The objective of this audit was to assess and report on the progress being made by Government agencies in achieving better practice in green office procurement and sustainable office management. The scope of the audit included agencies incorporated under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 as well as a sample of bodies incorporated under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. Sixty-three agencies were included in an audit survey. Detailed validation was carried out in nine of these agencies.

The objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of FaHCSIA's management of the GBM initiative, and the extent to which the initiative has contributed to improvements in community engagement and government coordination in the Northern Territory.

The audit focused on FaHCSIA's management of the GBM initiative under the NTER. The audit scope did not include additional functions assigned to some GBMs in the Northern Territory under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery (the National Partnership Agreement), or to Australian Government staff with similar roles and functions supporting the implementation of the National Partnership Agreement in Queensland and Western Australia.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s administration of the HAF. To address this objective, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) assessed FaHCSIA’s administration against a range of audit criteria, including the extent to which:

• assessment and approval processes were soundly planned and implemented, and were consistent with the requirements of the overarching financial management framework;
• appropriately structured funding agreements were established and managed for each approved grant; and
• the performance of the HAF, including each of the funded projects, was actively monitored and reported.

A performance audit of the management of the Detention Centre Contracts was listed in the 2003-04 Audit Work Program as a potential audit. The audit work program proposed that the audit would be conducted in two parts. The first part would focus on DIMIA's management of the detention centre contracts with the then detention service provider, GEO Australia. The second part would concentrate on how well any lessons learned from the first contract, were translated into improvements with the new contract. The original objective of this second ANAO audit was to assess DIMIA's management of detention services through the Contract, including the tender process, transition period and implementation of lessons learned from the previous contract.

The audit objective was to form an opinion on the adequacy of a select group of Australian Government agencies' management of Internet security, including following-up on agencies' implementation of recommendations from the ANAO's 2001 audit. The agencies audited were Australian Customs Service (ACS), Australian Federal Police (AFP), Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR), Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) and Medicare Australia. Factors considered in selecting agencies were agency size based on funding levels, whether the agency was included in ANAO's 2001 audit (ACS, ARPANSA, and DEWR), whether the agency's ICT was managed in-house or outsourced, and the nature of the agency's website (that is, general or restricted access).

The objective of the audit was to assess whether entities properly accounted for software assets, and adopted an integrated planning approach to inform software asset investment decisions.

The main focus of the audit was on whether entities accounted for software costs in accordance with relevant accounting standards and the FMOs, paying particular attention to the standard elements of an internal control framework and accounting practices. In addition, in the context of software asset planning, the audit considered whether entities assessed the risks associated with software assets, used life-cycle costing approaches, and aligned ICT and capital management plans, to inform decision-making on software asset investments.

This edition of Audit Insights summarises key messages for all Australian Government entities from a series of recent Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) performance audits assessing the delivery of key components of the Australian Government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It discusses the importance of planning, good governance and sound risk management in managing an emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

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 objectives of the audit were to evaluate the administrative systems and frameworks in Commonwealth organisations used in the management of risk and insurance. Specifically, the audit evaluated the adequacy and effectiveness of: the development and application of risk management and insurance frameworks and plans within organisations; organisations' records for the determination of risk treatments, including insurance cover; and procedures, and their application, for actively managing risk exposures and insurance experience.

On 9 May 2006, the Auditor-General advised the then Minister for Transport and Regional Services that he would undertake a performance audit and that the specific audit objectives and approach would be established once officers of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) had the opportunity to undertake preliminary enquiries with senior staff in Airservices Australia and the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS). On 31 May 2006, the Auditor-General designated a performance audit under Section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The objectives of the performance audit were to: examine the development and administration by Airservices Australia of its contracts with the Solomon Islands Government for upper airspace management; assess the regularity of payments made under the contracts and steps taken by Airservices Australia in respect of any irregularities; and make recommendations for any improvements in the processes employed by Airservices Australia in developing and administering these and similar contractual arrangements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the procurement and contracting associated with:

• the design, development and delivery of government advertising campaigns by Commonwealth departments; and
• the operation of the Central Advertising System (CAS).

The objective of this audit was to determine whether selected Australian Government organisations had effective processes for managing the annual leave entitlements of their staff, and whether systems and controls over the processing of annual leave were working as intended. In addressing this objective, the audit also assessed progress being made by the audited organisations in implementing the recommendations in ANAO Audit Report No.16 2005-06.

The current audit has focussed on Stage 2 of the Scheme. Its objective was to assess whether ACIS is being administered effectively by DIISR and, as relevant, by Customs. In particular, the audit examined the department's arrangements for:

• assessing the eligibility of participants to receive duty credits;
• calculating duty credits accurately and adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme;
• checking the integrity of participants' claims, which are self-assessed;
• accounting for the duty credits transferred to and used at Customs; and
• measuring and reporting on the performance of ACIS.

