The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the administration of the Gateway review process by Finance and FMA Act agencies. The audit also examined the extent to which those Gateway reviews that have been conducted have contributed to improvements in the delivery of major projects undertaken by FMA Act agencies.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tax Practitioners Board's implementation and administration of the regulatory arrangements for tax practitioners under the Tax Agent Services Act 2009.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the NCA's management of its asset portfolio. This included examining its asset management systems and the management of selected contracts that the NCA has in place to maintain specific assets.

The audit objective was to assess whether the early stages of DIAC's preparations for the re-tendering of the detention and health services contracts were consistent with sound practice. The audit focused on governance arrangements, in particular the recordkeeping arrangements, roles and responsibilities of personnel, expert advisors and the probity auditor—matters raised in the previous audit report. The audit did not examine the RFT, which is not due to be issued until April 2007.

The audit scope covered development of the R2R Program, management of the initial R2R Program and changes made to the Program funding conditions and administrative guidance for Auslink Roads to Recovery. The scope did not include management of Auslink Roads to Recovery. The audit objectives were to: · assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the management of the initial R2R Program; and · identify any opportunities for improvements to management of the Program.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether protective security functions in selected organisations were being effectively managed. In considering effectiveness, the audit assessed whether protective security arrangements: - were designed within the context of the business framework and the related security risks identified by the organisation; and - provided an appropriate level of support for the organisation's operations and the delivery of its services.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented to the Information Systems Audit and Control Association (Canberra Chapter) in conjunction with the Institute of Internal Auditors (Canberra Branch)

The objectives of the audit were to assess agency performance in relation to compiling their Internet contract listings as required by the Senate Order and the appropriateness of the use of confidentiality provisions in Commonwealth contracts. The audit involved a review in seven agencies of the processes used to compile their Internet contract listings and the use of confidentiality provisions in contracts.

Government service delivery through the Internet presents both significant opportunities and challenges in the delivery of on-line services. Depending on the level of sophistication of the application, the Internet allows Commonwealth agencies to publish information, interact with clients in the exchange of information, and/or transact business electronically. The over-all objective of this audit was to determine Commonwealth agencies' preparedness to achieve the Government's goal of all appropriate services being Internet-deliverable by 2001. The audit sought to assess:

• the extent to which agencies considered that they would be able to achieve that goal;
• what type of services agencies were delivering or planning to deliver on the Internet; and
• whether agencies had identified barriers and possible solutions to that delivery.

This audit focused on the approval of business system projects -projects aiming to achieve a business objective such as reduced costs or to implement a new program, in contrast with projects with a narrower technology focus such as replacing an agencyʹs desktop computers.

The audit examined the management of computer software assets at four Commonwealth bodies. It focused on the capitalisation of software for the purposes of annual financial reporting. The specific objectives were to: determine whether the selected bodies had established effective internal control frameworks for the capitalisation of externally acquired and internally developed software; and assess whether software costs were capitalised in accordance with organisational policy, accounting standards and relevant legislation.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the CPA Australia National Public Sector Convention : Overview and Panel Discussion by Auditors General

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship's (DIAC) administration of the character requirements of the Migration Act.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence is effectively managing the EO Services Contract.

The audit focused mainly on Defence's contract management framework, including the arrangements to monitor the contractor’s performance in delivering services under the contract. The audit also examined the processes used by Defence to develop the current version of the contract and the extent to which the revised contract, as negotiated in 2006, provides an assurance of better value for money when compared to the original contract signed in 2001.

The audit reviewed the administrative effectiveness of ComSuper in providing benefits to members of the CSS and PSS. The objectives of the audit were to assess the effectiveness of ComSuper's performance in regard to the establishment of new purchaser/provider arrangements; the integrity of the ComSuper databases for the payment of CSS and PSS benefits; and the accuracy and effectiveness of benefit processing and payment for resignation, retirement and retrenchment.

The audit reviewed fraud control arrangements in the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. The objective of this audit was to establish whether the Department had developed a sound fraud control framework by examining the arrangements for: · policy and planning; · performance assessment; · quality assurance; and · training and awareness raising.

The audit process involved an assessment of the payroll arrangements in Commonwealth organisations. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether organisations have established internal control frameworks for the management of payroll operations, assess whether payment of salaries and related expenditures is made in accordance with the relevant terms and conditions of employment, and identify better practices in the management and operations of payroll systems.

