The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the implementation and administration of the Small Business Superannuation Clearing House.

The objective of the audit was to continue to examine the progress of the implementation of the annual performance statements requirements under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) and the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014 (PGPA Rule) by selected entities.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the design and conduct of the funding round for the Building Better Regional Cities Program.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s (TGA) application of the Code of Good Manufacturing Practice (Code of GMP) for prescription medicines.

The objective of the audit was to assess the efficiency and the effectiveness of DEWR's administrative oversight for the WfD programme. The components of administration examined included whether:

• the operation of the WfD programme was guided by sound business planning including risk assessment;
• DEWR effectively and efficiently managed, monitored and reported the performance of CWCs in meeting contractual obligations;
• adequate support was provided to DEWR contract managers and account managers to assist in the delivery of WfD outcomes;
• there was evaluation of the performance of CWCs in delivering WfD objectives on behalf of the department;
• DEWR measures the effectiveness of WfD against programme objectives; and
• DEWR had implemented agreed recommendations from the previous WfD audit, where current and relevant.

Mr Ian McPhee - Auditor-General for Australia, presented at the CPA Australia Public Sectore Finance and Management Conference

The ANAO's purpose was to report on:

• the HIC's management of approaches to minimise medifraud and inappropriate practice;
• HIC's reporting of its performance on these matters to stakeholders;
• the methodology used by the HIC to estimate the extent of fraud and inappropriate practice, including comment on the reliability of the estimates; and
• the HIC's implementation of the major recommendations from Medifraud and Excessive Servicing - Audit Report No.17 1992-93.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether purchases of goods and services are conducted in accordance with relevant legislation, Government policies and guidelines, and sound purchasing principles and practices. The audit at each entity covered the internal control framework for purchasing and purchase transactions during 2002-03 and 2003-04 and, where applicable, was based on the CPGs current at that time. The audit examined all aspects of the purchasing process from the initial requirement for purchase through to the delivery of the supply and payment. It included an examination of aselection of individual purchases at each audited entity.

The overall objective of the preliminary study was to determine whether a performance audit of the management of corporate sponsorship was warranted. Specifically, the areas canvassed during the preliminary study were:

• policies and guidelines for the management of corporate sponsorship;
• integration of corporate sponsorship into agency planning;
• contractual arrangements;
• evaluation of corporate sponsorship within the agency;
• valuation and reporting of corporate sponsorship; and
• costs and benefits associated with corporate sponsorship.

The preliminary study findings did not warrant proceeding to a full performance audit. However, because corporate sponsorship is likely to be a growing area of importance for the Commonwealth, the ANAO concluded that there was value in producing a better practice guide in addition to the audit report.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected regulatory agencies have cost recovery procedures and practices which comply with the Government's guidelines. To address this objective, the audit assessed the management of cost recovery against the following criteria:

• regulatory agencies have clear and consistent cost recovery procedures to identify their activities and costs, and set fees and levies;
• regulatory agencies have effectively implemented their cost recovery procedures;
• regulatory agencies regularly monitor and review their cost recovery activities; and
• regulatory agencies regularly report on their cost recovery.