A Business Support Process audit of the administration of grants in small to medium organisations was undertaken across six Commonwealth organisations to assess whether agencies had implemented appropriate risk management strategies for grant programs; evaluate whether grants had been administered in accordance with the appropriate legislation, Commonwealth guidance, and other accepted internal controls; and to recommend improvements in the controls and practices relating to grants administration.

The audit is a follow-up of ANAO Audit Report No.33 of 1997-98, which assessed the effectiveness and efficiency of the Commonwealth's management of the Great Barrier Reef and made seven recommendations for improvement. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, which is responsible for advising the Commonwealth on the care and developement of the Marine Park, has implemented the recommendations of the earlier audit.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the selection, implementation, operation and monitoring of FRCs by AGD and FaHCSIA. The three main criteria for this audit assessed whether AGD and FaHCSIA had effectively:

• planned and implemented the FRC initiative, including the FRC selection and funding processes;
• undertaken administration activities to guide the operation and progress of the FRC initiative towards meeting its objectives; and
• monitored, evaluated and reported on the performance of FRCs.

The objective of the audit was to assess the Moorebank Intermodal Company’s achievement of value for money and management of probity in its operations and procurement activities.

On 2 November 2000, the Senate agreed to a resolution that the Auditor-General be requested to review all expenditures and entitlements accruing to Parliamentarians and Ministers in 1999-2000. The resolution requested that the Auditor-General consider a number of specific matters, and report by 30 June 2001. In the course of that audit, examination of issues relating to Parliamentarians' staff was deferred in order to give the Auditor-General a reasonable chance of reporting reasonably close to the Senate's requested reporting timeframe. ANAO Audit Report No.5 2001-02, Parliamentarians' Entitlements: 1999-2000, was tabled in the Parliament in August 2001. A proposed audit of the administration by Finance of the entitlements of staff engaged under the Members of Parliament (Staff) Act 1984 (MOP(S) Act was included in the ANAO Audit Work Program for 2001-02. The objectives of this performance audit were to: review the effectiveness of the internal control structures in the Department of Finance and Administration (Finance) concerning the administration of entitlements for MOP(S) Act staff; review the effectiveness and efficiency of the procurement and support services Finance provides in relation to MOP(S) Act staff: and identify principles of sound administrative practices to facilitate improved administrative arrangements for the future. The audit covered Finance's administration of payments and services to MOP(S) Act staff during the period 1998-99 to 2001-02. Sub-section 15(c) of the Auditor General Act 1997 precludes an audit of persons who are engaged under the MOP(S) Act. Accordingly, the audit scope did not include examination of the responsibilities of MOP(S) Act staff.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs management of complaints and other feedback to support service delivery. The audit criteria were that DVA has:

• a well-designed framework for managing complaints and other feedback;
• effective processes and practices to manage complaints; and
• appropriately analysed complaints to inform service delivery.

The ANAO concluded that DHAC's administration of the National Cervical Screening Program is generally sound. The ANAO found that the department has a key role in the Program by providing secretariat services and other support to the NAC, which provides policy advice to AHMAC, and by supporting initiatives to further develop the Program. Some areas of DHAC's administration of the Program provide examples of good practice. Related examples are the early identification of the need to monitor the Program, the early identification of possible data sources for monitoring, and the use of an independent body to provide advice, through the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, on performance indicators and data sources. A further example is DHAC's administration of the provision of cervical screening funding assistance to the States and Territories through Public Health Outcome Funding Agreements, which complies with the principles for sound Specific Purpose Payments program administration advocated by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit in their Report 362. On the other hand, the ANAO has identified areas for improvement in quality assurance for the analysis of Pap smears by pathology laboratories.

Consistent with the ANAO's practices, and in response to a request from AusAID, a follow-up audit was conducted in the period May to November 1998 to assess the extent of implementation of the recommendations of a 1996 audit into the Management of Funding to Non-Government Organisations (NGOs)and whether the implementation of recommendations has effectively improved the management of funding to NGOs. The ANAO examined AusAID's key funding accountability documentation, tested the revised accountability arrangements and consulted a number of key stakeholders, including NGO representatives.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of DFAT's implementation of biometric technology to meet international requirements for enhanced passport security. In particular, the audit examined whether:

• Australian ePassports meet international requirements, and coordination with Australian stakeholders is effective;
• Australian biometric passport technology is fit for purpose and has enhanced passport security;
• personal data on the passport microchip is secure and DFAT maintains an appropriate focus on both protecting privacy and client satisfaction; and
• arrangements are in place to evaluate the effectiveness of the ePassport and to monitor risks.

The overall objective of the audit was to determine whether Health's management and operation of selected IT systems:

• met industry better practice;
• met quality and service delivery parameters set by Health and, if applicable, by the Government; and
• operate effectively, efficiently and economically.

The audit applied selected processes from CobiT (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology) to assist with the assessment of key aspects of Health's management and operation of IT. The audit builds on ANAO's earlier IT audits using CobiT.