To assess the extent to which agencies create, manage and dispose of records in accordance with key business, legal and policy requirements.

The agencies included in the audit were the: Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs); Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC); and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury). The audit also considered the Archives' response to Recommendation No. 1 from ANAO Audit Report No.6 2006, 07 Recordkeeping including the Management of Electronic Records, including whether they had clarified Australian Government records management requirements for agencies.

This follow-up audit examined the actions taken by the Department of Veterans' Affairs to address the ANAO's recommendations made in Audit Report No.28 1993-94 regarding the use of private hospitals on behalf of the Repatriation Commission. The recommendations from that audit were aimed at improving the basis and consistency of contracts with the private sector for the use of private hospitals and providing added assurance that quality care was available to the veteran community.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DEEWR‘s administration of the initial phases of the NP ECE. The high-level criteria used to make this assessment were the appropriateness of DEEWR‘s:

• establishment of a sound foundation for implementation, including implementation plans, monitoring arrangements and an Indigenous strategy for universal access; and
• ongoing monitoring and support activities, including assessing progress reports, making payments, maintaining relationships, improving data quality and public reporting.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DIMIA's management of its detention agreements with ACM to operate Australia's mainland immigration detention centres. In particular, the ANAO examined: DIMIA's strategic approach to the management and coordination of the contract; how DIMIA defined the services to be delivered by ACM; the systems in place to monitor and report against contract performance; the effectiveness of controls over contract payment arrangements; and DIMIA's management of infrastructure through the detention agreements.

This second audit report relating to SMSFs examines the effectiveness of the Tax Office's approach to managing SMSF compliance risks. Specifically the ANAO examined the processes the Tax Office uses to:

• identify the risks relevant to SMSFs not complying with their obligations under the SISA, including members accessing their superannuation early;
• mitigate SMSF compliance risks; and
• administer fund wind-ups.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations’ (DEEWR) role in the delivery of the Children and Family Centre (CFC) component of the National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Early Childhood Development (IECD NP).

The audit reviewed the planning and management of the Australian Defence Force deployments to East Timor, including the support of those deployments. The audit focused on planning for the deployments and the role of Australia as the lead nation in the International Force in East Timor (INTERFET); and financial, personnel, logistic and other systems used to deploy and sustain Australia's military presence in East Timor.

The objective of this audit was to assess whether DFAT had effective processes for issuing passports in Australia. In particular, the audit focussed on whether DFAT had effective strategies for managing passport services; provided quality client service; and had effective and secure processes for passport issue to entitled persons.

As an element of the arrangements implemented to support the role of the ANAO in reviewing campaigns' compliance with the Guidelines announced on 2 July 2008, the ANAO advised the chair of the JCPAA that the ANAO will provide regular summary reports to Parliament. Section 25 of the Auditor-General's Act 1997 provides for the tabling of such reports.

The audit reviewed management of the Commonwealth's role in preparing for, and managing, pest and disease emergencies requiring a rapid response. The audit focused on the role of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry -Australia (AFFA), which is the Commonwealth Department with primary portfolio responsibility for coordinating the national and international response to an emergency. The audit did not address preventative measures such as quarantine and border controls; controlled release of exotic diseases or pests; or emergencies associated with previously known endemic diseases, food safety or chemical residue issues.

The audit was conducted as a joint financial statement and performance audit of HIC's IT systems. The objective of the financial statement component of the audit was to express an opinion on whether HIC could rely on its IT systems to support production of a reliable set of balances for the financial statements. The objective of the performance audit component was to determine whether HIC's IT systems' outputs met quality and service delivery targets.

The audit objective was to assess the appropriateness of the use and reporting of confidentiality provisions in Australian Government contracts. This included assessing compliance with the Order and following up on the implementation of recommendations made in previous Senate Order audits.

The audit involved three components:

• an examination of a stratified random sample of 150 contracts listed as containing confidentiality provisions from material and small agencies across the Australian Government to determine whether confidentiality provisions were used and reported appropriately;
• an examination of all FMA Act agencies' calendar year 2009 contract listings, and ministers' letters of advice, to assess compliance with the requirements of the Order, and check reported instances of excluded contracts; and
• a follow-up of the implementation of previous audit recommendations relating to the administration of the Senate Order in four agencies. The selected agencies were the: Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID); Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA); Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF); and the Federal Court of Australia (Federal Court). The selected agencies were audited in one of the ANAO's previous five audits of Senate Order compliance.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to examine the ATO's implementation of the 20 recommendations in: The Administration of Petroleum Excise Collections (Audit Report No.17, 2001(02); and The Administration of Tobacco Excise (Audit Report No. 55, 2001(02), having regard to any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting implementation of those recommendations. The audit also aimed to identify scope for improvement in the ATO's administration of petroleum and tobacco excise. Follow-up audits are recognised as an important element of the accountability processes of Commonwealth administration. The Parliament looks to the Auditor-General to report, from time to time, on the extent to which Commonwealth agencies have implemented recommendations of previous audit reports. Follow-up audits keep the Parliament informed of progressive improvements and current challenges in areas of Commonwealth administration that have previously been subject to scrutiny through performance audits.

The objective of the audit was to provide assurance about the Australian Taxation Office's risk management approach and to add value to its administration by analysing the economy, efficiency, administrative effectiveness, equity and accountability of the related processes employed within the organisation. The ANAO reviewed the formal risk management process that the ATO uses to deal with all sources of risk for the organisation.

