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 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 objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the actions taken by AQIS and BA to strengthen the administration of quarantine. The audit focussed on progress in implementing the recommendations from the previous ANAO audit, and recommendations made in the JCPAA's inquiry. (The audit did not address four JCPAA recommendations that were either not supported by the Government, or were policy matters for the Government to consider. See Appendix 1.)

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).

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

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 examine the effectiveness and efficiency of the management of the Family Relationships Services Program (FRSP) by the Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS) subsequent to that department becoming responsible for the administration of the Program in December 1998. The audit focussed on issues related to Program risk management, the development and management of contractual agreements and whether the performance management and reporting framework enabled an assessment of service provider performance and overall program outcomes.

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.

This audit considered the action taken in relation to the recommendations of Audit Report No.47, 1991-92, Energy Management of Commonwealth Buildings. The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess whether the Department of Primary Industries and Energy, the Department of Administrative Services, and the Department of Finance had taken appropriate action in relation to the recommendations. The audit criteria were the extent to which the original recommendations agreed by the agencies had been implemented and what had been achieved.

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 focus of this audit was to ascertain how the Family Court had spent Justice Statement monies and to form an opinion on the current and projected financial position of the Court. The ANAO undertook the review of the Family Court in a two-stage process. The first stage, the findings of which appear in this report, to allow consideration in the Budget context, was undertaken as a project audit and had the objective of addressing the issues of immediate concern to the Attorney-General.

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.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the design process and monitoring arrangements for the National Innovation and Science Agenda by the relevant entities.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation (NHFIC).

The audit objective was to examine entity compliance with regulatory requirements for the establishment and ongoing management of special appropriations.

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.

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 objectives of the audit were to examine and evaluate the efficiency, economy and administrative effectiveness of the non-judicial activities of the Family Court of Australia. A major aim of the audit was to identify administrative better practices that could be promulgated throughout the Court. The criteria for the audit address the following issues: corporate planning; performance measurement; organisational structure; human resource management; human resource development; management information and reporting systems; and operational processes and procedures.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of Comcare’s administration of claims for Australian Government entities under its workers’ compensation scheme.

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 objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Social Services' administration of the National Redress Scheme.

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 audit reviewed the operation of the payment of accounts function in 8 Commonwealth organisations against their internal control framework. The main objectives of the audit were to determine whether organisations had implemented appropriate risk management strategies for the processing of accounts and whether payment for goods ans services had been properly authorised. The audit also reviewed progress since the payment of accounts audit undertaken in 1996 ( Audit Report No. 16, 1996-97, Financial Control and Administration Audit, Payment of Accounts).

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 objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's probity management.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority's probity management.

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 assess the effectiveness of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's probity management.