The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of DVA's administration of mental health programs and services to support younger veterans.

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.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DMO's JORN and JFASmaintenance and support arrangements. The audit examined the maintenanceand operation of the JORN and JFAS radars, and their facilities.

The audit focuses on DMO's equipment acquisition and support, at the system program management level. The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy of Defence's capital equipment project definition, approval, acquisition and logistics support management. The SPOs subject to audit are:Aerospace Systems Division's Tactical Fighter Systems Program Office (TFSPO), which is responsible for acquisition and logistics support management of the Air Force's F/A-18 and Hawk 127 fleets and associated equipment. TFSPO is located at Williamtown, NSW; Land Systems Division's Track Manoeuvre Systems Program Office (TMSPO), which is responsible for the acquisition and logistics support management of Army's Leopard Tanks and M113 Armed Personnel Carrier fleets. TMSPO is located in Melbourne;Electronic and Weapon Systems Division's Over-the-Horizon Radar Systems Program Office (OTHRSPO), which is responsible for acquisition and logistics support management of the Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) and Jindalee OTHR systems. OTHRSPO is located within the Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) precinct at Edinburgh, South Australia; and Maritime Systems Division's Fast Frigate Guided System Program Office (FFGSPO), which is responsible for the support and upgrade of the Navy's FFG fleet. FFGSPO is located at Garden Island, Sydney.In view of the significant role that DMO's SPOs play in managing major capital equipment acquisition projects, the audit includes a case study of the $1.448 billion Fast Frigate Guided (FFG) Upgrade Project. A high level of audit assurance is not able to be provided on the FFG Upgrade Project given deficiencies in the FFGSPO information management systems and deficiencies in the level of design and development disclosure provided to SPO personnel by the FFG Upgrade Prime Contractor. The ANAO was unable to access appropriate audit evidence on the financial expenditure associated with the FFG Upgrade Project, and the Project's approved Equipment Acquisition Strategy.

The audit objective was to assess the Department of Defence’s progress in delivering Multi-Role Helicopters (MRH90 aircraft) to the ADF through AIR 9000 Phases 2, 4 and 6, within approved cost, schedule and performance parameters.

The objective of the audit was to report on the effectiveness of Defence’s approach to the acceptance into service of Navy capability, and to identify where better practice may be used by CDG, DMO and Navy.

The objective of the audit was to assess the progress of the M113 Upgrade Project (Defence Project: Land 106), including progress in the development of operational capability resulting from the introduction of the upgraded vehicles into service. The high-level audit criteria used to assess the project’s progress and Defence’s effectiveness in administering the M113 Upgrade Project were:

• the degree to which the schedule for the production and delivery of upgraded M113 vehicles to Defence had been recovered in accordance with Defence’s response to the 2008–09 audit report and contractual requirements, as negotiated over the life of the contract;
• Defence’s measurement and allocation of the total cost of the upgrade project; and
• the development of capability arising from the upgrade project.

The audit follows on from Audit Report No. 45 2004-2005, Management of Selected Defence Systems Program Offices, May 2005. That report is being considered by the JCPAA, as part of its current inquiry into Defence Financial Management and Equipment Acquisition at the Department of Defence and DMO.

To assess the upgrade and sustainment of the F/A-18A/B Hornet fleet, and the sustainment of the newly acquired F/A-18F Super Hornet fleet.

The Australian Customs Service (Customs) is responsible for managing the integrity of Australia's border. The Australian maritime border is the 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) around Australia's 37 000 kilometre coastline. The National Marine Unit (NMU) contributes to customs' Civil Maritime Surveillance and Response program. It has eight 35 - metre Bay Class vessels (known as Australian Customs Vessels or ACVs) that are capable of maintaining a strategic presence around the Australian coast. The audit examined the administrative effectiveness of the NMU's surveillance and response operations. Particular emphasis was given to the following areas:

• strategic and tactical taskings;
• crew operations;
• crew training;
• asset management; and
• governance arrangements.

Given the significant expenditure associated with the Super Seasprites, and the problems that the Project had encountered over some time, the ANAO had commenced this performance audit prior to the Government's decision to cancel the Project. The focus of the audit was on Defence's and DMO's administration of the Project. In light of the Government's decision to cancel the Project, the objective of the audit was revised to place greater emphasis on those issues that resulted in the failure of the Project to provide the required capability, and highlighting project management lessons for major Defence acquisitions going forward.Accordingly the audit objective was to:

• identify those factors that contributed to the on-going poor performance of the Project;
• outline measures taken by Defence and DMO in seeking to overcome issues encountered by the Project, and key lessons arising from this project for the benefit of major acquisitions projects generally; and
• determine the capability and cost implications of a project that failed to deliver to expectations.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Navy’s strategy for recruiting and retaining personnel with specialist skills. The effective delivery of Navy capability depends on Navy having available sufficient numbers of skilled personnel to operate and maintain its fleet of sea vessels and aircraft, and conduct wide‑ranging operations in dispersed locations. Without the right personnel, Navy capability is reduced. Navy’s budget for 2014–15 included $1.86 billion in employee expenses.

