The audit reviewed the use and operation of performance information in service level agreements between Centrelink and three agencies; the Department of Social Security, the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs and the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business. The objective of the audit was to establish whether the performance assessment framework specified in the agreements enabled the adequate assessment of achievements under purchaser/provider arrangements entered into by DSS, DEETYA and Centrelink.

The audit reviewed the fraud control arrangements in the Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS), a policy formulation, and advising body and major purchaser of social welfare services from Centrelink. The objective was to assess whether FaCS had:

• implemented appropriate fraud control arrangements in line with the Fraud Control Policy of the Commonwealth and that these arrangements operated effectively in practice; and
• fulfilled its responsibilities as a purchaser of services in relation to fraud control.

This audit is one in a series of fraud control audit and is complemented by a similar audit of Centrelink, a major provider of services on behalf of FaCS.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether FaCS had established effective business arrangements with Centrelink to help ensure that new claims for Age Pension were properly assessed in accordance with the Social Security Law and the Guide to the Social Security Law. In the context of the audit objective, the primary issues examined were whether FaCS had:

• established an appropriate business framework;
• adopted an appropriate risk management approach;
• appropriately monitored and evaluated performance; and
• provided relevant business support to Centrelink.

The objective of Phase Two of the audit was to examine the efficiency and effectiveness of operations of ATSIC Central, State and Regional Offices in relation to the administration of the Community Development Employment Projects Scheme. The ANAO established key criteria to assess progress against the implementation of the Phase One recommendations and further assess the efficiency and effectiveness of CDEP administration. The main areas examined were: planning, including reports of progress against plans and the development and use of performance information; monitoring, including client feedback and the review process at the Regional Office level; the implementation and effectiveness of management information systems in relation to CDEP; and the development and implementation of quality assuranced processes at State/Regional level.

The purpose of the audit was to assess whether management of parliamentary workflow by the agencies reviewed was efficient and effective and to identify elements of good practice. In assessing agency effectiveness and efficiency, the audit focussed on issues of client service such as timeliness, quality and cost. It considered also the governance framework and accountability arrangements relevant to parliamentary workflow, as well as more operational considerations including the use of information technology, development of relevant management information and suitable benchmarking processes.

The audit covered major program elements within the Department of Primary Industries and Energy and Environment Australia that are managed:

• directly by DPIE or Environment Australia;
• through the One-Stop-Shop project assessment process administered by the States/Territories; or
• by non-government organisations.

The purpose of the audit was to examine and benchmark the administrative processes established for these programs. The primary focus of the audit was to draw on the best elements of past practice (particularly in relation to programs involving the One-Stop-Shop) and highlight any shortcomings so that the risks to program effectiveness and accountability could be addressed in the implementation of the Natural Heritage Trust.

The audit examined the design, management and reporting of performance information for the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT) which is administered by the Commonwealth Departments of Environment and Heritage, and Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. The objective of the audit was to examine and report on the performance information used to support the administration of $1.5 billion in Commonwealth financial assistance; and compliance with legislative requirements for performance monitoring and reporting.