The objective of the audit was to assess how well EMA is meeting its objective of providing national leadership in the development of measures to reduce risk to communities and manage the consequences of disasters.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the management of the MSS for the delivery of Centrelink services. The management of the MSS was assessed against the following criteria:

• there are effective planning arrangements to identify and address the evolving needs of DCALB customers;
• service delivery arrangements meet the current needs of DCALB customers; and
• there are effective performance monitoring and reporting arrangements which are used to improve service delivery.

Around 20 per cent of the people receiving Centrelink services are identified as being from a diverse cultural and linguistic background (DCALB). DHS’ Multicultural Servicing Strategy (MSS) sets out the approach for delivering Centrelink services to DCALB customers. The MSS has four main components — Language Services, the Multicultural Services Officer program, Stakeholder Engagement Strategies and Employee Support Tools and Strategies.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of CSP’s feedback management system. CSP’s performance was assessed against the following criteria:

• CSP has appropriate channels to collect customer feedback;
• CSP effectively manages and resolves complaints; and
• CSP accurately reports on customer feedback, and analyses the information to improve aspects of child support administration.

To assess the extent to which agencies create, manage and dispose of records in accordance with key business, legal and policy requirements.

The agencies included in the audit were the: Australian Customs and Border Protection Service (Customs); Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC); and the Department of the Treasury (Treasury). The audit also considered the Archives' response to Recommendation No. 1 from ANAO Audit Report No.6 2006, 07 Recordkeeping including the Management of Electronic Records, including whether they had clarified Australian Government records management requirements for agencies.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the Better Regions Program has been effectively designed and administered. The audit scope included examination of all 106 Better Regions projects.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to review FaCSIA's progress in implementing the recommendations of Audit Report No.17 1999–2000. The focus was whether FaCSIA had maintained or improved its oversight, coordination and administration of the CSHA for both the 1999 CSHA and the 2003 CSHA, in line with the recommendations and findings identified in the previous ANAO audit.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the procurement and contracting associated with:

• the design, development and delivery of government advertising campaigns by Commonwealth departments; and
• the operation of the Central Advertising System (CAS).

As an element of the arrangements implemented to support the role of the ANAO in reviewing campaigns' compliance with the Guidelines announced on 2 July 2008, the ANAO advised the chair of the JCPAA that the ANAO will provide regular summary reports to Parliament. Section 25 of the Auditor-General's Act 1997 provides for the tabling of such reports.

This annual report documents the performance of the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) in the financial year ending on 30 June 2004. It includes highlights and areas of focus for the year; an introduction 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 audit objective was to form an opinion on the effectiveness of the NHMRC's grant administration. To meet this objective the NHMRC was assessed against four criteria:

• the NHMRC's governance arrangements provide appropriate accountability that it is meeting its objectives and obligations to Government (Chapter 2);
• there are strategic and systematic processes for developing and implementing grant programs (Chapter 3);
• the NHMRC manages grants post-award effectively, and complies with legislative requirements and program directives (Chapters 4 and 5); and
• the NHMRC monitors and evaluates its business to demonstrate that outcomes are being met (Chapter 6).