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 assess the application of the outcomes and outputs framework in Australian Government agencies. The audit included a review of:

• the outcomes and outputs of agencies and the integration of the outcomes and outputs framework into agencies' operations;
• the extent to which agencies' performance indicators incorporated better practice characteristics to enable agencies to meet their performance reporting obligations;
• agencies' processes for capturing, monitoring and reporting financial and performance information and the extent to which outcomes and outputs information was used in agency decision-making; and
• the extent that agencies met their external reporting and accountability obligations.

The audit consisted of a survey of 44 agencies subject to the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act) undertaken in October 2005 and detailed audit testing in three of those agencies. The purpose of the survey was to provide cross-agency data in relation to agencies' implementation of the framework during the period 2002–03 to 2005–06. The ANAO received responses from all 44 agencies, although not all agencies responded to all questions. The ANAO did not audit the information provided by survey participants and the reported results are based on agencies' responses to the survey.

The agencies at which detailed audit testing was undertaken were:

• Department of Education Science and Training;
• the then Department of the Environment and Heritage; and
• IP Australia.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of procedures and processes used by DEST and the ATO to record HECS–HELP student loans. To achieve this, the ANAO assessed the performance of DEST and the ATO against three criteria as follows:

• DEST monitored student contributions set by higher education providers for consistency with Australian Government policy;
• DEST paid HECS–HELP advance payments to higher education providers based on sound estimates, and recorded, reconciled and reported these payments; and
• the ATO has established procedures and processes to correctly record HECS–HELP loans against student tax records.

The audit theme was financial management and accountability. The audit concluded that six of the eight organisations had satisfactory payment of accounts processes and that GST administration control frameworks had been implemented. Payment of accounts processes could be improved by greater use of information technology whereas using risk management; formalising the BAS preparation procedures; and increasing monitoring and review procedures could improve GST administration.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the department's administration of general recurrent grants for non-government schools. The audit examined key processes in the department's administration ofgeneral recurrent grants for non-government schools for 2005–08 in accordance with the Schools Assistance (Learning Together—Achievement Through Choice and Opportunity) Act 2004.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2015. It addresses the Requirements for Annual Reports for Departments, Executive Agencies and Other Non‑corporate Commonwealth Entities approved by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in June 2015; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the 2014–15 Portfolio Budget Statements; section 28 of the Auditor‑General Act 1997; and other annual reporting requirements set out in legislation.

The objectives of the audit were to assess:

• whether FaCSIA has effectively administered the distribution of funding for the Local Answers, VSEG, Reconnect and Minor Capital Upgrade programmes, including promoting the relevant schemes to potential applicants, developing application forms, handling and appraising applications, selecting recipients and making grant announcements;
• the pattern of approvals of grants to States/Territories and to electorates held by the Government and Opposition parties under the Local Answers and VSEG programmes; and
• whether FaCSIA administered eight one-off grants to community organisations provided as a result of Government commitments during the 2004 Federal Election campaign in line with relevant legislation and guidelines.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration, by DoHA and the Commonwealth partners, of the 2008 and 2011 Heads of Agreement for the management, operation and funding of the Mersey Community Hospital (The Commonwealth partners for this audit were the Tasmanian Government Department of Health and Human Services and the Tasmanian Health Organisation – North West).

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 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 primary objective of this audit was to review the management and administration of travel undertaken by public sector employees to determine whether, and to what extent, it complied with approved policies and procedures. The other objective of this audit, as with all across-the-board FCA audits, is to identify, develop and report better practices. The audit dealt with short-term travel by Commonwealth public sector employees on official business.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) administration of the veterans’ children education schemes.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DIISTRE’s administration of the Research Block Grant schemes. The department’s performance was assessed against the following criteria:

• the schemes are effectively planned and administered;
• the processes and systems used for calculating and distributing funds reflect the allocation criteria specified for each scheme; and
• compliance with scheme guidelines is monitored and scheme performance and contribution to the broader goals of the RBG program is assessed.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the Public Seminar Series, Graduate Program in Public Policy, 'Democratic Governance: Improving the Institutions of Accountability', The Australian National University

The objective of the audit was to assess the awarding of funding under the Supported Accommodation Innovation Fund against the requirements of the Commonwealth’s grants administration framework.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of DIAC’s administration of the character requirements of the Citizenship Act.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the Council Allocation component of the RLCIP has been effectively designed, implemented and administered. The audit examined each of the three funding rounds, albeit with a focus on the first round (as it was due to be completed by 30 September 2009), with the second round not due to be completed until late in the audit timetable (31 December 2010) and third round funding agreements being signed and payments being made at the time audit work was completed.

