This audit examined DIMIA's administration of onshore compliance under rhe Migration Act 1958 (Cth) as amended (the Act). In particular, it focused on whether DIMIA had implemented appropriate onshore compliance strategies in regard to people who enter Australia lawfully but whose presence becomes unlawful through: - the expiry of their visa; or - a breach of visa conditions and cancellation of their visa.

The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and the effectiveness of DEWR's administrative oversight for the WfD programme. The components of administration examined included whether:

• the operation of the WfD programme was guided by sound business planning including risk assessment;
• DEWR effectively and efficiently managed, monitored and reported the performance of CWCs in meeting contractual obligations;
• adequate support was provided to DEWR contract managers and account managers to assist in the delivery of WfD outcomes;
• there was evaluation of the performance of CWCs in delivering WfD objectives on behalf of the department;
• DEWR measures the effectiveness of WfD against programme objectives; and
• DEWR had implemented agreed recommendations from the previous WfD audit, where current and relevant.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DFAT's employment and management of its LES at Australia's overseas missions. In particular, the audit examined arrangements for: planning and risk management; guidance and training; recruitment, engagement and employment of LES; and performance management.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DEEWR’s and FaHCSIA’s administration of the Australian Government’s responsibilities under Element 1 of the National Partnership Agreement on Indigenous Economic Participation (including the NT Jobs Package).

On 2 November 2000, the Senate agreed to a resolution that the Auditor-General be requested to review all expenditures and entitlements accruing to Parliamentarians and Ministers in 1999-2000. The resolution requested that the Auditor-General consider a number of specific matters, and report by 30 June 2001. In the course of that audit, examination of issues relating to Parliamentarians' staff was deferred in order to give the Auditor-General a reasonable chance of reporting reasonably close to the Senate's requested reporting timeframe. ANAO Audit Report No.5 2001-02, Parliamentarians' Entitlements: 1999-2000, was tabled in the Parliament in August 2001. A proposed audit of the administration by Finance of the entitlements of staff engaged under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 (MOP(S) Act was included in the ANAO Audit Work Program for 2001-02. The objectives of this performance audit were to: review the effectiveness of the internal control structures in the Department of Finance and Administration (Finance) concerning the administration of entitlements for MOP(S) Act staff; review the effectiveness and efficiency of the procurement and support services Finance provides in relation to MOP(S) Act staff: and identify principles of sound administrative practices to facilitate improved administrative arrangements for the future. The audit covered Finance's administration of payments and services to MOP(S) Act staff during the period 1998-99 to 2001-02. Sub-section 15(c) of the Auditor General Act 1997 precludes an audit of persons who are engaged under the MOP(S) Act. Accordingly, the audit scope did not include examination of the responsibilities of MOP(S) Act staff.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the implementation of the NPARIH in the Northern Territory from the perspective of the Australian Government.

The objective of this audit was to determine whether selected Australian Government organisations had effective processes for managing the annual leave entitlements of their staff, and whether systems and controls over the processing of annual leave were working as intended. In addressing this objective, the audit also assessed progress being made by the audited organisations in implementing the recommendations in ANAO Audit Report No.16 2005-06.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DEEWR’s administration of FWEIP. The three high level criteria that were used to make this assessment were the appropriateness of DEEWR’s:

• program planning and design;
• selection and engagement of providers; and
• program monitoring, reporting and evaluation.

The objectives of this performance audit were to provide assurance that there were effective measures in place to safeguard the national collections and that institutions had processes in place to provide access to them. The ANAO also examined the extent to which the national cultural institutions have implemented the eleven recommendations from the previous report, Safeguarding Our National Collections (Audit Report No.8 1998-99).

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of CRS Australia’s delivery of Disability Management Services. In assessing CRS Australia’s performance, the ANAO examined whether:

• services are delivered in accordance with CRS Australia’s operating procedures, which incorporate the Disability Services Standards and the requirements of the DEEWR MOU;
• CRS Australia has an effective client feedback (including complaints) system, which is used to identify and address business risks and areas for improving service delivery; and
• sound governance arrangements (including performance monitoring and reporting) are in place to monitor service delivery.

The audit did not specifically examine issues and information relating to the commercial nature of the business, such as profitability levels and competitive neutrality arrangements.