The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the major elements of Centrelink's central, strategic level project management arrangements, as defined in the CPMF. It focused on how well:

• the CPMF supports better management and service delivery in Centrelink;
• the CPMF supports project managers and projects to comply with better project management principles, relevant legislation and guidelines; and
• Centrelink monitors project performance and encouraged the attainment of project objectives.

The objectives of the follow-up audit were to assess DFAT's implementation of the six recommendations made by the ANAO in the previous audit. It also sought to determine whether implementation of these recommendations, or alternative action, had improved DFAT's administration of consular services. The audit focused on management processes and supporting systems for the delivery of consular services. It also reviewed DFAT's implementation of recommendations of the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee that were outstanding from the previous audit.

The audit examined the effectiveness of DEEWR's: administrative framework for the program; management of the application, assessment and funding processes; and monitoring of and reporting on the program's performance.

In order to form an opinion against the audit objective, the ANAO primarily conducted fieldwork and documentation reviews at DEEWR's central office. A stratified random sample (in order to provide for representation from states, territories and school sectors) of 74 applications from Rounds 1 and 2 was also selected for detailed examination. Through this sample, the ANAO sought to determine whether funding applications had been assessed in accordance with the established assessment criteria and that quality assurance mechanisms for the assessment process were effective.

The objectives of this audit were to:

• examine the effectiveness of ASIC's processes for receiving reports of suspected breaches of the Corporations Act; and
• assess the efficiency with which statutory reports are referred and investigated by ASIC.

The audit commenced in February 2006. ANAO undertook an assessment of ASIC's processes for receiving and referring for investigation statutory reports. ANAO also undertook a detailed examination of a random sample of 416 statutory reports received by ASIC in the period 2002–03 to 2004–05.

The audit scope did not extend to the role of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in prosecuting offences referred to it by ASIC.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which DOTARS had implemented the nine recommendations contained in the original audit.

The audit objective was to assess the administrative effectiveness of the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations(DEEWR), Department of Human Services (DHS) partnership arrangement in supporting the delivery of employment programs.

The objective of the audit was to assess DIMIA's management of offshore measures to prevent and detect unlawful entry, and to identify opportunities for improvement. The audit did not cover the processing arrangements, referred to as the Pacific Strategy, introduced as part of the legislative changes in September 2001. Nor did it cover the range of measures use for prevention and detection at the border and on shore. As DIMIA is the lead agency responsible for the development of immigration policy, the audit focussed in the administrative effectiveness of the governance framework used by the department to implement and to support the achievement of Government strategies to prevent unlawful entry to Australian Territory.

The objective of this audit was to form an opinion on the Australian Research Council's (ARC's) management of research grants. To achieve this, ANAO centred the audit around the following aspects of ARC's grants administration: governance and structure, particularly the roles and responsibilities of those parties involved in administering ARC's grants (Chapter 2); the processes for assessing and selecting ARC grants (Chapter 3);post-award management of grants under the Funding Agreements (Agreements) between ARC and those universities that receive and administer the ARC grants to researchers (Chapter 4); and ARC's monitoring of its grant programs for management, performance improvement and reporting (Chapter 5). In its assessment, ANAO considered ARC's compliance with relevant sections of the Australian Research Council Act 2001 (ARC Act) and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act). The assessment also took account of the ANAO's Better Practice Guides, particularly the Better Practice Guide—Administration of Grants. The audit focused mainly on ARC's administration of Discovery Projects, the largest scheme in ARC's National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

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.

The overall objective of the audit was to assess AusAID's management of commercial contracts to deliver Australia's overseas aid program. To this end, the audit examined whether:

• there are sound supporting structures for contract management;
• AusAid effectively manages risks;
• contracts clearly define deliverables;
• services are delivered and payments are made in accordance with the contract;
• there are appropriate arrangements to manage contractor performance;
• strategies appropriately assess and allocate risk between AusAid and contractors; and
• contracts deliver the desired aid outcomes.