Procurement is a significant public sector activity worth $47.4 billion in 2016–17. This information report seeks to provide greater transparency on procurement activity in the Australian public sector. This information report is neither an audit nor an assurance review and presents no conclusions or opinions. The report presents in a variety of ways, including tables and figures, publicly available data from public sector procurement activity.

The ANAO regards integrity as a core value of the organisation — critical in sustaining the confidence of Parliament, strengthening public trust in government and delivering quality audit products. Maintaining strong institutional integrity is critical to the operations and reputation of the ANAO.

The ANAO Integrity Framework provides an overarching structure to the integrity control system, supporting our institution’s integrity. The framework serves to assist in ethical decision making and risk, fraud and misconduct management.

Beyond its control system, the ANAO maintains an enduring focus on promoting integrity as a value that is embedded in our work and culture. The ANAO recognises that integrity demands quality not only in our products but also in the behaviours of our people.

The ANAO Integrity Advisor supports the effective and ongoing application of the Integrity Framework by providing advice to staff regarding integrity matters. The Integrity Advisor is responsible for increasing integrity awareness across the organisation and for reporting annually to the ANAO Executive Board of Management on actions taken under the Framework. The Auditor-General has published the ANAO Integrity Framework and Report for 2022–23 to provide increased transparency of the measures we undertake to maintain a high-integrity culture in the ANAO.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AO) - Auditor-General for Australia, Opening Address to the inaugural conference of the Risk Management Institution of Australasia - Bringing Risk Management Together - What the Future Holds

The objective of the audit was to assess the extent to which the Department of the Environment and Energy has implemented the recommendations from ANAO Report No. 43 2013–14 and strengthened its framework for the delivery of its regulatory activities.

Quality in the delivery of the ANAO’s audit services is critical in supporting the integrity of our audit reports and maintaining the confidence of the Parliament and public sector entities. The ANAO Corporate Plan 2025–26 is the ANAO's primary planning document. It outlines our purpose; the dynamic environment in which we operate; our commitment to building capability; and the activities and performance measures by which we will be held to account.

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

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

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

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

The objective of this audit was to determine whether Health adequately assessed the State and Territory Governments' compliance with their obligations under the terms of the AHCAs. In conducting the audit, ANAO addressed the following criteria:

• if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were adhering to the AHCAs clause 6 principles that all eligible persons had equitable access to free public health and emergency services on the basis of clinical need within an appropriate period;
• if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were increasing their own source funding at the rate specified in the AHCAs; and
• if Health assessed whether the States and Territories were meeting the performance reporting requirements set out in the AHCAs.

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

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

The objective of the audit was to assess the Tax Office's strategies to address tax haven compliance risks. Particular emphasis was given to the Tax Office's:

• management arrangements relating to the administration of tax haven compliance risks;
• risk management framework for the identification and evaluation of compliance risks, specifically the activities of the Offshore Compliance Program (OCP); and
• risk mitigation strategies.

The audit did not include an examination of cases related to the promoters of tax haven related schemes nor the criminal use of tax havens.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) publishes two reports annually addressing the outcomes of the financial statement audits of Australian government entities and the Consolidated Financial Statements (CFS) of the Australian Government to provide Parliament an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities. This report focuses on the results of the interim audit phase, including an assessment of entities’ key internal controls, of the 2016–17 financial statements audits of 25 entities including all departments of state and a number of major Australian government entities.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the CPA Forum 2004

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented an Occasional Paper

This report complements the interim phase report released in June 2013 (Audit Report No.49 2012–13), and provides a summary of the final audit results of the audits of the financial statements of all Australian Government entities, including the Consolidated Financial Statements for the Australian Government.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Customs and Border Protection's performance in managing and coordinating enforcement operations against illegal foreign fishing in Australia's northern waters. The audit focused on Customs and Border Protection's role within the whole of government policy coordination framework; the effectiveness of its intelligence support for operational planning and policy and strategy development; its performance in planning, prioritising and administering effective enforcement operations; and its performance in measuring and reporting on the effectiveness of the program.

Mr Mr Ian McPhee - Auditor-General for Australia, participated in a panel discussion at the Australian Government Leadership Network Annual Conference (Queensland)

The objective of this audit was to assess whether the Scheme is being administered effectively by the department. The ANAO focussed on Program Year 1 of the Scheme, 2005–06, and examined DIISR's arrangements for:

• assessing the eligibility of entities to receive grants;
• assessing entities' claims for eligible expenditure;
• adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme when calculating and paying claims, and managing any debts that arise;
• and evaluating and reporting on whether the statutory objective of the Scheme is being met.

The audit did not examine the other components of the 2005–2015 industry assistance package; nor did it examine any of the programs delivered under the previous assistance package (2000–2005).

Address by Richard Rundle, Executive Director, Business Assurance Services, at the Security in Government 2002 Conference

The ANAO Audit Report No. 51 of 2001/02, Research Project Management, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, assessed the effectiveness of CSIRO in administering research projects to deliver required results. The audit made nine recommendations designed to improve project management in CSIRO. The purpose of this follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which CSIRO has implemented the recommendations of the previous audit and of the JCPAA.

The objective of this audit was to assess the Australian Public Service Commission’s and selected entities’ implementation of the Australian Government’s Workplace Bargaining Framework.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s administration of allowances and entitlements paid to its Australian Public Service (APS) employees.

The audit objective was to determine whether selected grant programs are being administered efficiently by the Australia Council in relation to suitable comparators. The selected grant programs are collectively known as the Australia Council Grants Program.

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.

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 objective of the audit was to examine whether selected entities implemented agreed ANAO performance audit, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit, and other parliamentary committee recommendations.

The audit objective was to determine whether DIAC's biometrics program had appropriate:

• business review processes (including a business case);
• authorisation;
• business and IT governance arrangements; and
• IT project management and systems development arrangements.

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.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the Government in Excellence Summit 2000 - Reinventing Government - A Manifesto for Achieving Excellence and Managing for Results; Singapore

Mr Ian McPhee - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the 2009 Brookes Oration Deakin Business School, Deakin University

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 report summarises the final results of the audits of the financial statements of Australian Government entities, being the second report this year on financial statements for the period ended 30 June 2003. It complements Audit Report No.61 2002-2003 Control Structures as part of the Audit of Financial Statements of Major Commonwealth Entities for the Year Ending 30 June 2003.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected Commonwealth organisations had utilised better practice principles when establishing the role, and managing the use of their internal audit groups. In order to evaluate internal audit, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) first considered the status and accountabilities of internal audit within the overall governance framework of the organisations audited, in particular its accountabilities to the audit committee.