The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness to date of the Department of Defence’s implementation of its Pathway to Change — Evolving Defence Culture 2017–2022 cultural reform strategy.

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 development of Defence’s oversight and management of its portfolio of ICT investments and projects. In particular, the audit examined Defence’s:

• governance, strategic processes and decision-making structures that set out, prioritise and coordinate the integrated ICT reform portfolio and programs;
• ICT risk management and capacity to identify and plan to achieve the benefits of its SRP ICT stream reforms (including methodologies to measure the realisation of savings and non-savings benefits);
• level of portfolio and program management maturity; and
• the impact of improvement efforts on Defence’s ability to deliver the ICT services capacity required to support the SRP.

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

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Defence’s quarterly performance report as a mechanism to inform senior stakeholders about risks and issues in the delivery of capability to the Australian Defence Force.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Department of Defence's procurement and implementation of the myClearance system to date.

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 objective of the audit was to assess whether the Department of Defence’s Projects of Concern regime is effective in managing the recovery of underperforming projects.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s administration of industry support and skill development programs.

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 objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s design and implementation of the Base Services contracts.

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 objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s administration of contractual obligations to maximise Australian industry participation.

The audit objective was to examine whether the Department of Defence implemented a selection of agreed parliamentary committee recommendations and ANAO performance audit recommendations.

The audit objective was to assess whether Defence achieves value for money in the procurement of fuels.

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 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 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 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.

The objective of this audit was to assess how effectively the Defence Science and Technology Group (DSTG) administers the science and technology work it undertakes for the Australian Defence Organisation.

The audit focuses on DMO's equipment acquisition and support, at the system program management level. The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy of Defence's capital equipment project definition, approval, acquisition and logistics support management. The SPOs subject to audit are:Aerospace Systems Division's Tactical Fighter Systems Program Office (TFSPO), which is responsible for acquisition and logistics support management of the Air Force's F/A-18 and Hawk 127 fleets and associated equipment. TFSPO is located at Williamtown, NSW; Land Systems Division's Track Manoeuvre Systems Program Office (TMSPO), which is responsible for the acquisition and logistics support management of Army's Leopard Tanks and M113 Armed Personnel Carrier fleets. TMSPO is located in Melbourne;Electronic and Weapon Systems Division's Over-the-Horizon Radar Systems Program Office (OTHRSPO), which is responsible for acquisition and logistics support management of the Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) and Jindalee OTHR systems. OTHRSPO is located within the Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) precinct at Edinburgh, South Australia; and Maritime Systems Division's Fast Frigate Guided System Program Office (FFGSPO), which is responsible for the support and upgrade of the Navy's FFG fleet. FFGSPO is located at Garden Island, Sydney.In view of the significant role that DMO's SPOs play in managing major capital equipment acquisition projects, the audit includes a case study of the $1.448 billion Fast Frigate Guided (FFG) Upgrade Project. A high level of audit assurance is not able to be provided on the FFG Upgrade Project given deficiencies in the FFGSPO information management systems and deficiencies in the level of design and development disclosure provided to SPO personnel by the FFG Upgrade Prime Contractor. The ANAO was unable to access appropriate audit evidence on the financial expenditure associated with the FFG Upgrade Project, and the Project's approved Equipment Acquisition Strategy.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness and value for money to date of the Department of Defence’s acquisition of combat reconnaissance vehicles under project Land 400 Phase 2.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness to date of the Department of Defence’s procurement of six evolved Cape class patrol boats.

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 audit reviewed the Defence Department's management of the Defence Cooperation (DC) Program, through which Australia interacts with and provides assistance to security forces in South East Asia and the South Pacific. The primary aim of the program is to support Australia's defence relationships. Activities conducted through the program include training, study visits, personnel exchanges and combined exercises with elements of the various regional armed forces. The Pacific Patrol Boat Project is part of the program. The objectives of the audit were to:

1) consider how Defence assesses performance in meeting DC objectives;

2) review Defence's development of DC objectives; and

3) identify areas for improvement in managing DC resources.

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 audit reviewed the Defence's $5.05 billion New Submarine Project which commenced in 1982 and involves design and construction of six Collins class submarines and associated supplies and services. The objectives of the audit were to assess project management by the Department's Project Office in the light of accepted better-practice project management techniques. It also aimed to derive lessons learnt and recommendations that could be applied to the Project and to similar Defence projects now and in the future. The audit follows a 1992 audit of the Project by the ANAO and a review by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts in 1995.

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 audit objective is to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence's management of the Mulwala Redevelopment Project.

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.