The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the National Disability Insurance Agency’s (NDIA’s) management of complaints.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the National Recovery and Resilience Agency's administration of the Disaster Recovery Funding Arrangements (DRFA).

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 assess the effectiveness of the Australian Research Council’s (ARC’s) administration of the National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

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.

The audit reviewed the application by the Department of Finance and the portfolio departments of the 1993 Accountability and Ministerial Oversight Arrangements for Government Business Enterprises and any statutory monitoring and reporting requirements applying to the selected GBEs provided under their own establishing legislation. The objectives of the audit were to examine:

• the effectiveness of the GBE monitoring arrangements in providing appropriate performance information to the Government;
• the extent to which agencies and the selected GBEs comply with the monitoring arrangements and legislative requirements; and
• whether the GBE monitoring system provides an effective level of accountability to Ministers and to the Parliament.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's fraud control arrangements.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s design process and implementation to date of the Defence Export Strategy.

This audit is a part of the ANAO's protective security audit coverage. The objective of this audit was to determine whether agencies audited had developed and implemented sound IT security management principles and practices supported by an IT security control framework, in accordance with Australian Government policies and guidelines. The audit at each agency examined the framework for the effective management and control of IT security, including the management of IT operational security controls and, where applicable, was based on the Australian Government protective security and information and communications technology (ICT) security guidelines that were current at that time.

The audit’s objective was to assess the effectiveness of the selection, contracting and ongoing management of investments by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) and the extent to which the CEFC is meeting its legislated objective.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Social Services' fraud control arrangements.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Home Affairs' fraud control arrangements.

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.

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.

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.

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 the audit was to assess whether the Department of Infrastructure, Regional Development and Cities had designed and implemented appropriate governance and administration arrangements for the transition and delivery of sustainable reforms to services on Norfolk Island.

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 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.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Defence’s implementation of reforms to capability development since the introduction of the two-pass process for government approval of capability projects and government’s acceptance of the reforms recommended by the Mortimer Review. The scope of this audit included the requirements phase and, to a limited extent, the acquisition phase of major capability development projects, focusing upon changes flowing from the major reforms.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education’s (DIISRTE’s) administration of the Education Investment Fund grants program.

(DIISRTE was the department that had responsibility for the administration of the EIF grants program during the course of the audit. The recommendations and suggestions for improvement are, however, directed to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education because this department now has responsibility for the administration of the program).

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 assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the management of threatened species and ecological communities under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

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.

The audit assessed whether FaCS effectively undertakes its coordination, monitoring and other roles according to the CSTDA. The audit examined all disability services provided for under the CSTDA, except for disability employment services. The ANAO met relevant officers from FaCS' national office and State and Territory offices, and with 22 stakeholder organisations including: advocacy groups; peak national and State bodies representing the interests of disability service providers and people with disabilities; members of national and State Disability Advisory Bodies funded by FaCS; State and Territory governments; relevant Australian Government agencies; In particular, the Department of Health and Ageing and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. and local government bodies. Fieldwork for the audit was primarily undertaken during the period September 2004 to February 2005.

The objective of this audit was to assess the Private Health Insurance Administration Council's (PHIAC's) administrative effectiveness as a regulator of private health insurance. In making this assessment, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) addressed the following criteria: whether PHIAC monitored compliance with its legislative requirements and analysed related data; whether PHIAC addressed and managed non-compliance with its legislative requirements; and whether PHIAC's governance and organisation supported the performance of its legislative functions. Although the Department of Health and Ageing (Health) also has a role in the regulation of the private health insurance industry under the National Health Act 1953 (Health Act), Health's regulatory activities were outside the scope of this audit.

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.