The issues examined by the ANAO were considered on two levels. First, legal and ethical processes that focus on whether there are any impediments to the Government and public service implementing the CEIP in the way they have. The public interest issues turn largely on the question of whether the CEIP was for Government or party-political purposes. The other level on which these issues were considered is that of public accountability and the way in which decisions to spend public money are made. In turn, these issues raise questions about the relationship between, and authority of, the Government and Parliament. They may also involve consideration of what might be regarded as proper or responsible conduct by governments and the public service.

The ANAO assessed agencies' progress in implementing the seven recommendations of Audit Report No.47 of 1998-99, Energy Efficiency in Commonwealth Operations. The Objectives of the follow-up audit were to

(i) asses the extent to which selected Commonwealth agencies have implemented the recommendations of Report No. 47 of 1998-1999, taking account of any changed circumstances or new administrative issues identified as impacting upon implementation of these recommendations; and

(ii) offer continued assurance to the Parliament on the management of Commonwealth agencies' compliance with the Commonwealth energy efficiency requirements, and to identify areas of better practice in energy management by those agencies.

The objective of the audit was to review Defence's management of the HQJOC Project's tender process, including probity management, for the construction of the joint operation headquarters in order to provide assurance that the policy principles for the use of private financing had been followed.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education’s (DIISRTE’s) administration of the Education Investment Fund grants program.

(DIISRTE was the department that had responsibility for the administration of the EIF grants program during the course of the audit. The recommendations and suggestions for improvement are, however, directed to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education because this department now has responsibility for the administration of the program).

In 1999-2000, the ANAO conducted an audit in Centrelink to determine whether its planning, monitoring and costing arrangements provided a sound basis to underpin its delivery of quality, cost effective customer services. The report of that audit, Audit Report No. 43 1999-2000 Planning and Monitoring for Cost Effective Service Delivery, Staffing and Funding Arrangements, was tabled in Parliament in May 2000. The objective of this follow-up audit was to assess whether Centrelink had implemented a comprehensive costing system as a basis for planning productivity improvements and accounting for its expenditure of purchaser funds. The ANAO examined Centrelink's current costing system to determine if it reflected the design and implementation characteristics that were outlined in Audit Report No. 43.

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 whether the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) had complied with gifts, benefits and hospitality requirements.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation's workforce planning to support key activities.

The audit objective was to examine whether the selected entities have implemented a selection of agreed parliamentary committee and Auditor-General recommendations.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of AIMS administration of its co investment research program.