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 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 objective of this review was to determine whether the establishment and early implementation of the Fair Entitlements Guarantee Recovery Program by the Department of Jobs and Small Business has provided a sound basis for achieving value for money.

The audit reviewed the National Aboriginal Health Strategy (NAHS) component of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission's (ATSIC) Community Housing Infrastructure Program (CHIP). A major NAHS objective is to improve environmental health in indigenous communities through the construction and housing and the provision of water, sewerage and related systems. The objective of the performance audit was to form an opinion on ATSIC's management of the National Aboriginal Health Strategy program in providing housing and related infrastructure to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, and to identify areas where program administration could be improved.

The purpose of this follow-up audit was to report on action taken by the Department of Social Security and Centrelink in addressing the recommendations of Audit Report No.23 1993-94 Protection of Confidential Client Information from Unauthorised Disclosure. The objectives were to:

• ascertain the extent to which the recommendations of the original audit have been implemented;
• identify other changes made in relation to data confidentiality within the Social Security portfolio since 1993;
• assess the impact of the changes made; and
• identify any scope for further improvement.