The objectives of the audit were to examine and evaluate the efficiency, economy and administrative effectiveness of the non-judicial activities of the Family Court of Australia. A major aim of the audit was to identify administrative better practices that could be promulgated throughout the Court. The criteria for the audit address the following issues: corporate planning; performance measurement; organisational structure; human resource management; human resource development; management information and reporting systems; and operational processes and procedures.

This performance audit is the first property management audit that the ANAO has conducted since the FMA Act came into effect in 1997, with the associated devolution of responsibility to agency heads. The audit included coverage of office accommodation currently leased in Australia from the private sector. This office accommodation was housing the functions and activities of clerical, technical or professional staff, including conference and meeting rooms and ministerial suites but excluding basements, car parks, theatrettes, and cafeterias.

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 objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Navy’s strategy for recruiting and retaining personnel with specialist skills. The effective delivery of Navy capability depends on Navy having available sufficient numbers of skilled personnel to operate and maintain its fleet of sea vessels and aircraft, and conduct wide‑ranging operations in dispersed locations. Without the right personnel, Navy capability is reduced. Navy’s budget for 2014–15 included $1.86 billion in employee expenses.

The audit concluded that, in its strategic planning, Navy had identified its key workforce risks and their implications for Navy capability. To address these risks Navy had continued to adhere to its traditional ‘raise, train and sustain’ workforce strategy; developed a broad range of workforce initiatives that complemented its core approach; and sought to establish contemporary workforce management practices. However, long‑standing personnel shortfalls in a number of ‘critical’ employment categories had persisted, and Navy had largely relied on retention bonuses as a short‑ to medium‑term retention strategy.

Navy had developed a broad range of workforce initiatives, some designed specifically to address workforce shortages in its critical employment categories. To date, Navy had primarily relied on paying retention bonuses and other financial incentives; recruiting personnel with prior military experience to work in employment categories with significant workforce shortfalls; and using Navy Reserves in continuous full time roles. Ongoing work was required for Navy to firmly establish a range of promising workforce management practices, including providing the right training at the right time; more flexible approaches to managing individuals’ careers; and improving workplace culture, leadership and relationships. More flexible and tailored workforce management practices could help address the underlying causes of workforce shortfalls, particularly when the traditional approaches were not gaining sufficient traction.

The ANAO made two recommendations aimed at Navy: drawing on external human resource expertise to inform the development and implementation of its revised workforce plan; and evaluating the impact of retention bonuses on the Navy workforce to determine their future role within its overall workforce strategy.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2018. The report addresses all applicable obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act); the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014 (PGPA Rule); the Auditor-General Act 1997; the performance measures set out in the outcome and programs framework in the ANAO’s 2017–18 Portfolio Budget Statements (PBS) and the ANAO 2017–18 Corporate Plan and annual reporting requirements set out in other relevant legislation.

Increased transparency and accountability on progress with major Defence equipment acquisitions has been a focus of parliamentary interest for some time. Beginning in 2007–08, an annual program has been established in conjunction with the Department of Defence to enable the ANAO to review and report to the Parliament on the status of major Defence acquisition projects, as set out in the Major Projects Report. The review includes information relating to the cost, schedule and progress towards delivery of required capability of individual projects as at 30 June each year. The Report is undertaken at the request of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.

The audit reviewed the Australian Maritime Safety Authority's management of the navigation aids network, which is an important factor in shipping safety. The objectives of the audit were to determine whether AMSA's management of the network provides for the strategic needs of marine navigation in Australian waters, and whether AMSA's management was efficient and effective. The audit focused on AMSA's strategic planning, the management of revenue and expenditure to support the network, its contract management practices, and its accountability and performance reporting arrangements.

Grants Scheme in Audit Report No.33 of 1993-94. The major recommendations in that report related to:

• improved quality of claims and control measures;
• optimisation of management planning and control;
• rationalisation of the strategic planning structure;
• improved responsiveness of the scheme; and
• improved accountability to Parliament.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to form an opinion on Austrade's progress with implementing the recommendations of Audit Report No.33 of 1993-94.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of Army's management of the move of 1st Brigade to Darwin. The audit criteria directly related to implementation of the project. These criteria addressed planning as well as identification and management of longer-term risks to the success of the project.

The purpose of the audit was to examine the efficiency, effectiveness and accountability of the Therapeutic Goods Administration's performance in evaluating and approving prescription drugs for public use. In particular the audit focused on analysing elements of the regulatory process associated with the evaluation of prescription drugs. In this context the audit reviewed the administrative operations performed within the Department's Drug Safety and Evaluation Branch, the Australian Drug Evaluation Committee and the Business and Services Branch of the TGA, rather than any processes preceding or succeeding those activities.