The audit focuses on DMO's equipment acquisition and support, at the system program management level. The objective of the audit was to assess the adequacy of Defence's capital equipment project definition, approval, acquisition and logistics support management. The SPOs subject to audit are:Aerospace Systems Division's Tactical Fighter Systems Program Office (TFSPO), which is responsible for acquisition and logistics support management of the Air Force's F/A-18 and Hawk 127 fleets and associated equipment. TFSPO is located at Williamtown, NSW; Land Systems Division's Track Manoeuvre Systems Program Office (TMSPO), which is responsible for the acquisition and logistics support management of Army's Leopard Tanks and M113 Armed Personnel Carrier fleets. TMSPO is located in Melbourne;Electronic and Weapon Systems Division's Over-the-Horizon Radar Systems Program Office (OTHRSPO), which is responsible for acquisition and logistics support management of the Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) and Jindalee OTHR systems. OTHRSPO is located within the Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) precinct at Edinburgh, South Australia; and Maritime Systems Division's Fast Frigate Guided System Program Office (FFGSPO), which is responsible for the support and upgrade of the Navy's FFG fleet. FFGSPO is located at Garden Island, Sydney.In view of the significant role that DMO's SPOs play in managing major capital equipment acquisition projects, the audit includes a case study of the $1.448 billion Fast Frigate Guided (FFG) Upgrade Project. A high level of audit assurance is not able to be provided on the FFG Upgrade Project given deficiencies in the FFGSPO information management systems and deficiencies in the level of design and development disclosure provided to SPO personnel by the FFG Upgrade Prime Contractor. The ANAO was unable to access appropriate audit evidence on the financial expenditure associated with the FFG Upgrade Project, and the Project's approved Equipment Acquisition Strategy.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether the award of funding under the Building Better Regions Fund was effective as well as being consistent with the Commonwealth Grant Rules and Guidelines.

The audit focussed on performance information reporting by the submarine System Program Offices on reliability, safety systems and logistic support services. In the context of the sustainability arrangements, the audit considered combat system upgrades and personnel escape and rescue systems. Any arrangements that the Commonwealth may be considering regarding the potential sale of ASC were not within the scope of this audit.

The objective of the audit was to assess the Australian Federal Police's (AFP’s) management of policing services at Australian international airports. In order to form a conclusion against this audit objective, the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) examined if:

• the transition to the 'All In' model of policing at airports (Project Macer) had been delivered effectively;
• appropriate processes are in place for managing risk and operational planning;
• effective stakeholder engagement, relationship management and information sharing arrangements are in place;
• facilities at the airports are adequate and appropriate; and
• appropriate mechanisms for measuring the effectiveness of policing at airports have been developed and implemented.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of Health's implementation of the Diagnostic Imaging Review Reform Package, some three years into the five year reform period.

As an element of the arrangements implemented to support the role of the ANAO in reviewing campaigns' compliance with the Guidelines announced on 2 July 2008, the ANAO advised the chair of the JCPAA that the ANAO will provide regular summary reports to Parliament. Section 25 of the Auditor-General's Act 1997 provides for the tabling of such reports.

The objective of the audit was to provide assurance to Parliament concerning the adequacy of Defence preparedness management systems and to identify possible areas for improvement. The audit focused on the systems and processes that Defence uses to manage preparedness. We did not review the preparedness levels of specific capabilities, nor did we cover capital acquisition processes. The audit included coverage of: - preparedness systems architecture; - control and direction of preparedness; - coordination among contributors to preparedness; and - performance management and preparedness.

The objective of the audit was to examine the effectiveness of the AFP's approach to its management of the implementation of NPIs.

The current audit has focussed on Stage 2 of the Scheme. Its objective was to assess whether ACIS is being administered effectively by DIISR and, as relevant, by Customs. In particular, the audit examined the department's arrangements for:

• assessing the eligibility of participants to receive duty credits;
• calculating duty credits accurately and adhering to the funding limits for the Scheme;
• checking the integrity of participants' claims, which are self-assessed;
• accounting for the duty credits transferred to and used at Customs; and
• measuring and reporting on the performance of ACIS.

The audit also followed up on whether the ANAO's previous recommendations have been addressed.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of the management by Defence and the DMO of the procurement of the modernised High Frequency communication capability for the ADF. The audit focussed on Phase 3A of the Project which commenced in the mid 1990's and involved the selection of the Prime Contractor; negotiation of the Prime Contract and the Network Operation and Support Contract; and the development and implementation of the Communication System.