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.

The audit objective was to assess the Department of Defence’s progress in delivering Multi-Role Helicopters (MRH90 aircraft) to the ADF through AIR 9000 Phases 2, 4 and 6, within approved cost, schedule and performance parameters.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the (former) Department of Industry’s administration of the Australian Apprenticeships Incentives Program.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency’s (TEQSA’s) regulation of higher education.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Social Services’ arrangements for managing Disability Employment Services provider agreements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the transition of the Remote Jobs and Communities Programme to the Community Development Programme, including whether the Community Development Programme is well designed and administered effectively and efficiently.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office's administration of the JobKeeper scheme.

The audit objective was to examine whether Airservices Australia has effective procurement arrangements in place, with a particular emphasis on whether consultancy contracts entered into with International Centre for Complex Project Management (ICCPM) in association with the OneSKY Australia project were effectively administered.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the National Indigenous Australians Agency’s administration of funding for remote housing in the Northern Territory.

The objective of this audit was to assess whether the Department of Home Affairs’ procurement process for the Permissions Capability employed open and effective competition and achieved value for money, consistent with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.