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 audit follows on from Audit Report No. 45 2004-2005, Management of Selected Defence Systems Program Offices, May 2005. That report is being considered by the JCPAA, as part of its current inquiry into Defence Financial Management and Equipment Acquisition at the Department of Defence and DMO.

The Commonwealth has significant involvement in national emergency management arrangements through its roles in planning, coordination between agencies, operational response, financial support, education and training, public awareness and research activities. The objectives of this performance audit were to identify the Commonwealth's current emergency management arrangements; to provide assurance to Parliament concerning the adequacy of the arrangements; and to highlight areas for improvement.

The objective of the audit was to assess the implementation and administration of the movement limit and the Slot Management Scheme at Sydney Airport.

The scope of the audit included the development and administration of the SADM Act. The scope also included the development and administration of the relevant legislative instruments and determinations, particularly those which put in place the monitoring and compliance frameworks that support the legislation.

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 objectives of this audit were to:

• examine the effectiveness of ASIC's processes for receiving reports of suspected breaches of the Corporations Act; and
• assess the efficiency with which statutory reports are referred and investigated by ASIC.

The audit commenced in February 2006. ANAO undertook an assessment of ASIC's processes for receiving and referring for investigation statutory reports. ANAO also undertook a detailed examination of a random sample of 416 statutory reports received by ASIC in the period 2002–03 to 2004–05.

The audit scope did not extend to the role of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in prosecuting offences referred to it by ASIC.

The audit objectives were:

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

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the AFP’s administration of the Fighting Terrorism at its Source (FTAS) initiative and related measures.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the management of maintenance of the Defence estate, taking particular account of planning and delivery aspects.

The audit examined: Defence’s policies, procedures, processes and supporting tools related to the planning and delivery of the maintenance of the estate; and services provided to Defence by private sector firms in relation to maintenance activities. The audit did not focus on contract management matters, nor on the systems used by Defence to maintain information related to estate maintenance.

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.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) 2016-20 Corporate Plan is the primary strategic planning document, and outlines how the ANAO intends to deliver against the purpose over the coming four years.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness of the department's establishment of the P21 element of the BER program. The focus of the audit was on: the establishment of administrative arrangements for BER P21 in accordance with government policy; the assessment and approval of funding allocations; and the arrangements to monitor and report BER P21 progress and achievement of broader program outcomes. An examination of individual BER P21 projects was outside the scope of the audit.

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 objective of the audit was to examine the quality and integrity of DVA's income support records and to report on the effectiveness of the department's management of the data and how it impacts on service delivery.

The audit objective was to assess the extent to which DEEWR and FaHCSIA have effectively managed the planning and consultation phases for the IBF program and the IBHP program. The audit scope included consideration of the issues likely to affect the ongoing operation and sustainability of the facilities.

The audit reviewed Commonwealth debt management procedures. The audit objectives were to:

• review, and consider opportunities to improve, the reporting and disclosure of the Commonwealth's public debt;
• assess the effectiveness of the raising, management and retirement of Commonwealth debt, consistent with an acceptable degree of risk exposure; and
• determine whether there are opportunities to improve the Commonwealth's approach to the raising, management and retirement of Commonwealth debt.

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.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s arrangements for monitoring and reporting explosive ordnance and weapons security incidents.

The audit objective was to assess the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman's effectiveness in managing complaints.

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.

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

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 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.

The audit objective was to examine the selected entities’ effectiveness in implementing entity-wide fraud control arrangements, including compliance with the requirements of the 2011 Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines (2011 Guidelines), and the overall administration of the fraud control framework by the Attorney-General’s Department.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of procurement complaints handling by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, the Department of Finance, the Department of Industry, Science and Resources and the Reserve Bank of Australia.

The objectives for the audit of the third tranche sale of Telstra shares were to:

• assess the extent to which the Government's sale objectives were achieved, including maximising overall value for money;
• assess the effectiveness of the management of the sale; and
• identify principles of sound administrative practice to facilitate potential improvements in any future asset sales.

Special Benefit is a social security income support payment for people who are unable to support themselves or their dependents, and who are not otherwise entitled to any other income support payment. Its objective is to ensure that such people have adequate levels of income. The objective of the audit was to assess the extent to which new claims for Special Benefit had been determined in compliance with the Social Security Act, the Guide to the Act and other relevant guidelines, and whether Centrelink and FaCS had appropriate procedures to help ensure such compliance.

The objective of the audit was to assess Customs and Border Protection’s use of risk management to assist in the processing of sea and air cargo imports.

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

The objective of this audit was to evaluate whether selected Australian Government agencies were effectively managing security risks arising from the use of contractors. To address this objective, the audit evaluated relevant policies and practices in the audited agencies against a series of minimum requirements in the management of security issues in procurement and contracting activity. These minimum requirements were developed from the guidance and standards contained in the PSM and also from the ANAO's previous protective security audits.

The audit focused on two broad types of contracting arrangements: contracting of security functions; and contracting of any service or business function that requires, or which has the potential to require, contractors to access sensitive or security classified information.

The following Australian Government agencies were involved in this audit:

• Australian Customs Service (Customs);
• Commonwealth Superannuation Administration (ComSuper);
• Department of Finance and Administration (Finance); and
• Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT).

In addition, the Attorney-General's Department, which is responsible for the maintenance of the PSM and for providing advice on contemporary protective security policies and practices, was consulted during the audit.

The objective of the audit was to assess key aspects of the Australian Taxation Office's administration of the PAYE system in relation to employers' remittances and to identify opportunities for improvement. The audit focussed on four areas:

• remittance monitoring, especially managing late remittances;
• follow-up action for end of year reconciliation, including discrepancies;
• handling compliance intelligence gained from the public; and
• ATO compliance projects.