The objectives for the audit were to examine Commonwealth guarantees, indemnities and letters of comfort in relation to:

• the potential size of the Commonwealth's exposure to these instruments;
• the extent to which the overall exposures of the Commonwealth are managed and monitored;
• the adequacy of administrative reporting arrangements;
• areas of better administrative practice relating to their management; and
• to raise agencies' awareness of appropriate risk management and accountability practices in relation to these instruments.

The audit set out to quantify the Commonwealth's exposure to guarantees, indemnities and letters of comfort.

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 objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of FaHCSIA's management of the GBM initiative, and the extent to which the initiative has contributed to improvements in community engagement and government coordination in the Northern Territory.

The audit focused on FaHCSIA's management of the GBM initiative under the NTER. The audit scope did not include additional functions assigned to some GBMs in the Northern Territory under the National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery (the National Partnership Agreement), or to Australian Government staff with similar roles and functions supporting the implementation of the National Partnership Agreement in Queensland and Western Australia.

A Business Support Process audit of the administration of grants in small to medium organisations was undertaken across six Commonwealth organisations to assess whether agencies had implemented appropriate risk management strategies for grant programs; evaluate whether grants had been administered in accordance with the appropriate legislation, Commonwealth guidance, and other accepted internal controls; and to recommend improvements in the controls and practices relating to grants administration.

The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the action taken by the Australian Institute of Marine Science in response to the recommendations contained in 'External Funds Generation', Audit Report No.48, 1991-92.

The objectives in auditing the sale were to assess the extent to which the Government's sale objectives were achieved; review the efficiency of the management of the sale process; assess whether the sale arrangements adequately protected the Commonwealth's interests, including minimising ongoing Commonwealth risk; and identify principles of sound administrative practice to facilitate improved arrangements for future trade sales, particularly the later phases of airport sales.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether DEWR's management and oversight of Job Placement and matching services is effective, in particular, whether: DEWR effectively manages, monitors and reports the performance of JPOs in providing Job Placement services; DEWR effectively manages the provision of matching services (including completion of vocational profiles and provision of vacancy information through auto-matching) to job seekers; Job seeker and vacancy data in DEWR's JobSearch system is high quality and is managed effectively; and DEWR effectively measures, monitors and reports Job Placement service outcomes.

The objective of this audit was to assess the Private Health Insurance Administration Council's (PHIAC's) administrative effectiveness as a regulator of private health insurance. In making this assessment, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) addressed the following criteria: whether PHIAC monitored compliance with its legislative requirements and analysed related data; whether PHIAC addressed and managed non-compliance with its legislative requirements; and whether PHIAC's governance and organisation supported the performance of its legislative functions. Although the Department of Health and Ageing (Health) also has a role in the regulation of the private health insurance industry under the National Health Act 1953 (Health Act), Health's regulatory activities were outside the scope of this audit.

The objective of the audit was to form an opinion about DVA's management of the current and future demand for VHC services. To form an opinion, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) examined whether DVA:effectively planned the distribution of VHC resources; distributed VHC resources according to its planning; and monitored and evaluated how effectively it managed the demand for VHC services. To form an opinion against the audit objective, the ANAO interviewed DVA personnel, examined DVA documents, interviewed personnel at a selection of Agencies, Service Providers and stakeholders, and reviewed relevant literature.

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.