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.

Robust internal budgeting processes are an essential part of effective financial management and are critical in the successful implementation of the accrual-based, outputs and outcomes framework. Effective internal budgeting should be closely intergrated with business planning processes and require a comprehensive and collaborative approach, involving input from throughout the organisation.

The objective of the audit was to assess DIMIA's management of offshore measures to prevent and detect unlawful entry, and to identify opportunities for improvement. The audit did not cover the processing arrangements, referred to as the Pacific Strategy, introduced as part of the legislative changes in September 2001. Nor did it cover the range of measures use for prevention and detection at the border and on shore. As DIMIA is the lead agency responsible for the development of immigration policy, the audit focussed in the administrative effectiveness of the governance framework used by the department to implement and to support the achievement of Government strategies to prevent unlawful entry to Australian Territory.

The audit objective was to assess the appropriateness of the use and reporting of confidentiality provisions in Australian Government contracts. This included assessing compliance with the Order and following up on the implementation of recommendations made in previous Senate Order audits.

The audit involved three components:

• an examination of a stratified random sample of 150 contracts listed as containing confidentiality provisions from material and small agencies across the Australian Government to determine whether confidentiality provisions were used and reported appropriately;
• an examination of all FMA Act agencies' calendar year 2009 contract listings, and ministers' letters of advice, to assess compliance with the requirements of the Order, and check reported instances of excluded contracts; and
• a follow-up of the implementation of previous audit recommendations relating to the administration of the Senate Order in four agencies. The selected agencies were the: Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID); Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs (FaHCSIA); Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (DAFF); and the Federal Court of Australia (Federal Court). The selected agencies were audited in one of the ANAO's previous five audits of Senate Order compliance.

The audit objective was to form an opinion on the effectiveness of the NHMRC's grant administration. To meet this objective the NHMRC was assessed against four criteria:

• the NHMRC's governance arrangements provide appropriate accountability that it is meeting its objectives and obligations to Government (Chapter 2);
• there are strategic and systematic processes for developing and implementing grant programs (Chapter 3);
• the NHMRC manages grants post-award effectively, and complies with legislative requirements and program directives (Chapters 4 and 5); and
• the NHMRC monitors and evaluates its business to demonstrate that outcomes are being met (Chapter 6).

This follow-up Audit reviewed the Department of Health and Ageing's implementation of the recommendations of Audit Report No. 36, 1999-2000, Home and Community Care. The objective of the follow-up audit was to assess the extent to which the Department had implemented the nine recommendations of Audit Report No. 36, 1999-2000. The audit examined areas relating to funding, guidance, fees, coordination with other aged and disability care programs, acquittals, accountability and data requirements, and records management.

The objective of this audit was to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the establishment, implementation and administration of the quarantined heritage 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.

The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness of the department's establishment of the P21 element of the BER program. The focus of the audit was on: the establishment of administrative arrangements for BER P21 in accordance with government policy; the assessment and approval of funding allocations; and the arrangements to monitor and report BER P21 progress and achievement of broader program outcomes. An examination of individual BER P21 projects was outside the scope of the audit.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Human Services’ management of the trials of intensive service delivery for customers with complex needs.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of ARPANSA’s management of the regulation of Commonwealth nuclear, radiation facilities and sources, including ARPANSA’s compliance with its legislative requirements.