy for recruiting and retaining personnel with specialist skills. The effective delivery of Navy capability depends on Navy having available sufficient numbers of skilled personnel to operate and maintain its fleet of sea vessels and aircraft, and conduct wide‑ranging operations in dispersed locations. Without the right personnel, Navy capability is reduced. Navy’s budget for 2014–15 included $1.86 billion in employee expenses.

The audit concluded that, in its strategic planning, Navy had identified its key workforce risks and their implications for Navy capability. To address these risks Navy had continued to adhere to its traditional ‘raise, train and sustain’ workforce strategy; developed a broad range of workforce initiatives that complemented its core approach; and sought to establish contemporary workforce management practices. However, long‑standing personnel shortfalls in a number of ‘critical’ employment categories had persisted, and Navy had largely relied on retention bonuses as a short‑ to medium‑term retention strategy.

Navy had developed a broad range of workforce initiatives, some designed specifically to address workforce shortages in its critical employment categories. To date, Navy had primarily relied on paying retention bonuses and other financial incentives; recruiting personnel with prior military experience to work in employment categories with significant workforce shortfalls; and using Navy Reserves in continuous full time roles. Ongoing work was required for Navy to firmly establish a range of promising workforce management practices, including providing the right training at the right time; more flexible approaches to managing individuals’ careers; and improving workplace culture, leadership and relationships. More flexible and tailored workforce management practices could help address the underlying causes of workforce shortfalls, particularly when the traditional approaches were not gaining sufficient traction.

The ANAO made two recommendations aimed at Navy: drawing on external human resource expertise to inform the development and implementation of its revised workforce plan; and evaluating the impact of retention bonuses on the Navy workforce to determine their future role within its overall workforce strategy.

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

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness to date of Defence’s procurement of infantry fighting vehicles under Land 400 Phase 3.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness of Defence’s sustainment arrangements for Navy’s Canberra class fleet of amphibious assault ships (or LHDs).

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.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) had appropriately managed the procurement of garrison support and welfare services at offshore processing centres in Nauru and Papua New Guinea (Manus Island); and whether the processes adopted met the requirements of the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs) including consideration and achievement of value for money.

The audit objective was to review the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s (Defence) arrangements for delivering selected non-platform sustainment.

The audit examined the range of support made available to ADF personnel making the transition from military to civilian life, the extent to which the assistance is utilised, the cost to Defence of such assistance and the relevant responsibilities of those who deliver assistance.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence is effectively managing the EO Services Contract.

The audit focused mainly on Defence's contract management framework, including the arrangements to monitor the contractor’s performance in delivering services under the contract. The audit also examined the processes used by Defence to develop the current version of the contract and the extent to which the revised contract, as negotiated in 2006, provides an assurance of better value for money when compared to the original contract signed in 2001.

The objective of the audit was to provide an independent assurance on the effectiveness of the management of the upgrade of the M113 fleet for the Australian Defence Force (ADF). The audit sought to identify the initial capability requirements and approval process; analyse the contract negotiation process; and examine the management of the project and contracts.

The audit objective was to assess the Department of Defence’s progress in delivering Multi-Role Helicopters (MRH90 aircraft) to the ADF through AIR 9000 Phases 2, 4 and 6, within approved cost, schedule and performance parameters.

The objective of the performance audit was to report to Parliament our assessment as to how well the ATO manages and uses the AIIR data in taxation administration. The ANAO considered the following four key areas in addressing the audit objective. 1. Governance arrangements within the ATO, focussing on whole of ATO and whole-of-government aspects of the AIIR data, as distinct from solely business line applications. 2. Receipt of AIIR data and how well the ATO facilitates the collection of complete and valid AIIR data from investment bodies 3. Management of AIIR data through the construction by the ATO of valid entity records by using the AIIR data in conjunction with existing ATO client identification master files. 4: Use of the AIIR data on a systematic basis to inform active compliance activities.

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 report complements the Interim Report on Key Financial Controls of Major Entities financial statement audit report published in June 2024. It provides a summary of the final results of the audits of the Consolidated Financial Statements for the Australian Government and the financial statements of Australian Government entities for the period ended 30 June 2024. 

