The audit reviewed the construction of facilities for the Australian Defence Force and the Department of Defence by the Defence Estate Organisation. The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and administrative effectiveness of the Organisation's project delivery function, highlighting effective practice and, where appropriate, making practical recommendations to enhance facilities project management. The main projects examined were the facilities required for the Army Presence in the North and the Russell Hill Redevelopment.

The Defence Estate comprises the land, buildings and other facilities that Defence uses across Australia. These facilities are vital to achieving the Defence mission - to prevent or defeat the use of armed force against Australia and its interests. The Estate has a gross replacement value of $14.8 billion. Defence Estate Organisation's (DEO's) Facilities Operations (FACOPS) Program delivers general maintenance and minor new works to Defence facilities on a regional basis across the country. DEO's Estate Operations and Planning Branch and its nine Regional Estate Centres are responsible for the FACOPS Program. Resources available for the Program have been reduced in recent years. The total DEO budget for 2000-01, which includes funds for capital works, facilities operations and property management, is $2.6 billion. Of this total, the FACOPS Program has a cash allocation of $213 million and an additional $15.6 million for employee expenses associated with the Program's 283 staff. The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of selected Defence facilities operations, including tendering and contracting, with a view to adding value with practical recommendations for enhancing operations.

The objective of the audit was to examine the investment of public funds by selected entities, including: compliance with relevant legislation, delegations and instructions; the value for money of investment strategies; and reporting of investment activities. Six entities were selected for audit, comprising three FMA Act agencies and three Commonwealth authorities. The six entities had aggregrate investments of $1.64 billion as at 30 June 2004 and realised investment earnings of some $80.4 million during 2003/04.

Major capital equipment contributes importantly to the capabilities of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) to achieve the Defence mission, that is, the defence of Australia and its national interests. The Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) is the relatively new Defence organisation responsible for the acquisition and through-life support of Defence equipment and systems. DMO's stated purpose is to equip and sustain the ADF. In 2001-02, it will spend $2.9 billion on progressing some 270 major capital equipment acquisition projects. This preliminary study for the audit focused on DMO reporting on the status of major equipment acquisition projects.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of the Defence Home Ownership Assistance Scheme by the Department of Defence and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs.

The audit examined the process of identifying the ADC Weston Creek property for sale and leaseback and the management of the sale process. The objective of the performance audit was to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of the management of the sale process by Defence, including assessing whether the sale and long term leaseback arrangements adequately protect the Commonwealth's interests.

The Auditor-General responded on 1 July 2021 to correspondence from the Hon Brendan O'Connor MP and Mr Tim Watts MP dated 5 June 2021, requesting that the Auditor-General consider initiating a performance audit into the use of provisional ICT accreditation within Defence. 

The audit objective was to assess the administrative effectiveness of Defence’s procedures to provide emergency assistance to the civil community.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence effectively managed the procurement process for services related to the recruitment of personnel to the ADF and the introduction of a new service provider.

Causes and Consequences of Personnel Postings in the Australian Defence Force The audit arose from a Defence Efficiency Review (1997) recommendation that Defence could make savings on the large volume of postings it made every year. The audit examined the posting process and sought to provide assurance that Defence had identified and examined salient postings issues and was addressing them effectively.

The audit sought to assess the efficiency of Defence property management; provide assurance that probity and compliance requirements are being met; and make practical recommendations for enhancing property operations. It focused on Infrastructure Division's property management, with recognition that other areas manage certain property service contracts, such as those for electricity supply and cleaning.

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of DMO’s implementation of its Gate Review process for major Defence capital acquisition projects.

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of Defence and the DMO's management of procurement and through life support arrangements to meet the explosive ordnance requirements of the ADF, particularly the non-guided munitions requirements of Army. This included a review of the progress of Defence and the DMO in implementing the recommendations of ANAO Audit Report No.40 2005–06.

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 Auditor-General responded on 5 January 2021 to correspondence from Ms Kristy McBain MP dated 14 December 2020, requesting that the Auditor-General review the governance and outcomes of a 2019 tender process seeking leased office accommodation for the Department of Defence. 

The Auditor-General responded on Thursday 13 July 2023 to correspondence from Senator Jacqui Lambie dated 16 June 2023, requesting that the Auditor-General consider an audit of the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force. The Auditor-General provided a follow-up response to Senator Lambie on 4 October 2023.

