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 Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) was established on 1 July 1998 as the prudential regulator of banks and other authorised deposit-taking institutions (ADIs), life insurance companies (including friendly societies), general insurance companies, superannuation funds and retirement savings accounts. ANAO's objectives for this audit were to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of APRA's prudential supervision of banks. Prudential supervision aims to protect depositors by ensuring that financial institutions adopt prudent risk management practices designed to ensure their continuing solvency and liquidity. APRA is a relatively new organisation, established in July 1998 and becoming responsible for prudential supervision of all ADIs from July 1999. ANAO concluded that there are steps APRA can take in a number of areas to improve its supervisory practices, including improving the administration of the ADI supervisory levy; strengthening its risk management approach; and maintaining closer adherence to international standards for prudential supervision issued by the Basle Committee on Banking Supervision. ANAO made five recommendations concerning administration of levies, risk-based supervision and supervision of cross-border banking. APRA agreed, or agreed with qualifications, to all recommendations, as well as agreeing with the overall audit conclusions.

The objective of this audit was to assess how effectively entities had developed and implemented appropriate KPIs to support stated program objectives.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the Department of Health and Ageing’s administration of New Directions. In this respect the ANAO considered whether:

• planning processes were developed to support the program’s objectives and rationale;
• implementation arrangements were clearly defined and aligned to the objectives of the program; and
• robust performance management arrangements had been established and were in use by the department.

The audit objective was to examine whether Health's financial management framework and processes adequately support Health's Secretary, Executive and managers to make informed decisions on the use of Commonwealth resources.

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 whether the Scheme is being administered effectively by the department. The ANAO focussed on Program Year 1 of the Scheme, 2005–06, and examined DIISR's arrangements for:

• assessing the eligibility of entities to receive grants;
• assessing entities' claims for eligible expenditure;
• adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme when calculating and paying claims, and managing any debts that arise;
• and evaluating and reporting on whether the statutory objective of the Scheme is being met.

The audit did not examine the other components of the 2005–2015 industry assistance package; nor did it examine any of the programs delivered under the previous assistance package (2000–2005).

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) administration of the veterans’ children education schemes.

A performance audit of the management of the Detention Centre Contracts was listed in the 2003-04 Audit Work Program as a potential audit. The audit work program proposed that the audit would be conducted in two parts. The first part would focus on DIMIA's management of the detention centre contracts with the then detention service provider, GEO Australia. The second part would concentrate on how well any lessons learned from the first contract, were translated into improvements with the new contract. The original objective of this second ANAO audit was to assess DIMIA's management of detention services through the Contract, including the tender process, transition period and implementation of lessons learned from the previous contract.

The audit sought to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the ADF's management of fuel and lubricants and to identify possible areas for improvement. The audit focused on major aspects of the fuel supply chain, in particular the strategic management of fuel (eg. the coordination of fuel requirements and stockholding policy). The audit also reviewed fuel procurement practices, storage and handling issues. The audit coverage addressed the fuel supply aspects of these matters rather than transport, distribution and equipment issues. Although directed principally towards operational fuels, the audit took into consideration issues associated with ADF's requirement for oils and lubricants.