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence's planning and administrative arrangements to support the provision of emergency Defence Assistance to the Civil Community (DACC).

The objective of this audit was to examine the efficiency and economy of the Department of Defence’s management of its general stores inventory.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s management of the acquisition of medium and heavy vehicles, associated modules and trailers for the Australian Defence Force.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess whether Defence had taken appropriate action on recommendations made in the ANAO's 1995 audit report on Management Audit Branch (MAB), which is responsible for internal audit in Defence, and to assess whether the internal audit function in Defence could be improved.

The objectives of the Australian National Audit Office's (ANAO) performance audit were to: examine the efficiency and effectiveness of agencies' procurement and management of legal services arrangements; determine adherence to Australian Government policy requirements; examine the effectiveness of the OLSC's monitoring of agencies' compliance with Government policy requirements; examine the OLSC's role in assisting agencies to comply with Government policy.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness to date of the Department of Defence’s procurement and contract management of the Offshore Patrol Vessel program.

The objective of the audit was to consider the status of workforce planning by APS agencies against the background of the ANAO's 2001 Better Practice Guide Planning for the Workforce of the Future, in light of there commendations made in the MAC Organisational Renewal 2001 and the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee report Recruitmentand Training in the Australian Public Service 2003. Workforce planning was defined as a continuous process of shaping the workforce to ensure it is capable of delivering organisational objectives now and in the future.

Members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) have informal and formal complaint mechanisms available to them to address grievances. Initially, members are advised to seek resolution of their complaint at the lowest possible level, through the normal command channels and administrative arrangements. A member who is not satisfied that a complaint has been resolved in this manner may use the Redress of Grievance (ROG) system to submit a formal complaint to the commanding officer of the member's unit. The objective of this audit was to ascertain whether the ROG system could be refined to improve the efficiency and timeliness of processing of complaints while preserving the equity and transparency the current system provides.The Redress of Grievance system is clearly time-consuming and resource intensive. Some grievances have taken as long as four years to resolve. Some could be resolved by administrative means rather than through recourse to grievance processes. The system contains various inefficiencies that detract from its cost-effectiveness from the viewpoint of the ADF and individual members. In addition many members are unaware of the system or do not have a high level of confidence in its effectiveness.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s arrangements for the management of contractors.

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 administrative effectiveness of Defence’s procedures to provide emergency assistance to the civil community.

The objective of this audit was to provide an independent assurance on the effectiveness of Defence's management of the acqusition of armoured infantry mobility vehicles (IMV) for the Australian Defence Force (ADF). The audit sought to identify the initial capability requirements; analyse the tendering and evaluation process; and examine the management of the project by Defence. As such, this was not an audit of contractor performance, but of the formation and contract management of the aquisition project by Defence.

This report complements the Interim Report on Key Financial Controls of Major Entities published in May 2025. It provides a summary of the final results of the audits of the Consolidated Financial Statements for the Australian Government and the financial statements of Australian Government entities for the period ended 30 June 2025.

The objective of this audit was to assess whether the Department of Defence (Defence) is managing its Australian Defence Force health services contract to achieve efficient and effective delivery of the contracted services.

The objectives of the audit were to:

• examine Customs' management of the CMR project; and
• determine whether the ICS and CCF met:
  • project and operational objectives; and
  • user capability and functionality requirements.

Particular emphasis was given to the following areas:

• the project management framework that supported the CMR project;
• implementation arrangements for the ICS; and
• ongoing operational arrangements.

After this audit commenced, Customs engaged Booz Allen Hamilton to undertake a separate review of the ICS. The purpose of that review was to provide Customs with a forward looking report on the lessons to be learned from the implementation of the ICS, its current status and the opportunities to enhance benefits for both Government and industry. The ANAO consulted closely with the Booz Allen Hamilton team and is supportive of the recommendations in their report, which was released in May 2006. The review made thirteen recommendations relating to the ongoing management and governance of the Cargo Management Re-engineering Program at both strategic and tactical levels.