The audit assessed FaHCSIA's management of AACAP and how the department monitors the contribution the program is making to the improvement of primary and environmental health, and living conditions, in remote Indigenous communities.

The audit examined program delivery under the 2006–2009 MoU, as well as the planning for the 2010 project under the variation to the 2006–2009 MoU. As part of the audit the ANAO considered:

• program strategy and implementation including the roles and responsibilities of the major stakeholders, community selection and scope of works (Chapter 2);
• the financial management of the program and the changing role of the Contracted Program Manager (Chapter 3); and
• performance measures, including FaHCSIA's performance reporting framework, and approach to monitoring and reporting performance against the stated program objectives (Chapter 4).

The audit focused on AACAP in so far as it relates to Indigenous community outcomes. It did not consider the program from the perspective of the Australian Defence Force capability building.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AO) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the UN Results Based Management Seminar

The audit focussed on the systems and processes OGTR has established for both receiving and assessing applications under the Act, and also for ensuring compliance with the statutory requirements through monitoring and inspection. The audit objective was to form an opinion on the discharge by OGTR of selected functions entrusted to it under the Act. The audit assessed the practices of OGTR against the following principal criteria: Assessment of applications under the Act: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for the management and assessment of applications under the Act. Ensuring compliance—monitoring, inspection and enforcement activities: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Act. Performance management: Whether OGTR manages selected aspects of its work efficiently and effectively. The audit did not seek to form an opinion on the appropriateness of the chosen structure of the regime for regulating gene technology or the merit of the scientific judgments involved. The audit methodology included discussions with representatives from agencies that co-ordinate aspects of the co-operative regulatory regime for gene technology across Australian jurisdictions, with various other stakeholders and users of the regime, as well as with officers of OGTR, along with examination of OGTR documents and files.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the management of maintenance of the Defence estate, taking particular account of planning and delivery aspects.

The audit examined: Defence’s policies, procedures, processes and supporting tools related to the planning and delivery of the maintenance of the estate; and services provided to Defence by private sector firms in relation to maintenance activities. The audit did not focus on contract management matters, nor on the systems used by Defence to maintain information related to estate maintenance.

The objective of the audit was to examine whether the UP and CPP services provided by the Australian Federal Police Protection Service are being managed effectively. In particular, the audit examined:

• whether the Protection function has been effectively integrated into the AFP, and sound arrangements are in place to strategically plan Protection services and manage risks;
• whether Protection staff have access to appropriate training and guidance; and
• the management arrangements for UP and CPP services.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA) - Australia SOPAC ?98 The IIA - Australia, South Pacific and Asia Conference

The objectives of the audit were to assess whether DOTARS had developed and implemented an appropriate framework and procedures to administer lessee obligations entered into as part of the 1997 and 1998 leasehold sales of 17 Federal airports. In particular, the audit sought to: - review DOTARS' monitoring of lessee compliance with the Airport Leases and supporting sale documentation; - examine the effectiveness of the framework and procedures developed by DOTARS to administer lessee development commitments; and assess the impact of changes in the aviation environment on the management and monitoring of lessee obligations.

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.

This first Assurance Report on the status of selected Defence equipment acquisition projects, which has the support of the Parliament and the Government, represents a substantial step towards improving transparency and public accountability in major Defence procurement projects. It is the pilot of an annual Defence Materiel Organisation (DMO) Major Projects Report, and was developed in conjunction with the DMO. It covers the cost, schedule and capability progress achieved by nine DMO projects, which had an approved budget totalling $13.535 billion as at 30 June 2008.

This report is organised into three parts. Part 1 comprises an ANAO overview and Auditor–General's Foreword. Part 2 comprises the Major Projects Report prepared by DMO, including an overview reflecting DMO's perspective on their business and on the nine projects included in the. Part 3 incorporates the Auditor-General's Review Report, the statement by the CEO DMO, and the information prepared by DMO in the form of standardised Project Data Summary Sheets covering each of the nine pilot projects.

In the next 12 months, the ANAO will review 15 DMO projects planned for inclusion in the 2008-09 DMO Major Projects Report, with the number of projects rising to 30 projects in subsequent years. The ANAO will also work with DMO to refine the approach adopted for providing assurance on each project's progress toward achieving Final Operational Capability. The ANAO will also consider the inclusion of an analysis of each project's emerging trends, as appropriate, to complement DMO's intention to provide improved analysis of project management performance regarding all projects included in the Major Projects Report.