The Auditor-General received further correspondence from Senator Lambie on 6 October 2023 and 3 November 2023. The Auditor-General provided a follow-up response to Senator Lambie on 15 November 2023.

The Auditor-General received further follow-up correspondence from Senator Lambie on 18 October 2024. The Auditor-General provided a follow-up response to Senator Lambie on 31 October 2024.

The Auditor-General responded on 22 June 2021 to correspondence from Mr Jason Falinski MP dated 27 May 2021, requesting that the Auditor-General conduct an investigation to examine concerns raised by Mr Falinski's constituent regarding the louvre windows selected by the appointed company for the Department of Defence building project — Cook and Tiroas Barracks, Vanuatu.

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 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 objective was to provide independent assurance to the Parliament on the effectiveness of Australian Public Service organisations in the use and management of the HRIS to satisfy mandatory reporting requirements, as well as provide meaningful information to management. The audit also considered the use of employee self service facilities offered by the HRIS, which has the capacity to provide staff with access to their personal information, reduce manual processing and streamline processing.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s implementation of the First Principles Review.

The objective of the ANAO audit was to identify possible areas for improvement in the Australian Defence Force's management of its Reserve forces. The audit focused on major aspects of the Reserves including roles and tasks, force structure, capability, training, individual readiness, equipment, facilities, recruitment, retention, conditions of service and administration. The audit covered the Australian Naval Reserve, the Australian Army Reserve and the Royal Australian Air Force Reserve. However, due to its size and cost, the Army Reserve was a major focus of the audit activity.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s planning, budgeting and implementation of an electronic health records solution for Defence personnel.

The objective of this report is to provide the Auditor-General’s independent assurance over the status of the selected Major Projects. The status of the selected Major Projects is reported in the Statement by the Secretary of Defence and the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) prepared by Defence. Assurance from the ANAO’s review is conveyed in the Independent Assurance Report by the Auditor-General.

The objective of the audit was to assess the management and effectiveness of DCO’s delivery and coordination of support services to ADF families, in particular support services provided when an ADF member is seriously injured or ill, or dies in service.

Grant Hehir, Auditor-General for Australia, attended the Institute of Internal Auditors-Australia ‘Public Sector Internal Audit Conference’ on 31 July 2018, and presented an opening keynote session titled Strategic governance of risk: Lessons learnt from public sector audit. The accompanying paper to the speech, which was delivered against a conference theme of ‘internal auditor as a trusted advisor’, is available here.

The Australian Public Service Commission's Delivering for Tomorrow: APS Workforce Strategy 2025 states that the Australian Public Service (APS) will continue to deploy a flexible approach to resourcing that strikes a balance between a core workforce of permanent public servants and the selective use of external expertise. This will mean a continuing mixed workforce approach, where APS employees and non-APS workers are used to deliver outcomes within agencies. In this context, the strategy highlights the value of ensuring that agencies take a structured approach to the use of non-APS employees.

In a series of three performance audits, the ANAO has examined the arrangements established by Services Australia, the Department of Veterans' Affairs and the Department of Defence for the use, engagement and management of contractors against the same audit objective and criteria.

This audit followed up the ANAO's 1997 performance audit report on ADF health services (Audit Report No.34 1996-97 Australian Defence Force Health Services), which focused on the delivery of non-operational health services to entitled members. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess Defence's implementation of recommendations made in the original audit report and their effectiveness in improving ADF health services.

The objective of the audit was to report on whether Defence applies Life-cycle Costing appropriately in support of decisions throughout the acquisition and management of its capital assets, and to make recommendations for any improvement. Criteria were established against each of the issues considered by the audit, namely LCC policy and coordination, use of LCC in investment decisions, use of LCC to support budgeting, data to support LCC and LCC training and education.

Increased transparency and accountability on progress with major Defence equipment acquisitions has been a focus of parliamentary interest for some time. Beginning in 2007–08, an annual program has been established in conjunction with the Department of Defence to enable the ANAO to review and report to the Parliament on the status of major Defence acquisition projects, as set out in the major projects report. The review includes information relating to the cost, schedule and progress towards delivery of required capability of individual projects at 30 June each year, and is undertaken at the request of JCPAA.