The audit sought to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the ADF's management of fuel and lubricants and to identify possible areas for improvement. The audit focused on major aspects of the fuel supply chain, in particular the strategic management of fuel (eg. the coordination of fuel requirements and stockholding policy). The audit also reviewed fuel procurement practices, storage and handling issues. The audit coverage addressed the fuel supply aspects of these matters rather than transport, distribution and equipment issues. Although directed principally towards operational fuels, the audit took into consideration issues associated with ADF's requirement for oils and lubricants.

The audit reviewed Commonwealth debt management procedures. The audit objectives were to:

• review, and consider opportunities to improve, the reporting and disclosure of the Commonwealth's public debt;
• assess the effectiveness of the raising, management and retirement of Commonwealth debt, consistent with an acceptable degree of risk exposure; and
• determine whether there are opportunities to improve the Commonwealth's approach to the raising, management and retirement of Commonwealth debt.

This report covers a number of the discretionary compensation and debt relief mechanisms that are available to Commonwealth agencies, where individuals or entities have been disadvantaged by legislation, or actions by agencies or staff, or some other negative circumstances. It deals mainly with two legislative mechanisms, namely, act of grace payments and waivers of debt, and one administrative mechanism, the Compensation for Detriment caused by Defective Administration (CDDA) scheme. This report also briefly covers two other mechanisms, namely ex gratia payments and payments in special circumstances relating to Australian Public Service (APS) employment. The main objective of the audit was to assess whether the management of claims for compensation and debt relief in special circumstances was in accordance with relevant legislative requirements and Commonwealth guidelines, and whether the current administrative policies and procedures were adequate.

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 audit objectives were:

• to assess the effectiveness of the revised certification process in promoting compliance of government advertising campaigns (campaigns) with the March 2010 Guidelines on Information and Advertising Campaigns by Australian Government Departments and Agencies (2010 Guidelines);
• to assess the effectiveness of agency administration in developing campaigns and implementing key processes against the requirements of the campaign advertising framework;
• to assess the effectiveness of Finance’s administration of the campaign advertising framework; and
• to assess the effect on campaigns of an exemption from the 2010 Guidelines.

The objective of the audit was to review Defence's management of the HQJOC Project's tender process, including probity management, for the construction of the joint operation headquarters in order to provide assurance that the policy principles for the use of private financing had been followed.

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.

In 1999-2000, the ANAO conducted an audit in Centrelink to determine whether its planning, monitoring and costing arrangements provided a sound basis to underpin its delivery of quality, cost effective customer services. The report of that audit, Audit Report No. 43 1999-2000 Planning and Monitoring for Cost Effective Service Delivery, Staffing and Funding Arrangements, was tabled in Parliament in May 2000. The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess whether Centrelink had implemented a comprehensive costing system as a basis for planning productivity improvements and accounting for its expenditure of purchaser funds. The ANAO examined Centrelink's current costing system to determine if it reflected the design and implementation characteristics that were outlined in Audit Report No. 43.

The audit considered the way organisations in the APS process and use cost information. The specific objective was to form an opinion on whether costing processes and uses were: valid, cost effective, and in accordance with the principles of better practice.

Mr Ian McPhee - Deputy Auditor-General, presented at the National Institute for Governance, Canberra

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 assess the effectiveness of the services delivered through ATO shopfronts to individual and micro enterprise tax clients. Particular emphasis was given to the delivery of services to clients and planning and reporting processes for shopfront services.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to examine Centrelink's progress in implementing the recommendations of the 2004–05 audit and the subsequent JCPAA inquiry.

The ANAO first examined asset management in the general government sector in 1995. The outcome of that review was presented in Audit Report No. 27, 1995-96, Asset Management. The primary objectives of the current review were to:

• ascertain the degree of acceptance of the previous audit recommendations;
• establish the extent to which organisations were managing their assets in accordance with the asset management principles espoused in the Asset Management Handbook; and
• examine any central coordination initiatives in asset management.

Meeting these objectives permits the ANAO to express an updated opinion on the state of asset management in the general government sector other than for specialised military equipment.

The objective of the audit was to assess the economy, efficiency and administrative effectiveness, including accountability, of the management of boat people by the Department and the providers of major related services to DIMA such as: the Coastwatch Service within the Australian Customs Service and the Australian Protective Service within the Attorney-General's portfolio. The audit examined key issues in the management of boat people largely from a risk management perspective. The audit conclusions are presented in terms of: the economy, efficiency and administrative effectiveness, including the accountability, of operations; and the administrative functions which support the management of boat people, such as detection, reception of boats and costs.

The objective of this audit was to determine the extent to which selected agencies have implemented the two recommendations of the previous audit; and the appropriateness of advice provided by Finance and the ATO. To address this audit objective, the audit assessed:

• the roles of Finance and the ATO in clarifying: the interaction of the PB and SG Act; the ongoing role of the PB Act; and mechanisms to monitor Australian Government organisations' compliance with the PB Act;
• the extent to which Finance and the ATO have provided guidance and other support to assist Australian Government organisations manage and meet statutory superannuation obligations for eligible contractors; and
• whether Australian Government organisations have managed and met statutory superannuation obligations for contractors in past and current contracts.