In the current audit, the objectives were to provide assurance to the Parliament on the adequacy of the measures and plans instituted by Defence to ensure that the combat aircrew workforce meets military preparedness requirements in the future, and to identify possible areas for improvement.

As part of its 2001 inquiry into the recruitment and retention of Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel, the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee reviewed Defence's contract with Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd for trialling the outsourcing of recruiting services to the ADF. In its subsequent report, the Committee commented that the original contractual arrangements deserved further scrutiny by the ANAO. The objective of the audit was to examine Defence's management of the contractual arrangements for the provision of recruiting services to the ADF. In examining the management of the contract, the ANAO looked at the evaluations conducted at the end of each contractual phase, roles and responsibilities associated with ADF recruiting, and Defence's monitoring of contractual performance and management of risks associated with ADF recruiting.

This report complements the Interim Report on Key Financial Controls of Major Entities financial statement audit report published in June 2022. It provides a summary of the final results of the audits of the Consolidated Financial Statements for the Australian Government and the financial statements of Australian Government entities for the period ended 30 June 2022. 

The audit objective was to assess whether the Department of Defence's (Defence's) arrangements for the operation and maintenance of the Mulwala and Benalla facilities beyond June 2020 were established through appropriate processes and in accordance with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs).

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence Housing Australia administers its functions efficiently and effectively, and in accordance with the Government Business Enterprise guidelines.

The audit objective was to examine whether Airservices Australia has effective procurement arrangements in place, with a particular emphasis on whether consultancy contracts entered into with International Centre for Complex Project Management (ICCPM) in association with the OneSKY Australia project were effectively administered.

The objective of the audit, in examining the construction of the CIIDC, was to assess:

• the adequacy of the planning and delivery processes for the project;
• the value-for-money achieved in the delivery of the project, including with regard to the suitability of the centre for its intended purpose; and
• the extent to which the Public Works Committee Act.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the coordination arrangements of key Australian Government entities operating in Torres Strait.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence effectively managed the procurement process for services related to the recruitment of personnel to the ADF and the introduction of a new service provider.

Defence has long provided housing assistance for members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) and their families. In 1988, this function passed to the Defence Housing Authority (DHA), which was established to provide suitable housing to meet Defence's operational needs. In 2000, Defence and DHA signed a Services Agreement valued at $3.5 billion over 10 years. The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence's management of its housing and relocation services provided for ADF members meets specified requirements; and to make practical recommendations for more efficient, effective and economical use of public resources provided for this purpose.

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 whether the Department of Homes Affairs has appropriately managed the procurement of garrison support and welfare services for offshore processing centres in Nauru and PNG (Manus Island).

The objective of this audit was to establish whether Defence has developed sound fraud control arrangements that are consistent with better practice and fulfil its responsibilities for the protection of public property, revenue, expenditure, and rights and privileges from fraudulent exploitation.

The Audit reviewed the Commercial Support Program (CSP) within the Department of Defence. The CSP was introduced in 1991 following a review of the report, The Defence Force and the Community. Its objective is to achieve best value for money in the acquisition of support services for the Department of Defence and to give the private sector an opportunity to participate in the provision of those support services. The objective of this audit was to assess whether CSP was meeting its objectives and to identify any areas where it may be possible to improve the timeliness, and therefore cost-effectiveness, with which CSP is implemented and the quality of the process itself to produce better outcomes.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DIAC’s management of the student visa program. Three key areas were examined in the audit: the processing of student visa applications; ensuring compliance with student visa conditions; and cooperation between DIAC and DEEWR.

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of DMO’s implementation of its Gate Review process for major Defence capital acquisition projects.