The audit concluded that, in its strategic planning, Navy had identified its key workforce risks and their implications for Navy capability. To address these risks Navy had continued to adhere to its traditional ‘raise, train and sustain’ workforce strategy; developed a broad range of workforce initiatives that complemented its core approach; and sought to establish contemporary workforce management practices. However, long‑standing personnel shortfalls in a number of ‘critical’ employment categories had persisted, and Navy had largely relied on retention bonuses as a short‑ to medium‑term retention strategy.

Navy had developed a broad range of workforce initiatives, some designed specifically to address workforce shortages in its critical employment categories. To date, Navy had primarily relied on paying retention bonuses and other financial incentives; recruiting personnel with prior military experience to work in employment categories with significant workforce shortfalls; and using Navy Reserves in continuous full time roles. Ongoing work was required for Navy to firmly establish a range of promising workforce management practices, including providing the right training at the right time; more flexible approaches to managing individuals’ careers; and improving workplace culture, leadership and relationships. More flexible and tailored workforce management practices could help address the underlying causes of workforce shortfalls, particularly when the traditional approaches were not gaining sufficient traction.

The ANAO made two recommendations aimed at Navy: drawing on external human resource expertise to inform the development and implementation of its revised workforce plan; and evaluating the impact of retention bonuses on the Navy workforce to determine their future role within its overall workforce strategy.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans' Affairs and Department of Defence's administration of rehabilitation services under the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s arrangements for the management of contractors.

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 objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence's management of the disposal of specialist military equipment.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence Housing Australia administers its functions efficiently and effectively, and in accordance with the Government Business Enterprise guidelines.

The objective of this audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Defence’s development and implementation of Australia’s approach to providing military assistance to the Government of Ukraine.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of Army’s workforce planning.

The audit objective was to assess whether Defence is effectively controlling the use of Commonwealth credit cards for official purposes in accordance with legislative and policy requirements.

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

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness to date of the Department of Defence’s administration of the Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) program, with a focus on ERP Tranche 1 activities.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs' (DVA's) planning and management of the Veteran Centric Reform (VCR) program.

The audit objective was to examine Defence’s administration of Materiel Sustainment Agreements (MSAs) and the contribution made by MSAs to the effective sustainment of specialist military equipment.

The audit objective was to assess whether the Department of Defence's (Defence's) arrangements for the operation and maintenance of the Mulwala and Benalla facilities beyond June 2020 were established through appropriate processes and in accordance with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs).

The objective of this audit was to examine the efficiency and economy of the Department of Defence’s management of its general stores inventory.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s management of the acquisition of medium and heavy vehicles, associated modules and trailers for the Australian Defence Force.

The audit objectives were to examine the effectiveness of Defence’s management of the test and evaluation (T&E) aspects of its major capital equipment acquisition program; and to report on Defence’s progress in implementing T&E recommendations made in the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee’s August 2012 report, Procurement procedures for Defence capital projects.

The audit objective is to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Defence's management of the Mulwala Redevelopment Project.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Services Australia’s arrangements for the management of contractors.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs’ arrangements for the management of contractors.

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

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s administration of allowances and entitlements paid to its Australian Public Service (APS) employees.

The objective of this report is to provide the Auditor-General’s independent assurance over the status of the selected Major Projects, as reflected in the Statement by the Secretary of Defence, and the Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSSs) prepared by Defence, in accordance with the Guidelines endorsed by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.

This report outlines the ANAO’s assessment of the internal controls of major entities, including governance arrangements, information systems and control procedures. The findings summarised in this report are the results of the interim phase  of the financial statement audits of 23 major General Government Sector entities that represent some 95 per cent of total General Government Sector revenues and expenses.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Customs and Border Protection Service's management of the Cape Class patrol boat program.

The audit examined the range of support made available to ADF personnel making the transition from military to civilian life, the extent to which the assistance is utilised, the cost to Defence of such assistance and the relevant responsibilities of those who deliver assistance.

This audit followed up the ANAO's 2000 performance audit report on retention of military personnel (Audit Report No.35 1999-2000 Retention of Military Personnel), which focused on examining whether ADF personnel management practices to retain personnel were commensurate with the cost of recruiting and training new personnel, or whether more cost- effective steps could be taken to reduce the separation rates of desirable personnel. 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 helping Defence control the flow of trained personnel from the Services.

The audit reviewed the retention of military personnel that are managed by the Australian Defence Force which comprises the three Services. The objective of the audit was to review the management of personnel retention within the ADF with a view to evaluating the measures Defence has in place to monitor and control the flow of trained personnel from the Services

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 objective was to assess the effectiveness of the management of international travel restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) publishes two reports annually addressing the outcomes of the financial statement audits of Australian government entities and the Consolidated Financial Statements (CFS) of the Australian Government to provide Parliament an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities. This report focuses on the results of the interim audit phase, including an assessment of entities’ key internal controls, of the 2016–17 financial statements audits of 25 entities including all departments of state and a number of major Australian government entities.

