The objective of the audit was to assess the Commonwealth's administration of the grants component of the R&D Start program. Lessons for the new Commercial Ready program have been identified in the audit. Accordingly, recommendations arising from this audit are directed, when appropriate, to the Commercial Ready program. As most financial assistance is in the form of grants, the loans component of the program was excluded from the audit.

This audit would assess the effectiveness of the administration of grants awarded under the Safe Places Emergency Accommodation Program (Safe Places), including compliance with the Commonwealth Grants Rules and Principles, and management of the grants across the Safe Places program life cycle.

Safe Places is a capital works program funding the building, renovation or purchase of emergency accommodation for women and children experiencing family and domestic violence. There have been two rounds of funding. Under successive National Plans to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children, the Australian Government has committed over $170 million over seven years to Safe Places ($72.6 million for round 1 from 2020–21 to 2024–25, and $100 million for round 2 from 2022–23 to 2026–2027). The first round of grants, awarded in 2020, was intended to deliver new emergency and crisis accommodation for women and children experiencing domestic and family violence. The second round of grants, was awarded in 2024 and was designed to focus on improving access to appropriate emergency accommodation for First Nations women and children, women and children from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and women and children with disability.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Attorney-General’s Department’s design of the Data Retention Industry Grants program, including performance monitoring, reporting, evaluation and assurance arrangements.

The ANAO’s performance audit program is one of the main assurance functions of the Auditor-General. The purpose of this information report was to provide analysis of 2023–24 performance audits.

Mr P.J. Barrett (AM) - Auditor-General for Australia, presented to the Corporate Management Network Meeting, Rydges Lakeside, Canberra

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of Health's management of the MPSP and the RHSP. To achieve the audit's objective, the ANAO examined whether Health; had an effective approach to planning the programs; had an effective approach to delivering the programs; effectively used performance information to manage the programs; and effectively managed its relationship with all stakeholders of the programs.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the administration of specific climate change programs by the departments of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts and Resources, Energy and Tourism. In undertaking this audit, particular emphasis was given to the implementation of good administrative practice and the extent to which the program objectives were being met. The audit followed four lines of inquiry:

• development of program objectives and assessment of program risks;
• assessment and approval of competitive grant applications;
• assessment and approval of rebate applications; and
• measurement and reporting of program outcomes.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Health's and the Department of Human Services' administration of the Radiation Oncology Health Program Grants Scheme.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Defence's administration of the Future Submarine Program to date.

The audit scope covered the management of the AusLink R2R Standard Program and the AusLink R2R Supplementary Program. The scope did not include management of the Nation Building Roads to Recovery Program, which has only recently commenced. The audit objectives were to:

• assess the effectiveness of the management of the AusLink Roads to Recovery Program;
• assess the delivery of the program and management of the funding, including the extent to which the program has provided additional (rather than substitute) funding for land transport infrastructure; and
• identify opportunities for improvements to the management of the program.