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 objective of this audit was to the examine action taken by the ATO to improve TFN integrity, particularly through the implementation of the recommendations made in:Report No.37, taking into account any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting the implementation of those recommendations; and Numbers on the Run, taking into account that the Government has not formally responded to the report at this time.The audit also aimed to identify further opportunities for the ATO to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the TFN system. The report of this audit is necessarily detailed as it considers each of the recommendations and the extent to which they have been implemented.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the Council Allocation component of the RLCIP has been effectively designed, implemented and administered. The audit examined each of the three funding rounds, albeit with a focus on the first round (as it was due to be completed by 30 September 2009), with the second round not due to be completed until late in the audit timetable (31 December 2010) and third round funding agreements being signed and payments being made at the time audit work was completed.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s overseas crisis management and response arrangements in meeting the government’s objectives for returning Australians from overseas in response to the COVID-19 global pandemic.

The objectives of the audit were to determine whether FaCS and Centrelink had: a valid Business Case for the Edge project, as revised from time to time, including estimated costs, actual costs, and expected benefits; effective governance of the project, including reviews at critical points in the project and subsequent decisions to continue or, in the final analysis, to discontinue; an appropriate contract with SoftLaw, which was adequately managed; delivered appropriate advice on progress, project viability, and acceptable solutions to technical issues to Executive of FaCS and Centrelink during the project; and valid reasons for discontinuing the project. The ANAO began this audit in March 2004, four months after the Edge project was terminated, following the Auditor-General's agreement to a suggestion by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit that the project was a suitable subject for audit.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DEWR's administration of the JSKA in ensuring its optimal usage in achieving job seeker outcomes. The ANAO examined the following aspects of the JSKA: guidance provided to Job Network Members on its operation; identification and assessment of contract risks; management of contract risks and Job Network Member performance; claims and payments; encouraging economy; and performance information.

The audit reviewed the planning and management of the Australian Defence Force deployments to East Timor, including the support of those deployments. The audit focused on planning for the deployments and the role of Australia as the lead nation in the International Force in East Timor (INTERFET); and financial, personnel, logistic and other systems used to deploy and sustain Australia's military presence in East Timor.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s procurement of Hunter class frigates and the achievement of value for money to date.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness to date of the Department of Defence’s administration of the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) program, with a focus on ERP Tranche 1 activities.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of, and to identify possible areas for improvement in, Defence management of the general service fleet.

The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of administrative arrangements for the provision of food to the Australian Defence Force and identify possible areas for improvement. The audit criteria addressed the adequacy of policy guidance, planning, performance information and risk management in all areas of ADF food provisioning.

During the preparation of the ANAO's Planned Audit Work Program 2006–07, JSCEM suggested that the ANAO consider a possible performance audit into the efficiency and effectiveness of the AEC's management of elections. JSCEM's suggestion was considered in the planning and preparation for this performance audit, which focuses primarily on the AEC's administration of the CEA in the lead-up to and conduct of the 2007 general election.

The audit reviewed the efficiency and effectiveness of Defence's management of Naval Aviation Force (NAF) in achieving its required capability within budgeted resources. The objectives of the audit were to assess whether planning, management and resource allocation mechanisms and practices for NAF were conducive to achieving the latter's objectives in a cost-effective manner.

The objective of the audit is to examine and report on the efficiency and effectiveness of AFP's administration and management of its overseas deployments. The audit specifically examines two deployments and focuses on strategic and operational planning and logistics. The audit examines a planned, long-term overseas deployment (as part of the Participating Police Force (PPF) within the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI)) and a crisis-driven deployment in response to a specific event (Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) assistance to Thailand following the Indian Ocean Tsunamis of 26 December 2004).

The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the provision of health services to the Australian Defence Force Regular forces. Audit criteria were developed which examined health services policy and strategic planning, resource management, the tri-Service provision of medical, dental and other health care, the operation of and planning for major medical facilities, health care management information systems, occupational health and safety and the supply of health materiel.

The overal objective of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) audit was to determine the efficiency and effectiveness of the conversion to digital broadcasting by the national broadcasters. This encompasses, among other things, addressing the request from the former Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (the Minister) for an audit of the actual cost of digital conversion, the sources of funds applied and the efficiency of funds utilisation. It also involved an examination of the broadcasters' management processes to deliver their Strategies and to 'minimise the call on the Budget'.