The audit also followed up on whether the ANAO's previous recommendations have been addressed.

The objective of this performance audit was to assess whether DIMIA's information systems and business processes are effective in supporting APP to meet its border security and streamlined clearance objectives. In particular, the audit focused on the following: Mandatory APP - Stage 1 (MAPP1) project management; MAPP1 IT development and system performance; APP performance reporting; contract management; and financial management.

Following on from the 2002 audit, the ANAO decided to conduct an audit of trust monies in entities operating under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997 (CAC Act). The objectives of the current audit were to: · assess whether the selected entities were managing trust monies in accordance with legal and administrative requirements and better practice principles; · identify better practice in the management of trust monies; and · as necessary, recommend improvements in the controls and practices relating to the management of trust monies.

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 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 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 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 objective was to examine the effectiveness and efficiency of ASIC's implementation of Australian financial services licences. In particular, the audit examined ASIC's planning for the introduction of financial services licences; the roles of the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and ASIC in defining the effective scope of licensing; ASIC's assessment and processing of licence applications; and ASIC's supervision of licensees.

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 assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA's management of the Fixing Houses for Better Health program since 2005.

The audit reviewed the two elements of the program for which FaHCSIA is responsible: management of the service delivery arrangements and overall performance monitoring and reporting. Following the development of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, which introduced new approaches to the delivery of Indigenous programs, FaHCSIA made changes to FHBH for the 2009–11 phase. The audit has focused on both the 2005–09 and the 2009–11 phases. This provided coverage of the program's normal operations as well enabling the audit to consider the modifications made to the program for the
2009–11 phase.

Against this background, the audit considered whether:

• program management arrangements had been established that were suitable for the size, nature and objectives of the FHBH program;
• service delivery arrangements were designed to support the achievement of the program's objectives and FaHCSIA's management of the program; and
• FaHCSIA used robust systems to monitor achievement of the program objectives.

The ANAO also considered whether there was any experience from the department's management of FHBH that could be broadly applied to FaHCSIA's management of the National Partnership Agreement.

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 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 audit reviewed APRA's regulation of approved Trustees and superannuation funds registered under the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993. The audit evaluated APRA's superannuation supervisory activities: and assessed the effectiveness of its supervision of superannuation entities. Particular attention was paid to the supervisory framework and the risk-based supervisory methodologies of APRA's frontline supervisory divisions.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether purchases of goods and services are conducted in accordance with relevant legislation, Government policies and guidelines, and sound purchasing principles and practices. The audit at each entity covered the internal control framework for purchasing and purchase transactions during 2002-03 and 2003-04 and, where applicable, was based on the CPGs current at that time. The audit examined all aspects of the purchasing process from the initial requirement for purchase through to the delivery of the supply and payment. It included an examination of aselection of individual purchases at each audited entity.

The audit objective was to examine if ACMA is, in respect of commercial broadcasting services, effectively discharging its regulatory responsibilities under the BSA. The audit examined ACMA's:

• monitoring of commercial broadcasters' compliance with the BSA;
• addressing non compliance with, and enforcement of, the BSA;
• collection of broadcast licence fees; and
• monitoring and reporting of its regulatory performance in respect of commercial broadcasting.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DHS' management of the tender process for a replacement BasicsCard to support the delivery of the income management scheme.

In conducting the audit, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) assessed the following five key areas of the replacement BasicsCard procurement process, which are described in the Department of Finance and Deregulation's (Finance) Guidance on the Mandatory Procurement Procedures :

• planning for the procurement;
• preparing to approach the market;
• approaching the market;
• evaluating tender submissions; and
• concluding the procurement, including contract negotiation.

In two letters dated 19 and 22 June 2009, the Prime Minister requested a performance audit of a range of matters relating to representations to the Treasury regarding automotive finance arrangements for car dealers. In response to these requests, the Auditor-General decided that ANAO would undertake a performance audit under section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997 (Auditor-General Act). The audit objective, based on the matters raised in the Prime Minister's correspondence and in the Parliament, was to examine and report on:

• any representations to the Treasury since October 2008 from all sources regarding automotive finance arrangements for car dealers, including any made in relation to John Grant Motors;
• the nature of these representations;
• the manner in which the representations were responded to by officials, having regard to any relevant standards and procedures; and
• any related administrative matters that came to attention.

The audit objectives were to assess the effectiveness of:

• selected agencies’ administration in developing advertising campaigns and implementing key processes against the requirements of the Australian Government’s campaign advertising framework, and other key legal and administrative requirements; and
• the ongoing administration of the campaign advertising framework.