The audit examined the management of computer software assets at four Commonwealth bodies. It focused on the capitalisation of software for the purposes of annual financial reporting. The specific objectives were to: determine whether the selected bodies had established effective internal control frameworks for the capitalisation of externally acquired and internally developed software; and assess whether software costs were capitalised in accordance with organisational policy, accounting standards and relevant legislation.

On 3 February 2010, Senator Christine Milne wrote to the Auditor General raising concerns about DEWHA's administration of the Green Loans program and requesting a performance audit of the program. Issues raised included: uncapped assessor numbers; problems with the delivery of the program; the quality of assessor training and assessments provided to households; the lack of an audit facility within the program; and equitable access to work under the program.

In light of Senator Milne's request and other concerns in relation to the administration of the program, the Auditor-General agreed on 25 February 2010 to conduct a performance audit of the program. The objective of the audit was to examine key aspects of the establishment and administration of the Green Loans program by DEWHA and the program's transition to DCCEE. Particular emphasis was given to the program's three main elements:

• training, registration and contracting of assessors;
• scheduling, conduct, and reporting of home sustainability assessments, and the associated payments to assessors; and
• provision of green loans to householders, and the associated payments to participating financial institutions.

The audit also examined the extent to which steps had been taken by DEWHA and DCCEE to assess whether the Green Loans program was achieving its objectives.

DFAT is responsible for implementing the Government's foreign and trade policy decisions. The objective of the audit was to assess DFAT's management of bilateral relations and to identify any scope for improvement.

The objectives of the audit were to assess the administrative and financial effectiveness of the Department of Finance and Administration's (Finance's) management of the Commonwealth's exposure under the DASFLEET Tied Contract; assess the effectiveness of Finance's monitoring of performance of the DASFLEET Tied Contract with Macquarie Fleet; and review the action taken by Finance in response to a recommendation of Audit Report No. 25 1998-99, Sale of DASFLEET.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of physical security arrangements in selected Australian Government agencies, including whether applicable Australian Government requirements are being met.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Taxation Office’s administration of debt relief arrangements.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the management of risks arising from the use of PSDs in selected Australian Government agencies. The PSDs included within the scope of this audit were: USB flash drives; CDs and DVDs; external hard drives; laptop computers and smartphones.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs’ arrangements for the management of contractors.

The audit assessed whether Centrelink effectively manages customer debt, excluding debt relating to Family Tax Benefit, consistently across its network, ensuring integrity of payments made on behalf of the Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS). The audit assessed five components of Centrelink's debt management processes, including administration, prevention, identification, raising and recovery.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether Defence is effectively managing the EO Services Contract.

The audit focused mainly on Defence's contract management framework, including the arrangements to monitor the contractor’s performance in delivering services under the contract. The audit also examined the processes used by Defence to develop the current version of the contract and the extent to which the revised contract, as negotiated in 2006, provides an assurance of better value for money when compared to the original contract signed in 2001.