The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s administration of the HAF. To address this objective, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) assessed FaHCSIA’s administration against a range of audit criteria, including the extent to which:

• assessment and approval processes were soundly planned and implemented, and were consistent with the requirements of the overarching financial management framework;
• appropriately structured funding agreements were established and managed for each approved grant; and
• the performance of the HAF, including each of the funded projects, was actively monitored and reported.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Defence’s monitoring of the implementation of ANAO and internal audit recommendations. The audit also examined a sample of ANAO and internal audit recommendations—reported as being complete by Defence—to assess the extent to which these recommendations had been implemented by Defence.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the Launch of MAB/MIAC Report 17 - Guidelines for Managing Risk in the Australian Public Sector - An Exposure Draft

The objective of the audit was to provide assurance to Parliament concerning the adequacy of Defence preparedness management systems and to identify possible areas for improvement. The audit focused on the systems and processes that Defence uses to manage preparedness. We did not review the preparedness levels of specific capabilities, nor did we cover capital acquisition processes. The audit included coverage of: - preparedness systems architecture; - control and direction of preparedness; - coordination among contributors to preparedness; and - performance management and preparedness.

The audit objective was to assess selected agencies’ compliance with the four mandatory ICT security strategies and related controls in the Australian Government Information Security Manual.

The audit surveyed a wide range of Commonwealth agencies' Year 2000 preparedness, their management of the problem and their application of core corporate governance principles, including risk management disciplines. The scope of the audit reflected the wide ranging ramifications of the Year 2000 problem for agencies' overall functions (whole-of-business) internally as well as in terms of external interactions. The audit objectives were to:

• assess the adequacy of agencies' planning in relation to achieving Year 2000 compliance;
• review and assess agencies' implementation, management and monitoring of Year 2000 compliance strategies;
• review agencies' strategic risk assessments in relation to the Year 2000 changeover; and
• raise surveyed agencies' and other Commonwealth agencies' awareness of the various aspects of the Year 2000 problem.

The overall objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Refresh and, in particular:

• the extent to which Centrelink has used the funds invested by the Government to develop its IT capability and realise the anticipated service delivery, financial and other benefits; and
• how Centrelink's programme management approach and Refresh's oversight arrangements have contributed to the achievement of the outcomes of the programme.

The objectives of the audit were to determine whether: citizenship services were planned based on a risk assessment, especially in relation to fraud; and were monitored and reported on appropriately; decision-making was accurate, consistent and in line with relevent laws and policies and was supported by appropriate training and quality assurance (QA) mechanisms; client and outsourced services were managed effectively; and promotion strategies were effective and have been evaluated appropriately.

The objective of the audit was to assess the Department of Human Services' and the Department of Social Services’ management of selected fraud prevention and compliance Budget measures.

The objective of this performance audit of construction projects on the AusLink National Network was to assess the effectiveness of the administration by DITRDLG in working with the States to deliver the outcomes expected by the Government and the broader community. To inform the audit assessment, the methodology included examination of both Australian Government and State Government records as well as site inspections in relation to 21 projects being delivered in three States (New South Wales (NSW), Queensland and Tasmania). DITRDLG and the respective State road transport authorities were consulted in the selection of projects to be examined in detail.