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.

This audit is the first time that the ANAO has looked at superannuation payments to independent contractors. The audit examined whether Commonwealth organisations were identifying contracts that were wholly or principally for the labour of the contractor and meeting statutory superannuation obligations under the Superannuation (Productivity Benefit) Act 1988.

This audit is a part of the ANAO's protective security audit coverage. The objective of this audit was to determine whether agencies audited had developed and implemented sound IT security management principles and practices supported by an IT security control framework, in accordance with Australian Government policies and guidelines. The audit at each agency examined the framework for the effective management and control of IT security, including the management of IT operational security controls and, where applicable, was based on the Australian Government protective security and information and communications technology (ICT) security guidelines that were current at that time.

The objective of the audit was to assess how well agencies had implemented the CPGs and relevant FMA legislation when undertaking Direct Source procurement.

The audit examined whether selected agencies had developed a sound procurement framework; appropriately classified procurement methods when meeting external reporting requirements; implemented the CPGs and relevant legislation when Direct Sourcing; and established effective procurement monitoring and review arrangements.

The ANAO selected four FMA Act agencies to provide a cross-section of the 104 agencies that reported procurement activity in AusTender in
2008–09. The agencies selected for audit were:

• the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA);
• the Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (Innovation);
• the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA); and
• the Australian Crime Commission (ACC).

The ANAO examined a stratified random sample of 645 procurements valued at $10 000 and over, across the four agencies. More detailed testing was undertaken for the 285 Direct Source procurements in the sample.

The objective of the audit is to examine and report on the efficiency and effectiveness of AFP's administration and management of its overseas deployments. The audit specifically examines two deployments and focuses on strategic and operational planning and logistics. The audit examines a planned, long-term overseas deployment (as part of the Participating Police Force (PPF) within the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI)) and a crisis-driven deployment in response to a specific event (Disaster Victim Identification (DVI) assistance to Thailand following the Indian Ocean Tsunamis of 26 December 2004).

The objective of the audit was to:

• assess, in a selection of FMA Act and CAC Act agencies, how well the revised Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines had been implemented; and
• identify any better practice or common problem areas to assist other agencies in their future procurement activities.

The audit focused on procurement requirements that had changed as a result of the revised CPGs, rather than being a more general audit of compliance with all procurement requirements.
The audit was conducted in the following entities:

• Australian Federal Police;
• Bureau of Meteorology;
• Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO);
• Department of Defence;
• Department of Education, Science & Training;
• Family Court of Australia; and
• National Museum of Australia.

The objective of the audit was to examine whether the UP and CPP services provided by the Australian Federal Police Protection Service are being managed effectively. In particular, the audit examined:

• whether the Protection function has been effectively integrated into the AFP, and sound arrangements are in place to strategically plan Protection services and manage risks;
• whether Protection staff have access to appropriate training and guidance; and
• the management arrangements for UP and CPP services.

The objective of the audit was to assess the framework being put in place to manage and account for aid funds provided under the AIPRD. In particular, the audit addressed: structures for oversighting the development and delivery of the AIPRD; planning and risk management (including those relating to fraud and corruption); financial management; and arrangements for ongoing monitoring and reporting. The audit focussed on the arrangements being established to monitor, evaluate and report on AIPRD implementation, rather than the management of activities and outcomes achieved. This reflects the fact that the long lead times associated with establishing such a large programme of assistance had meant that only limited activities were underway at the time of audit fieldwork. The ANAO anticipates undertaking an audit in the future of the management of activities and outcomes achieved, when more funds have been expended. It was not the purpose of this audit to examine Australia's immediate emergency and humanitarian response to the tsunami crisis.

The audit objective was to form an opinion on the adequacy of a select group of Australian Government agencies' management of Internet security, including following-up on agencies' implementation of recommendations from the ANAO's 2001 audit. The agencies audited were Australian Customs Service (ACS), Australian Federal Police (AFP), Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA), Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (DEWR), Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources (DITR) and Medicare Australia. Factors considered in selecting agencies were agency size based on funding levels, whether the agency was included in ANAO's 2001 audit (ACS, ARPANSA, and DEWR), whether the agency's ICT was managed in-house or outsourced, and the nature of the agency's website (that is, general or restricted access).

The objectives of the Australian National Audit Office's (ANAO) performance audit were to: examine the efficiency and effectiveness of agencies' procurement and management of legal services arrangements; determine adherence to Australian Government policy requirements; examine the effectiveness of the OLSC's monitoring of agencies' compliance with Government policy requirements; examine the OLSC's role in assisting agencies to comply with Government policy.