The objective of this audit was to examine whether the selected entities within the Attorney-General’s portfolio have implemented all agreed recommendations from parliamentary committee and Auditor-General reports within the scoped timeframe.

The Auditor-General Act 1997 establishes the mandate for the Auditor-General to undertake financial statement audits of all Australian Government entities including those of government agencies, statutory authorities and government business enterprises.

Our interim audits of agencies encompass a review of governance arrangements related to agencies’ financial reporting responsibilities, and an examination of relevant internal controls, including information technology system controls. The ANAO’s examination of these areas is designed to assess the reliance that can be placed on agencies’ internal controls to produce complete and accurate information for financial reporting purposes.

The Auditor-General undertook a limited assurance review of the Department of Finance’s reporting and administration of the Advances to the Finance Minister (AFM) for the Period 29 August 2020 to 25 September 2020.

The Senate Order for Departmental and Agency Contracts (the Senate Order/the Order) was introduced in June 2001. The Order is one of several measures that the Senate introduced in recent years, to improve public knowledge of information on procurement and the expenditure of public funds. The main principle that underpins the Senate Order is that the Parliament's and public's access to this information should not be restricted by the inclusion of confidential information in contracts unless there is a sound basis for doing so. Public knowledge of information on contracted goods and services delivered to the government, can lead to better results for the Australian Government and the public. The Senate Order requirements have been amended over time to improve agency reporting, for example, on grants.

The audit objective was to examine whether selected entities in the Health and Education portfolios implemented the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit and other parliamentary inquiry report recommendations and agreed ANAO performance audit recommendations.

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 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 objective of this follow-up audit was to examine the ATO's implementation of the 20 recommendations in: The Administration of Petroleum Excise Collections (Audit Report No.17, 2001(02); and The Administration of Tobacco Excise (Audit Report No. 55, 2001(02), having regard to any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting implementation of those recommendations. The audit also aimed to identify scope for improvement in the ATO's administration of petroleum and tobacco excise. Follow-up audits are recognised as an important element of the accountability processes of Commonwealth administration. The Parliament looks to the Auditor-General to report, from time to time, on the extent to which Commonwealth agencies have implemented recommendations of previous audit reports. Follow-up audits keep the Parliament informed of progressive improvements and current challenges in areas of Commonwealth administration that have previously been subject to scrutiny through performance audits.

The audit examined whether the Department of Home Affairs implemented all agreed recommendations from parliamentary committee and Auditor-General reports within the scoped timeframe.

The audit examined the effectiveness of DEEWR's administrative arrangements supporting the delivery of Indigenous childcare services through MACS and crèches, including the approaches DEEWR uses to monitor the achievement of the BBF sub-program objective.

In conducting the audit, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) reviewed three key areas:

• program administration—DEEWR's administrative systems and processes supporting the delivery of Indigenous childcare services through MACS and crèches and the broader BBF sub-program;
• management of service provider funding agreements—DEEWR's systems and processes for managing MACS and crèche service providers' funding agreements; and
• monitoring and reporting performance—the effectiveness of DEEWR's processes for monitoring the performance of service providers, and the achievement of the outputs and outcomes of the BBF sub-program.

The ANAO sought not to duplicate the work of DEEWR's Internal Audit function, and in doing so referred to the findings of the recent internal audit review of the CCSSP, where these were relevant and appropriate.