The audit objective was to determine whether Australian Government agencies were implementing appropriate policies and processes to identify and manage conflicts of interest.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DIAC's administration of the health requirement of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act). To achieve this objective, the ANAO examined whether DIAC was setting and implementing the health requirement in accordance with the Act, the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations), and DIAC's own guidelines.

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 this audit was to assess how effectively entities had developed and implemented appropriate KPIs to support stated program objectives.

The audit objective was to report on the administration of the Australia Network tender process and to identify lessons learned from the conduct of the process to inform future procurement activities.

As an element of the arrangements implemented to support the role of the ANAO in reviewing campaigns' compliance with the Guidelines announced on 2 July 2008, the ANAO advised the chair of the JCPAA that the ANAO will provide regular summary reports to Parliament. Section 25 of the Auditor-General's Act 1997 provides for the tabling of such reports.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the Better Regions Program has been effectively designed and administered. The audit scope included examination of all 106 Better Regions projects.

The objective of this audit was to assess the Tax Office's implementation of the nine recommendations of Audit Report No.19 2004–05 Taxpayers' Charter, having regard to any changed circumstances affecting the implementation of the recommendations. This involved an examination of the Tax Office's:

• systems and processes used to develop, maintain and update the Charter;
• strategic commitment to implementing the principles of the Charter;
• integration of Charter principles with its business processes;
• systems for resolving disputes according to Charter principles; and
• monitoring and reporting of its performance against commitments in the Charter.

The objective of the audit was to assess the appropriateness of the use and reporting of confidentiality provisions in Australian Government contracts for 2011.

The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess how well the ATO has implemented the recommendations of Audit Report No.3 of 2001-2002, The Australian Taxation Ofiice's Administration of Taxation Rulings. As part of the audit we also considered the ATO's progress in addressing the JCPAA's suggestions resulting from its review of Report No.3 of 2001-2002.