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.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s (TGA) application of the Code of Good Manufacturing Practice (Code of GMP) for prescription medicines.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Energy Regulator’s regulation of energy markets.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the International Quality & Productivity Centre Seminar

The audit objectives were to examine the extent to which selected TSB2 and TSI Response programs: are achieving or had achieved their objectives; and had been administered effectively by DCITA according to better practice principles. To evaluate this aspect, the audit assessed DCITA's compliance with the better practice principles outlined in the Administration of Grants Better Practice Guide (May 2002) produced by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO). There are 19 separate principles covered under the broad areas of: Planning for effective grant programs; Selecting projects; Managing and monitoring funding deeds; and Evaluating and reporting grant program performance.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority's processes for the prudential regulation of superannuation entities.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority's probity management.

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

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

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

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

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

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission’s (ACNC’s) regulation of charities.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Home Affairs’ regulation of migration agents.

The objective of this audit was to form an opinion on the Australian Research Council's (ARC's) management of research grants. To achieve this, ANAO centred the audit around the following aspects of ARC's grants administration: governance and structure, particularly the roles and responsibilities of those parties involved in administering ARC's grants (Chapter 2); the processes for assessing and selecting ARC grants (Chapter 3);post-award management of grants under the Funding Agreements (Agreements) between ARC and those universities that receive and administer the ARC grants to researchers (Chapter 4); and ARC's monitoring of its grant programs for management, performance improvement and reporting (Chapter 5). In its assessment, ANAO considered ARC's compliance with relevant sections of the Australian Research Council Act 2001 (ARC Act) and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act). The assessment also took account of the ANAO's Better Practice Guides, particularly the Better Practice Guide—Administration of Grants. The audit focused mainly on ARC's administration of Discovery Projects, the largest scheme in ARC's National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

The audit focussed on the systems and processes OGTR has established for both receiving and assessing applications under the Act, and also for ensuring compliance with the statutory requirements through monitoring and inspection. The audit objective was to form an opinion on the discharge by OGTR of selected functions entrusted to it under the Act. The audit assessed the practices of OGTR against the following principal criteria: Assessment of applications under the Act: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for the management and assessment of applications under the Act. Ensuring compliance—monitoring, inspection and enforcement activities: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Act. Performance management: Whether OGTR manages selected aspects of its work efficiently and effectively. The audit did not seek to form an opinion on the appropriateness of the chosen structure of the regime for regulating gene technology or the merit of the scientific judgments involved. The audit methodology included discussions with representatives from agencies that co-ordinate aspects of the co-operative regulatory regime for gene technology across Australian jurisdictions, with various other stakeholders and users of the regime, as well as with officers of OGTR, along with examination of OGTR documents and files.

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

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

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

The objective of the audit was to assess 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 was to assess the effectiveness of Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s regulation of registered company auditors.

The Objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of GPET's management of the general practice training programs, AGPT and PGPPP, the latter being a responsibility that GPET assumed in 2010.

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

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

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

The objective of the audit was to 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.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing's administration of the Round the Clock Medicare: Investing in After Hours General Practice Services program.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the CPA Australia's Government Business Symposium, Melbourne

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency’s (TEQSA’s) regulation of higher education.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority’s regulation of permits and approvals, including its implementation of recommendations from Auditor-General Report No.3 of 2015–16 Regulation of Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Permits and Approvals.

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 DoHA's effectiveness:

• in undertaking PIP program planning, program monitoring and review; and
• with Medicare Australia, in ensuring PIP program delivery to general practices and their medical practitioners.

In undertaking the audit, the ANAO considered the 12 incentives that comprised the PIP up to August 2009. The three most recently introduced incentives at the time of audit fieldwork, namely, Domestic Violence, GP Aged Care Access and eHealth incentives, were examined in greater detail and formed case studies to support audit analysis. The ANAO also sought views on the program administration from industry, including from general practices directly through an online survey.

With regard to accreditation of general practice, the audit scope did not include an assessment of the Standards nor the work of the bodies that undertake accreditation of general practices. The ANAO's focus on general practice accreditation related to DoHA's management of program entry criteria.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing's administration of health workforce initiatives in rural and remote Australia.

The primary objective of this audit was to review the management and administration of travel undertaken by public sector employees to determine whether, and to what extent, it complied with approved policies and procedures. The other objective of this audit, as with all across-the-board FCA audits, is to identify, develop and report better practices. The audit dealt with short-term travel by Commonwealth public sector employees on official business.

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.