The follow-up audit assessed the extent to which the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), Department of Health and Ageing (Health), and Medicare Australia had implemented the six recommendations from Audit Report No.47 2001–02, Administration of the 30 Per Cent Private Health Insurance Rebate. The audit also looked at: the implementation of some of the major suggestions for improvement in the original audit; and the current validity of some of the positive major findings from that audit. The audit found that the ATO, Health and Medicare Australia have acted upon the recommendations contained in Audit Report No.47 2001–02 and, overall, the administration of the Rebate is currently being undertaken effectively.

The audit objective was to assess Health's administration of primary care funding, with a focus on the administrative practices of the Primary Care Division and Health's State and Territory Offices. In forming an opinion on the audit objective, the ANAO reviewed 41 agreements, with a combined value of $252 million. The ANAO also reviewed relevant documentation and files, interviewed programme officers and met with a number of stakeholders. The audit comments on a range of issues, including the utility of funding agreements, monitoring, payments, and support for administrators.

The objective of the audit was to examine processes used by Defence and the DMO to procure explosive ordnance for the ADF, with an emphasis on Army requirements. The audit reviewed the extent to which the DMO effectively translated the explosive ordnance requirements of the ADF, and particularly of Army, into procurement and through life support arrangements.

The objectives of the audit were to provide assurance that Artbank was effectively meeting its charter of: acquiring art by contemporary artists; expanding the number of public places that Artbank's collection is rented and displayed; and managing its collection and rental scheme. The audit also examined Artbank's governance arrangements, and its programmes for marketing, client development, performance management, budgeting, debt management and also sought client feedback on Artbank's operations via a survey.

The objective of this audit was to form an opinion on the Australian Research Council's (ARC's) management of research grants. To achieve this, ANAO centred the audit around the following aspects of ARC's grants administration: governance and structure, particularly the roles and responsibilities of those parties involved in administering ARC's grants (Chapter 2); the processes for assessing and selecting ARC grants (Chapter 3);post-award management of grants under the Funding Agreements (Agreements) between ARC and those universities that receive and administer the ARC grants to researchers (Chapter 4); and ARC's monitoring of its grant programs for management, performance improvement and reporting (Chapter 5). In its assessment, ANAO considered ARC's compliance with relevant sections of the Australian Research Council Act 2001 (ARC Act) and the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997 (FMA Act). The assessment also took account of the ANAO's Better Practice Guides, particularly the Better Practice Guide—Administration of Grants. The audit focused mainly on ARC's administration of Discovery Projects, the largest scheme in ARC's National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

The objective of the audit was to assess whether selected Australian Government entities were effectively supporting their business requirements through planning for, and management of, the acquisition, disposal and use of their IPE assets. The audit reviewed each entity's policies and practices against a series of audit criteria across the following components of asset management: control environment; planning; acquisitions; operations; and disposals.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of management of the procurement of a major, new capability for the ADF by the DMO and Defence. The audit reviewed the initial capability requirements and approval process; analysed the contract negotiation process; and examined management of the Acquisition and Through-Life-Support Contracts. Coverage of the audit extended from development of the concept for the requirement, to acceptance of deliverables in the period prior to the award of the Australian Military Type Certificate (see shaded area of Figure 1). The audit fieldwork was undertaken during the delivery phase of the Project, following delivery of ARH numbers 1, 2 and 5.

The objective of the audit was to assess the ATO's administration of activity statement HRRs. Specifically the audit sought to: examine aspects of ATO governance relevant to its administration of activity statement HRRs. This includes: ATO planning, the integration between Lines to administer HRRs; corporate risk management processes; and performance management; assess the ATO's methodology and practice to identify and, if necessary, correct activity statement HRRs; and identify and assess the Information Technology (IT) and manual systems, processes and controls used by the ATO to process HRRs resulting from the lodgement of activity statements.

The objective of this performance audit was to assess whether DIMIA's information systems and business processes are effective in supporting APP to meet its border security and streamlined clearance objectives. In particular, the audit focused on the following: Mandatory APP - Stage 1 (MAPP1) project management; MAPP1 IT development and system performance; APP performance reporting; contract management; and financial management.

The objective of this follow-up audit was to examine the ATO's implementation of the 20 recommendations in: The Administration of Petroleum Excise Collections (Audit Report No.17, 2001(02); and The Administration of Tobacco Excise (Audit Report No. 55, 2001(02), having regard to any changed circumstances, or new administrative issues, affecting implementation of those recommendations. The audit also aimed to identify scope for improvement in the ATO's administration of petroleum and tobacco excise. Follow-up audits are recognised as an important element of the accountability processes of Commonwealth administration. The Parliament looks to the Auditor-General to report, from time to time, on the extent to which Commonwealth agencies have implemented recommendations of previous audit reports. Follow-up audits keep the Parliament informed of progressive improvements and current challenges in areas of Commonwealth administration that have previously been subject to scrutiny through performance audits.