The audit is a follow-up to Audit Report 12, 1995-96 Risk Management by Commonwealth Consumer Product Safety Regulators. The objectives of this follow-up audit were to determine the extent to which ANZFA had implemented the agreed recommendations contained in the 1995 Audit Report, and to determine the effectiveness of the implemented recommendations in improving food safety regulation.

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.

As an element of the arrangements implemented to support the role of the ANAO in reviewing campaigns' compliance with the Guidelines announced on 2 July 2008, the ANAO advised the chair of the JCPAA that the ANAO will provide regular summary reports to Parliament. Section 25 of the Auditor-General's Act 1997 provides for the tabling of such reports.

The objective of the audit was to assess the management and effectiveness of DCO’s delivery and coordination of support services to ADF families, in particular support services provided when an ADF member is seriously injured or ill, or dies in service.

The objective was to assess the extent to which staff reductions have been managed in a sound strategic and cost-effective manner consistent with the Government's guidelines and the ANAO's 1996 better practice guide Managing APS Staff Reductions. The audit focussed on 3 agencies - the Australian Taxation Office, the former Department of Primary Industry and Energy, and the former Department of Transport and Regional Development. The ANAO found that the majority of staff reductions were achieved through retrenchment rather than natural attrition; and that decisions on the number of retrenchments were not always supported by an assessment of the impact of the reductions on the agencies' abilities to conduct their business.

The objectives of this audit were to assess the progress of the M113 Armoured Personnel Carrier Upgrade Project against stated schedule, cost and technical performance objectives; and Defence Materiel Organisation's (DMO's) progress in implementing the recommendations and addressing the findings of ANAO Audit Report No. 3 2005–06, Management of the M113 Armoured Personnel Carrier Upgrade Project.

The objectives of this audit were to:

• examine the effectiveness of ASIC's processes for receiving reports of suspected breaches of the Corporations Act; and
• assess the efficiency with which statutory reports are referred and investigated by ASIC.

The audit commenced in February 2006. ANAO undertook an assessment of ASIC's processes for receiving and referring for investigation statutory reports. ANAO also undertook a detailed examination of a random sample of 416 statutory reports received by ASIC in the period 2002–03 to 2004–05.

The audit scope did not extend to the role of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions in prosecuting offences referred to it by ASIC.

The objective of this benchmarking study of the finance function was to obtain and report on over time, quantitative and qualitative data, relating to finance function activities as they operate in Commonwealth organisations. Over the three year period of the study, the majority of participating Commonwealth organisations have shown an improvement in their quantitative and/or qualitative benchmark results across the range of finance function activities. The Report does not provide specific reasons for differences in performance. However, it does provide guidance as to some of the better practices that participating organisations, and the wider public sector, may wish to adopt, or adapt in order to achieve improved performance in the activities of the finance function.

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 FSANZ's administration of its food standard functions, as specified in the Food Standards Australia New Zealand Act, 1991 (last amended 2007).
Particular emphasis was given to whether:

• FSANZ's performance management and reporting provided effective support and ensures accountability;
• FSANZ effectively administered its food standard development and variation function, including its stakeholder management; and
• FSANZ effectively monitored the implementation of its standards and coordinates relevant jurisdictions to address market failures.