The audit objectives were to establish whether Comcare took an effective leadership role in helping to manage the cost of occupational stress to the Commonwealth; and whether agency management of occupational stress was efficient and effective. The ANAO criteria for the audit focused on how well Comcare understood the impact of occupational stress across APS employment, and supported agencies in their management of the disability. They also dealt with how well agencies understood and measured the impact of stress, and planned for its prevention or minimisation.

The audit reviewed the retention of military personnel that are managed by the Australian Defence Force which comprises the three Services. The objective of the audit was to review the management of personnel retention within the ADF with a view to evaluating the measures Defence has in place to monitor and control the flow of trained personnel from the Services

The objective of the audit was to determine the extent to which the new employment services market had been implemented effectively and efficiently in accordance with announced Government policy and timeframe.

The objective of the ANAO audit was to identify possible areas for improvement in the Australian Defence Force's management of its Reserve forces. The audit focused on major aspects of the Reserves including roles and tasks, force structure, capability, training, individual readiness, equipment, facilities, recruitment, retention, conditions of service and administration. The audit covered the Australian Naval Reserve, the Australian Army Reserve and the Royal Australian Air Force Reserve. However, due to its size and cost, the Army Reserve was a major focus of the audit activity.

The objective of this audit is to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Finance’s and selected entities’ implementation of the Australian Government’s campaign advertising framework.

The objectives of the audit were to examine the benefits of diversity management in the APS and review the progress made towards equity in employment in the APS, including the EEO Program. It included:

• an assessment of the progress towards achieving equity across the APS and by individual agencies;
• an assessment of the quality of agency EEO programs;
• an assessment of the role of the PSMPC in approving agency EEO programs and monitoring trends across the service;
• a consideration of legal obligations and agencies compliance with these; and
• the possible risks to, and opportunities for, equity under the WRA.

The audit concentrated on evidence of overall progress, the relative performance of individual agencies, and the examination of observed and underlying trends.

The objective of the performance audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of DIMA's business entry program against the background of the Business and Temporary Entry program objective, with particular regard to whether:

• the existing performance management mechanisms and compliance monitoring strategies support the achievement of program outcomes and outputs;
• the quality of decision-making;
• business processes facilitate prompt visa decision-making consistent with program objectives; and
• decision-making support mechanisms promote robust and timely decision-making.

This audit followed up the ANAO's 2000 performance audit report on retention of military personnel (Audit Report No.35 1999-2000 Retention of Military Personnel), which focused on examining whether ADF personnel management practices to retain personnel were commensurate with the cost of recruiting and training new personnel, or whether more cost- effective steps could be taken to reduce the separation rates of desirable personnel. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess Defence's implementation of recommendations made in the original audit report and their effectiveness in helping Defence control the flow of trained personnel from the Services.

The ANAO's audit aims were to: examine the efficiency and effectiveness of DFAT's human resource management; and identify good practice, which could position the Department, and other APS agencies, to maximise opportunities afforded by the Government's emerging public sector reform agenda. The audit addressed a range of issues including the effectiveness of HR planning and forecasting, staff selection and deployment, performance management, and the fostering of relevant skills and knowledge.

The audit assessed FaHCSIA's management of AACAP and how the department monitors the contribution the program is making to the improvement of primary and environmental health, and living conditions, in remote Indigenous communities.

The audit examined program delivery under the 2006–2009 MoU, as well as the planning for the 2010 project under the variation to the 2006–2009 MoU. As part of the audit the ANAO considered:

• program strategy and implementation including the roles and responsibilities of the major stakeholders, community selection and scope of works (Chapter 2);
• the financial management of the program and the changing role of the Contracted Program Manager (Chapter 3); and
• performance measures, including FaHCSIA's performance reporting framework, and approach to monitoring and reporting performance against the stated program objectives (Chapter 4).

The audit focused on AACAP in so far as it relates to Indigenous community outcomes. It did not consider the program from the perspective of the Australian Defence Force capability building.