Members of the Australian Defence Force (ADF) have informal and formal complaint mechanisms available to them to address grievances. Initially, members are advised to seek resolution of their complaint at the lowest possible level, through the normal command channels and administrative arrangements. A member who is not satisfied that a complaint has been resolved in this manner may use the Redress of Grievance (ROG) system to submit a formal complaint to the commanding officer of the member's unit. The objective of this audit was to ascertain whether the ROG system could be refined to improve the efficiency and timeliness of processing of complaints while preserving the equity and transparency the current system provides.The Redress of Grievance system is clearly time-consuming and resource intensive. Some grievances have taken as long as four years to resolve. Some could be resolved by administrative means rather than through recourse to grievance processes. The system contains various inefficiencies that detract from its cost-effectiveness from the viewpoint of the ADF and individual members. In addition many members are unaware of the system or do not have a high level of confidence in its effectiveness.

The objectives of the audit were to: assess the effectiveness of the key evaluation methods used to review the efficacy of the Australian Government's national counter-terrorism coordination arrangements; and examine the effectiveness of the links between the key evaluation methods, and how the key evaluation methods contribute to the process of continuous improvement.

The audit reviewed the implementation of the Whole-of-Government Information Technology Infrastructure Consolidation and Outsourcing Initiative (IT Initiative). The objectives of the audit were to examine the administrative and financial effectiveness of the implementation of the IT Initiative, with the focus being on the first four tenders conducted. Accordingly, the audit assessed:

• the effectiveness of the overall planning and implementation of the IT Initiative, taking into account the tendering, contracting and monitoring processes undertaken in respect of Cluster 3, DEETYA/EN, ATO and Group 5;
• the extent to which those latter processes have contributed to the achievement of the objectives of the IT Initiative; and
• the extent to which the Commonwealth's interests have been adequately protected within this context.

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.

The audit was conducted as a joint financial statement and performance audit of DVA's Information Technology (IT) systems. The objective of the financial statement component of the audit was to express an opinion on whether DVA could rely on its IT systems to support production of a reliable set of financial information for the financial statements. The objective of the performance audit component was to determine whether DVA's IT systems outputs adequately met quality and service delivery targets.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence is effectively managing the EO Services Contract.

The audit focused mainly on Defence's contract management framework, including the arrangements to monitor the contractor’s performance in delivering services under the contract. The audit also examined the processes used by Defence to develop the current version of the contract and the extent to which the revised contract, as negotiated in 2006, provides an assurance of better value for money when compared to the original contract signed in 2001.

The management of Australia's overseas posts has not previously been scrutinised by the ANAO from a performance perspective. This audit is the first in a series planned to examine different aspects of the administration of Australian representation abroad, focusing particularly on DFAT and Austrade, as the agencies responsible for managing almost all overseas posts.

The diversity and complexity of issues at overseas missions of different sizes mean that posts generally cannot be treated as if they were all the same. This audit concentrated on small and medium-sized posts. The findings and conclusions should, therefore, not be regarded as automatically applicable to large posts.

The Government introduced the Defence Reform Program (DRP) in 1997 to enable Defence's resources to be focused more efficiently and effectively on its core functions. The objective of the audit was to assess Defence's management and implementation of DRP and the extent to which it achieved savings for reinvestment in the operational capabilities of the ADF.

The audit examined how well performance information for programs administered by the (now) Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA) facilitates good decision-making and provides a suitable framework for control and accountability for performance.

The objective of the audit was to determine whether the controls and measures employed by FaCS and Centrelink to deliver Parenting Payment Single (PPS) payments were effective and efficient. To achieve this, the audit focused on four key areas. These were:

• the quality of performance measures used by FaCS and Centrelink;
• the effectiveness of FaCS' methodology for estimating the levels of risk of incorrect payment to PPS customers and the impact of these incorrect payments on the integrity of program outlays;
• the correctness of Centrelink's processing of reassessments; and
• the improvements to preventive controls such as training, guidance material, and the Quality On-Line system.