The objectives of the audit were to assess whether DOTARS had developed and implemented an appropriate framework and procedures to administer lessee obligations entered into as part of the 1997 and 1998 leasehold sales of 17 Federal airports. In particular, the audit sought to: - review DOTARS' monitoring of lessee compliance with the Airport Leases and supporting sale documentation; - examine the effectiveness of the framework and procedures developed by DOTARS to administer lessee development commitments; and assess the impact of changes in the aviation environment on the management and monitoring of lessee obligations.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the management by Defence and the DMO of the procurement of the modernised High Frequency communication capability for the ADF. The audit focussed on Phase 3A of the Project which commenced in the mid 1990's and involved the selection of the Prime Contractor; negotiation of the Prime Contract and the Network Operation and Support Contract; and the development and implementation of the Communication System.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office's (ATO) strategies and activities to address the cash and hidden economy.

The audit assessed whether FaCS effectively undertakes its coordination, monitoring and other roles according to the CSTDA. The audit examined all disability services provided for under the CSTDA, except for disability employment services. The ANAO met relevant officers from FaCS' national office and State and Territory offices, and with 22 stakeholder organisations including: advocacy groups; peak national and State bodies representing the interests of disability service providers and people with disabilities; members of national and State Disability Advisory Bodies funded by FaCS; State and Territory governments; relevant Australian Government agencies; In particular, the Department of Health and Ageing and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. and local government bodies. Fieldwork for the audit was primarily undertaken during the period September 2004 to February 2005.

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).

This audit focused on the implementation of the Revised Government Foreign Exchange Risk Management Policy. Overall, the audit found the implementation of the Revised Policy with all CAC Act entities was not complete and important elements of the Revised Policy have not been adequately implemented. ANAO made five recommendations aimed at improving the compliance of GGS entities with the revised Policy, central agency consideration of entities' requests for exemption and enhancing the reporting made to Government. Finance and other entities agreed with all the recommendations.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA's management of the Fixing Houses for Better Health program since 2005.

The audit reviewed the two elements of the program for which FaHCSIA is responsible: management of the service delivery arrangements and overall performance monitoring and reporting. Following the development of the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Indigenous Housing, which introduced new approaches to the delivery of Indigenous programs, FaHCSIA made changes to FHBH for the 2009–11 phase. The audit has focused on both the 2005–09 and the 2009–11 phases. This provided coverage of the program's normal operations as well enabling the audit to consider the modifications made to the program for the
2009–11 phase.

Against this background, the audit considered whether:

• program management arrangements had been established that were suitable for the size, nature and objectives of the FHBH program;
• service delivery arrangements were designed to support the achievement of the program's objectives and FaHCSIA's management of the program; and
• FaHCSIA used robust systems to monitor achievement of the program objectives.

The ANAO also considered whether there was any experience from the department's management of FHBH that could be broadly applied to FaHCSIA's management of the National Partnership Agreement.

The objective of the audit was to assess the Australian Federal Police's (AFP’s) management of policing services at Australian international airports. In order to form a conclusion against this audit objective, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) examined if:

• the transition to the 'All In' model of policing at airports (Project Macer) had been delivered effectively;
• appropriate processes are in place for managing risk and operational planning;
• effective stakeholder engagement, relationship management and information sharing arrangements are in place;
• facilities at the airports are adequate and appropriate; and
• appropriate mechanisms for measuring the effectiveness of policing at airports have been developed and implemented.

The objectives of the audit were to provide assurance that Artbank was effectively meeting its charter of: acquiring art by contemporary artists; expanding the number of public places that Artbank's collection is rented and displayed; and managing its collection and rental scheme. The audit also examined Artbank's governance arrangements, and its programmes for marketing, client development, performance management, budgeting, debt management and also sought client feedback on Artbank's operations via a survey.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the APVMA is performing its key regulatory functions effectively. In particular, the audit examined the APVMA's arrangements for:

• planning and overseeing the delivery of regulatory functions;
• registering pesticides and veterinary medicines in a timely manner;
• obtaining external scientific advice to support the registration function;
• monitoring the quality of pesticides and veterinary medicines approved for sale in Australia; and
• administering its cost recovery framework.