The objective of the audit was to assess the Personnel Management Key Solution Project's planning and approval processes and its contract and project management. The audit addresses the scope of the delivered system, the expectations of end-users, and the system's ability to meet their capability requirements.

The objective of the audit was to report to Parliament on the progress Defence has made since June 2001 in implementing appropriate strategies for recruiting, developing and retaining skilled IT personnel. The audit focused on management of specialist information system skills and did not examine skills needed by users of information systems, although the latter is of obvious importance for overall performance. In June 2001, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA), after reviewing the ANAO's Audit Report No. 11 Knowledge System Equipment Acquisition Projects in Defence, commented that its major concern about Defence's ability to develop a knowledge edge with adequate coherence, centred on Defence's ability to recruit, develop and retain skilled individuals needed in all parts of the DIE. The JCPAA recommended that the ANAO conduct an audit of Defence's strategies for recruiting, developing and retaining skilled IT personnel.

The audit objective was to examine whether the Department of Defence implemented a selection of agreed parliamentary committee recommendations and ANAO performance audit recommendations.

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 assess whether the Department of Defence’s Projects of Concern regime is effective in managing the recovery of underperforming projects.

The objective of the audit was to assess the workforce planning systems used by the Australian Defence Force with a view to identifying better practice and making recommendations where appropriate to promote overall effectiveness of planning systems. The main issues were the management of the workforce planning function and determination of workforce requirements. The audit concentrated on the full-time military workforce, but also included the issue of the flexibility for military units to employ reserves or civilians where appropriate.

The Audit Activity Report: July to December 2004 summarises the activity and outputs of the Australian National Audit Office for the first half of the 2004-05 reporting year. The Report outlines the key findings of performance and financial control audits, and summarises audits tabled and better practice guides during July to December 2004.

The objective of this audit was to examine whether Army effectively administers the Army Individual Readiness Notice to support the achievement of its purpose.

The objective of the audit is to examine and report on the efficiency and effectiveness of AFP's administration and management of its overseas deployments. The audit specifically examines two deployments and focuses on strategic and operational planning and logistics. The audit examines a planned, long-term overseas deployment (as part of the Participating Police Force (PPF) within the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI)) and a crisis-driven deployment in response to a specific event (Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) assistance to Thailand following the Indian Ocean Tsunamis of 26 December 2004).

The objective of this audit was to assess Army's progress in addressing the issues previously identified in Defence reviews and ANAO audits as affecting the Army Reserve's capability; and Identify the extent that the Army Reserve is capable of contributing to contemporary Australian Defence Force capability requirements through fulfilling its assigned roles and tasks.

As part of its 2001 inquiry into the recruitment and retention of Australian Defence Force (ADF) personnel, the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee reviewed Defence's contract with Manpower Services (Australia) Pty Ltd for trialling the outsourcing of recruiting services to the ADF. In its subsequent report, the Committee commented that the original contractual arrangements deserved further scrutiny by the ANAO. The objective of the audit was to examine Defence's management of the contractual arrangements for the provision of recruiting services to the ADF. In examining the management of the contract, the ANAO looked at the evaluations conducted at the end of each contractual phase, roles and responsibilities associated with ADF recruiting, and Defence's monitoring of contractual performance and management of risks associated with ADF recruiting.

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.

Defence has long provided housing assistance for members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) and their families. In 1988, this function passed to the Defence Housing Authority (DHA), which was established to provide suitable housing to meet Defence's operational needs. In 2000, Defence and DHA signed a Services Agreement valued at $3.5 billion over 10 years. The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence's management of its housing and relocation services provided for ADF members meets specified requirements; and to make practical recommendations for more efficient, effective and economical use of public resources provided for this purpose.

Members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) have informal and formal complaint mechanisms available to them to address grievances. Initially, members are advised to seek resolution of their complaint at the lowest possible level, through the normal command channels and administrative arrangements. A member who is not satisfied that a complaint has been resolved in this manner may use the Redress of Grievance (ROG) system to submit a formal complaint to the commanding officer of the member's unit. The objective of this audit was to ascertain whether the ROG system could be refined to improve the efficiency and timeliness of processing of complaints while preserving the equity and transparency the current system provides.The Redress of Grievance system is clearly time-consuming and resource intensive. Some grievances have taken as long as four years to resolve. Some could be resolved by administrative means rather than through recourse to grievance processes. The system contains various inefficiencies that detract from its cost-effectiveness from the viewpoint of the ADF and individual members. In addition many members are unaware of the system or do not have a high level of confidence in its effectiveness.

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.

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.

This report is an information document summarising the audit activities of the ANAO in the period January to June 1997.

The audit reviewed the efficiency and effectiveness of Defence's management of Naval Aviation Force (NAF) in achieving its required capability within budgeted resources. The objectives of the audit were to assess whether planning, management and resource allocation mechanisms and practices for NAF were conducive to achieving the latter's objectives in a cost-effective manner.