The study examined aggregated benchmarking measures of cost, efficiency quality and better practice for nineteen Commonwealth organisations and compared the results with that of an international group. The objective of the study was to obtain and report on over time quantitative and qualitative data relating to finance function activities as they operate in Commonwealth organisations.

The audit assessed the operations of the four Northern Territory Land Councils which provide a range of services to Aboriginal people under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976. The audit also assessed the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commision's (ATSIC) administration of the Aboriginals Benefit Account, which provides funding to the Land Councils under the same Act. The objectives of the audit were to assess:

• whether the governance arrangements used by ATSIC and the Land Councils are appropriate;
• whether ATSIC meets its legislative requirements concerning the Aboriginals Benefit Account in an effective and efficient way; and
• whether the Land Councils are effective and efficient in managing their recourses to meet the objectives of the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, address presented at the Australian National University

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 the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy’s administration of the Household Assistance Scheme.

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 objective of the audit was to assess whether the WHM programme is administered effectively and in accordance with relevant laws and policies. In particular, the ANAO focused on four key areas: the implementation of eWHM visa; authority for the WHM programme; decision-making for WHM visas; and programme performance information. A feature of the audit was the computer-aided scrutiny of over 300 000 visa application records to test DIMA's decision-making processes.

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.

The audit reviewed Defence's management of the Test and Evaluation (T&E) aspects of its capital equipment acquisition program. The audit sought to identify, from Defence T&E practice, any barriers that might limit the efficiency and effectiveness of its T&E activities.

The audit objective was to assess the administrative effectiveness of the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations(DEEWR), Department of Human Services (DHS) partnership arrangement in supporting the delivery of employment programs.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the ATO’s administration of external debt collection arrangements.

The audit examined whether the Department of Health and Ageing had the performance information necessary to administer the Australian Health Care Agreements. A strong focus of the audit was accountability for performance given the significant size of Commonwealth financial assistance, more than $29.6 billion over 5 years, provided to the States and Territories for the provision of health care services.

The overall objective of the audit was to determine whether Health's management and operation of selected IT systems:

• met industry better practice;
• met quality and service delivery parameters set by Health and, if applicable, by the Government; and
• operate effectively, efficiently and economically.

The audit applied selected processes from CobiT (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology) to assist with the assessment of key aspects of Health's management and operation of IT. The audit builds on ANAO's earlier IT audits using CobiT.

The objectives of the audit were to assess the administrative and financial effectiveness of the Department of Finance and Administration's (Finance's) management of the Commonwealth's exposure under the DASFLEET Tied Contract; assess the effectiveness of Finance's monitoring of performance of the DASFLEET Tied Contract with Macquarie Fleet; and review the action taken by Finance in response to a recommendation of Audit Report No. 25 1998-99, Sale of DASFLEET.

Mr Ian McPhee - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the Australian Institute of Project Management, Hobart

Pursuant to a request from the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee and the Auditor - General's response to the Committee, the objective of this performance audit was to examine and report on the selection of the preferred tenderer in the Health Group IT outsourcing process. In particular, the audit examined the circumstances surrounding OASITO's administration of the: - disclosure to a tenderer of information provided by other tenderers; - subsequent acceptance of a late re-pricing offer from a tenderer: and - advice to the decision- maker leading to the selection of the preferred tenderer. The audit focused particularly on assessing the administrative processes undertaken in the selection of the preferred tenderer for the Health Group. Audit emphasis was placed on the management of the probity aspects of the tender process, particularly in regard to events that occurred between June 1999, when the tenderers provided their penultimate pricing, and the selection of the preferred tenderer in September 1999.

The objective of the audit was to assess the ATO's administration of the Surcharge. Specifically, the audit sought to: report on the environment into which the Surcharge was introduced, including the legislative intent behind the Surcharge, and the current Surcharge environment; examine and report on aspects of Surcharge governance; assess the systems, processes and controls the ATO uses to: match Member Contributions Statements (MCS) data with income tax return data using Tax File Numbers (TFNs); process Surcharge information; and issue Surcharge liability assessments. assess the mechanisms the ATO uses to assess, classify, manage and rectify existing Surcharge exceptions, and prevent future exceptions from occurring; and examine the mechanisms and strategies the ATO uses to provide assurance that members and holders of contributions are complying with their Surcharge obligations.