To assess the upgrade and sustainment of the F/A-18A/B Hornet fleet, and the sustainment of the newly acquired F/A-18F Super Hornet fleet.

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.

Causes and Consequences of Personnel Postings in the Australian Defence Force The audit arose from a Defence Efficiency Review (1997) recommendation that Defence could make savings on the large volume of postings it made every year. The audit examined the posting process and sought to provide assurance that Defence had identified and examined salient postings issues and was addressing them effectively.

The objective of the audit was to assess the management and effectiveness of DCO’s delivery and coordination of support services to ADF families, in particular support services provided when an ADF member is seriously injured or ill, or dies in service.

The audit reviewed the retention of military personnel that are managed by the Australian Defence Force which comprises the three Services. The objective of the audit was to review the management of personnel retention within the ADF with a view to evaluating the measures Defence has in place to monitor and control the flow of trained personnel from the Services

The audit sought to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the ADF's management of fuel and lubricants and to identify possible areas for improvement. The audit focused on major aspects of the fuel supply chain, in particular the strategic management of fuel (eg. the coordination of fuel requirements and stockholding policy). The audit also reviewed fuel procurement practices, storage and handling issues. The audit coverage addressed the fuel supply aspects of these matters rather than transport, distribution and equipment issues. Although directed principally towards operational fuels, the audit took into consideration issues associated with ADF's requirement for oils and lubricants.

The Department of Defence spends some $2.4 billion a year on major equipment acquisition projects. The audit objective was to assess Defence's arrangements for higher-level management of major equipment acquisition projects. The principal aim was to formulate practical recommendations that would both enhance Defence's management of major acquisition projects and provide a degree of assurance about its ongoing apparent capacity to do so efficiently and effectively.

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 adequacy of Defence’s processes, including compliance with the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act), the Financial Management and Accountability Regulations 1997 (FMA Regulations), and relevant Commonwealth and Defence procurement requirements, to select the capability solution recommended to the Government to satisfy the requirements of AIR 8000 Phase 2.

Tactical fighter operations (TFOs) form the basis of Australia's current military capability to ensure air superiority. Air superiority over the Australian territory and maritime approaches is an essential element in Australia's defence strategy. The audit objectives were to:

• assess whether the resources used to provide the F/A-18 tactical fighter force operational capability are managed cost-effectively; and
• identify areas for improvement in the coordination, planning and practices employed in administration of tactical fighter operations.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether protective security functions in selected organisations were being effectively managed. In considering effectiveness, the audit assessed whether protective security arrangements: - were designed within the context of the business framework and the related security risks identified by the organisation; and - provided an appropriate level of support for the organisation's operations and the delivery of its services.

The audit reviewed Defence's higher-level management of its knowledge system equipment acquisition projects. These amount to $8.5b. The focus of the audit was on the opportunities for Defence to adopt a much more coherent and integrated approach to knowledge systems management prospectively rather than on emphasising current system compatibility issues.

The objective of this audit was to assess whether the Australian War Memorial is effectively managing the development project.

Australian Industry Involvement Program. Department of Defence The audit examined the management by Defence of its Australian Industry Involvement (AII) Program. AII is the major program through which Defence gives effect to government policy on Australian industry. The objective of the audit was to assess the extent to which the AII Program has achieved its two policy objectives, which are to :

• develop and sustain strategically important capabilities in Australian industry to support Australian Defence Force operations and Defence capability development; and
• maximise Australian industry involvement in Defence's procurement of goods and services, consistent with the government procurement policy objective of achieving best value for money to the Commonwealth.

A Health Care Card (HCC) is one of three types of concession cards issued by Centrelink for the Australian Government. The objectives of the audit were to assess: the effectiveness of whole of government approaches to administering HCCs by FaCS, Centrelink, Health and HIC; the adequacy ofperformance information relating to HCCs, including monitoring the use of the card and its budgetary impact, as well as the cost of administering HCCs; and the effectiveness of controls relating to the issue, maintenance and cancellation of the HCC; and to limit its incorrect or fraudulent use.