This follow-up audit reviewed the operations of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) which is responsible for ensuring the sustainable use and efficient management of Commonwealth fisheries resources. The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which AFMA addressed the issues that gave rise to the recommendations of ANAO Report No.32 1995-96, and the related recommendations of the House of Representatives Standing Committee Report 1997, that were supported by the Government.

The follow-up audit focussed on the key issues identified in the recommendations and grouped these in the themes of:

• strategic and performance management;
• management of the advisory process;
• implementation of fisheries management methods;
• managing AFMA's environmental responsibilities as they relate to Commonwealth fisheries
  management;
• compliance, monitoring and enforcement responsibilities; and
• management of information and research.

The audit focussed on the systems and processes OGTR has established for both receiving and assessing applications under the Act, and also for ensuring compliance with the statutory requirements through monitoring and inspection. The audit objective was to form an opinion on the discharge by OGTR of selected functions entrusted to it under the Act. The audit assessed the practices of OGTR against the following principal criteria: Assessment of applications under the Act: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for the management and assessment of applications under the Act. Ensuring compliance—monitoring, inspection and enforcement activities: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Act. Performance management: Whether OGTR manages selected aspects of its work efficiently and effectively. The audit did not seek to form an opinion on the appropriateness of the chosen structure of the regime for regulating gene technology or the merit of the scientific judgments involved. The audit methodology included discussions with representatives from agencies that co-ordinate aspects of the co-operative regulatory regime for gene technology across Australian jurisdictions, with various other stakeholders and users of the regime, as well as with officers of OGTR, along with examination of OGTR documents and files.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the APVMA is performing its key regulatory functions effectively. In particular, the audit examined the APVMA's arrangements for:

• planning and overseeing the delivery of regulatory functions;
• registering pesticides and veterinary medicines in a timely manner;
• obtaining external scientific advice to support the registration function;
• monitoring the quality of pesticides and veterinary medicines approved for sale in Australia; and
• administering its cost recovery framework.

The objective of the audit was to assess the coordination of Australian Government assistance to Solomon Islands through RAMSI, including the establishment of objectives and an outcomes monitoring framework. In particular, the audit examined arrangements for: coordination between Australian Government agencies; strategic planning and risk management; measuring the effectiveness of RAMSI; and reporting to RAMSI's Australian stakeholders.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of monitoring arrangements (by the Accreditation Agency) and compliance activities (by DoHA) put in place to achieve residential aged care homes’ compliance with the Accreditation Standards and their other, related, responsibilities under the Act and its associated instruments.

The ANAO’s assessment considered whether:

— a sector-wide compliance strategy was in place and aligned with effective monitoring and compliance activities at the operational level;
— there was a clear articulation of the separat but complementary roles and responsibilities of DoHA and the Accreditation Agency; and
— performance information gathered by both agencies to support public reporting and business improvements was useful and enabled comparison of performance over time.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2006. It includes highlights and areas of focus for the coming year; a forward by the Auditor-General; an overview of the report; a report on performance; details about management and accountability, and the financial statement for the year.

The objective of this audit was to assess and report on the administration of the regional delivery of NHT 2 and the NAP.

The scope of the audit encompassed both Environment and DAFF, including the Joint Team of staff from both departments working together under a common management structure for the delivery of both programs. The audit focused on:

• the implementation of the regional delivery arrangements;
• governance and financial management for regional delivery; and
• monitoring, evaluation and reporting on the programs' performance.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DIT’s and Centrelink’s¹ administration of TFES.

^[1] From 1 July 2011, Centrelink became a master program within DHS.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing and the Australian National Preventive Health Agency in fulfilling the Commonwealth’s role in implementing the Council of Australian Government’s National Partnership Agreement on Preventive Health, to achieve the Agreement’s objectives, outcomes and outputs, including supporting all Australians to reduce their risk of chronic disease.

The Age Pension is Australia's largest social security programme delivering approximately $22 billion to 1.9 million Australians in 2005-06. The Age Pension programme is administered by Centrelink on behalf of its client agency the Department of Families, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of Centrelink's administration of complex assessments of customer entitlements for the Age Pension programme, particularly through the use of Complex Assessment Officers.