The audit examined the effectiveness of DEEWR's: administrative framework for the program; management of the application, assessment and funding processes; and monitoring of and reporting on the program's performance.

In order to form an opinion against the audit objective, the ANAO primarily conducted fieldwork and documentation reviews at DEEWR's central office. A stratified random sample (in order to provide for representation from states, territories and school sectors) of 74 applications from Rounds 1 and 2 was also selected for detailed examination. Through this sample, the ANAO sought to determine whether funding applications had been assessed in accordance with the established assessment criteria and that quality assurance mechanisms for the assessment process were effective.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DIAC’s management of the student visa program. Three key areas were examined in the audit: the processing of student visa applications; ensuring compliance with student visa conditions; and cooperation between DIAC and DEEWR.

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 audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs’ administration of residential care payments.

The objective of this audit was to assess the progress made by DoHA and Medicare Australia (recommendation 3) in addressing the four recommendations from ANAO Audit Report No.50, 2000–01 designed to improve the administration and performance of NCSP.

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 examine the effectiveness of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s administration of the Tasmanian Forests Intergovernmental Agreement Contractors Voluntary Exit Grants Program.

The objective of the audit was to assess how effectively DHS (including CSA), FaHCSIA and Centrelink managed the implementation of stage one of the CSSR and the Improving Compliance program.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tax Office's compliance approach for high risk income tax refunds in the individuals and micro enterprises market segments. The audit examined three key areas:

• management and organisational arrangements relating to high risk income tax refund processes;

• processes and procedures for identifying high risk income tax refunds, and the processes and tools used to evaluate and verify taxpayers' entitlements to income tax refunds; and

• information technology systems, processes and controls supporting the processing of income tax returns and refunds.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DFAT's management of the overseas leased estate. In particular, the audit examined whether DFAT:

• has effective governance, reporting and funding arrangements in place to support the sound management and oversight of the overseas leased estate;
• effectively manages overseas leased chancery and residential property on a day-to-day basis; and
• manages relationships with landlords and attached agencies effectively and adequately consults with stakeholders.