The objective of this audit was to follow up DVA's implementation of the recommendations in Audit Report No. 44, 2000-01, Information Technology in the Department of Veterans' Affairs. The ANAO made two recommendations in the report (the second having five parts). The recommendations addressed the monitoring of IT changes; IT performance information; information systems model documentation; and the facilitation of the interpretation of performance information.

The objective of this audit was to assess the efficiency¹ and effectiveness of the establishment, implementation and administration of the bike paths component of the Local Jobs stream of the Jobs Fund. A particular focus was on the establishment of program objectives and the extent to which approved grants have demonstrably contributed to the cost-effective achievement of those objectives. The audit approach has been influenced by recent audits of grants administration which have emphasised the importance of transparent and accountable grant decision-making processes to the cost effective achievement of stated program objectives, and having regard for recent government decisions to enhance the framework applying to the administration of grants.

As an economic stimulus program, efficiency was assessed with particular attention to whether the application, assessment, decision-making and funding agreement processes were undertaken in a timely manner. This emphasis was consistent with the criterion adopted by the Government for the design of the stimulus packages established in response to the global financial crisis (see further at paragraph 4.20 of the audit report).

The overall objective of the audit was to assess whether the RSS Programme is effective and efficient in providing assurance on the levels of payment error and the resultant risks to the integrity of Australian Government outlays for payments administered by Centrelink. Specifically, the audit assessed whether: the RSS Programme meets the objectives outlined for it in the Portfolio Budget Statements under which funding was provided; there is an adequate methodology underpinning the RSS reviews; the RSS reviews are conducted effectively and efficiently, and adequate quality assurance mechanisms exist to assure the results obtained from the RSS reviews; and reporting by the agencies of the results of the RSS Programme is adequate and takes into consideration the issues identified in Audit Report No. 44 2002–03 Review of the Parenting Payment Single Program, and Audit Report No. 17 2002–03 Age Pension Entitlements.

In 1997, and subsequently in 1999, the Australian Government introduced two major spending packages with a total value of almost $1 billion. These spending packages were designed to address the challenges posed by the issue of climate change and to meet Australia's domestic and international commitments. Since its inception in 1998, the Australian Greenhouse Office has been responsible for the implementation of greenhouse related programs from these two major spending packages. The objective of the audit was to examine and report on the administrative efficiency and effectiveness of seven major programs administered by the Australian Greenhouse Office.

The Australian Customs Service (Customs) is responsible for managing the integrity of Australia's border. The Australian maritime border is the 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) around Australia's 37 000 kilometre coastline. The National Marine Unit (NMU) contributes to customs' Civil Maritime Surveillance and Response program. It has eight 35 - metre Bay Class vessels (known as Australian Customs Vessels or ACVs) that are capable of maintaining a strategic presence around the Australian coast. The audit examined the administrative effectiveness of the NMU's surveillance and response operations. Particular emphasis was given to the following areas:

• strategic and tactical taskings;
• crew operations;
• crew training;
• asset management; and
• governance arrangements.

The audit focussed on the systems and processes OGTR has established for both receiving and assessing applications under the Act, and also for ensuring compliance with the statutory requirements through monitoring and inspection. The audit objective was to form an opinion on the discharge by OGTR of selected functions entrusted to it under the Act. The audit assessed the practices of OGTR against the following principal criteria: Assessment of applications under the Act: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for the management and assessment of applications under the Act. Ensuring compliance—monitoring, inspection and enforcement activities: Whether OGTR has established systems and procedures for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Act. Performance management: Whether OGTR manages selected aspects of its work efficiently and effectively. The audit did not seek to form an opinion on the appropriateness of the chosen structure of the regime for regulating gene technology or the merit of the scientific judgments involved. The audit methodology included discussions with representatives from agencies that co-ordinate aspects of the co-operative regulatory regime for gene technology across Australian jurisdictions, with various other stakeholders and users of the regime, as well as with officers of OGTR, along with examination of OGTR documents and files.

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.

The Auditor-General responded on 6 April 2016 to correspondence from Senator Hanson-Young on 30 March 2016 regarding Refugee resettlement deal established between the Commonwealth Government of Australia and the Kingdom of Cambodia in September of 2014.

The objective of this report is to provide comprehensive information on the status of selected Major Projects, as reflected in the Project Data Summary Sheets prepared by the DMO, and the Statement by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the DMO, and including the ANAO’s review of the preparation of the PDSSs by the DMO.

The objectives of the audit were to assess the Commonwealth's management of contractual rights and obligations under the Sale Agreements. In particular the audit sought to: assess the Commonwealth's management of contractual warranties and indemnities; assess DoTARS' management of each purchaser's compliance with contractual commitments to capital expenditure; and examine the effectiveness of the development and management of contractual arrangements for concessional rail passenger travel provided by the Commonwealth.