The objective of the audit was to assess whether the award of a $443.3 million grant to the Great Barrier Reef Foundation was informed by appropriate departmental advice and through processes that complied with the grants administration framework.

The objective of this performance audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of grants made to the ARTC. The audit involved an examination of DOTARS' administration of the grant funding approved for, and paid to, the ARTC (in respect of both the grants paid for projects approved under legislation and the three special grants). It also involved consideration of the role of Finance and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C) in advising on the special grant funding and (in respect of Finance) the payment and reporting arrangements for the grants. The audit was conducted under Section 18 of the Auditor-General Act 1997.

The Auditor-General responded on 30 April 2019 to correspondence from Ms Cathy McGowan AO, MP dated 8 April 2019, requesting that the Auditor-General conduct an investigation to examine the politicisation of taxpayer funded grant announcements (Community Sport Infrastructure grants program). 

The objective of this audit was to form an opinion on the Australian Research Council's (ARC's) management of research grants. To achieve this, ANAO centred the audit around the following aspects of ARC's grants administration: governance and structure, particularly the roles and responsibilities of those parties involved in administering ARC's grants (Chapter 2); the processes for assessing and selecting ARC grants (Chapter 3);post-award management of grants under the Funding Agreements (Agreements) between ARC and those universities that receive and administer the ARC grants to researchers (Chapter 4); and ARC's monitoring of its grant programs for management, performance improvement and reporting (Chapter 5). In its assessment, ANAO considered ARC's compliance with relevant sections of the Australian Research Council Act 2001 (ARC Act) and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act). The assessment also took account of the ANAO's Better Practice Guides, particularly the Better Practice Guide—Administration of Grants. The audit focused mainly on ARC's administration of Discovery Projects, the largest scheme in ARC's National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the selected entities:

• management of the delivery of projects awarded funding under four programmes where ANAO has previously audited the application assessment and selection processes; and
• development and implementation of evaluation strategies for each of those programmes.

This information report would cover Australian Government grants reporting following on from Auditor-General Report No. 7 2021–22 Australian Government Grants Reporting. The report would provide transparency of, and insights on government grants expenses and Commonwealth entities’ self-reporting of grants on GrantConnect.

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 primary objective of the audit was to assess whether the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (DCITA) and the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) were administering a number of grant programs that are designed to enhance telecommunications infrastructure and services in regional, rural and remote areas of Australia according to better practice. The audit was also aimed at determining whether DCITA had implemented the recommendations of an earlier audit of Networking the Nation.

The Auditor-General responded on 27 February 2020 to correspondence from senators Larissa Waters and Janet Rice dated 14 February 2020, requesting that the Auditor-General conduct an investigation to examine the decision-making process under the Community Development Grants Programme.

The Auditor-General responded on 3 July 2020 to follow-up correspondence from senators Larissa Waters and Janet Rice dated 9 June 2020, requesting that the Auditor-General reconsider including a review of the decision-making process under the Community Development Grants Programme as part of the ANAO 2020-21 Annual Audit Work Program.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education’s (DIISRTE’s) administration of the Education Investment Fund grants program.

(DIISRTE was the department that had responsibility for the administration of the EIF grants program during the course of the audit. The recommendations and suggestions for improvement are, however, directed to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education because this department now has responsibility for the administration of the program).