Currently showing reports relevant to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Senate estimates committee. [Remove filter]

Type: Performance statements audit
Report number: 25 of 2024-25
Portfolios: Across entities
Entities: Across entities
Date tabled:
Audit Summary : show

Executive summary

1. Performance information is important for public sector accountability and transparency as it shows how taxpayers’ money has been spent and what this spending has achieved. The development and use of performance information is integral to an entity’s strategic planning, budgeting, monitoring and evaluation processes.

2. Annual performance statements are expected to present a clear, balanced and meaningful account of how well an entity has performed against the expectations it set out in its corporate plan. They are an important way of showing the Parliament and the public how effectively Commonwealth entities have used public resources to achieve desired outcomes.

The needs of the Parliament

3. Section 5 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) sets out the objects of the Act, which include requiring Commonwealth entities to provide meaningful performance information to the Parliament and the public. The Replacement Explanatory Memorandum to the PGPA Bill 2013 stated that ‘The Parliament needs performance information that shows it how Commonwealth entities are performing.’1 The PGPA Act and the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014 (PGPA Rule) outline requirements for the quality of performance information, and for performance monitoring, evaluation and reporting.

4. The Parliament’s Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) has a particular focus on improving the reporting of performance by entities. In September 2023, the JCPAA tabled its Report 499, Inquiry into the Annual Performance Statements 2021–22, stating:

As the old saying goes, ‘what is measured matters’, and how agencies assess and report on their performance impacts quite directly on what they value and do for the public. Performance reporting is also a key requirement of government entities to provide transparency and accountability to Parliament and the public.2

5. Without effective performance reporting, there is a risk that trust and confidence in government could be lost (see paragraphs 1.3 to 1.6).

Entities need meaningful performance information

6. Having access to performance information enables entities to understand what is working and what needs improvement, to make evidence-based decisions and promote better use of public resources. Meaningful performance information and reporting is essential to good management and the effective stewardship of public resources.

7. It is in the public interest for an entity to provide appropriate and meaningful information on the actual results it achieved and the impact of the programs and services it has delivered. Ultimately, performance information helps a Commonwealth entity to demonstrate accountability and transparency for its performance and achievements against its purposes and intended results (see paragraphs 1.7 to 1.13).

The 2023–24 performance statements audit program

8. In 2023–24, the ANAO conducted audits of annual performance statements of 14 Commonwealth entities. This is an increase from 10 entities audited in 2022–23.

9. Commonwealth entities continue to improve their strategic planning and performance reporting. There was general improvement across each of the five categories the ANAO considers when assessing the performance reporting maturity of entities: leadership and culture; governance; reporting and records; data and systems; and capability.

10. The ANAO’s performance statements audit program demonstrates that mandatory annual performance statements audits encourage entities to invest in the processes, systems and capability needed to develop, monitor and report high quality performance information (see paragraphs 1.18 to 1.27).

Audit conclusions and additional matters

11. Overall, the results from the 2023–24 performance statements audits are mixed. Nine of the 14 auditees received an auditor’s report with an unmodified conclusion.3 Five received a modified audit conclusion identifying material areas where users could not rely on the performance statements, but the effect was not pervasive to the performance statements as a whole.

12. The two broad reasons behind the modified audit conclusions were:

  • completeness of performance information — the performance statements were not complete and did not present a full, balanced and accurate picture of the entity’s performance as important information had been omitted; and
  • insufficient evidence — the ANAO was unable to obtain enough appropriate evidence to form a reasonable basis for the audit conclusion on the entity’s performance statements.

13. Where appropriate, an auditor’s report may separately include an Emphasis of Matter paragraph. An Emphasis of Matter paragraph draws a reader’s attention to a matter in the performance statements that, in the auditor’s judgement, is important for readers to consider when interpreting the performance statements. Eight of the 14 auditees received an auditor’s report containing an Emphasis of Matter paragraph. An Emphasis of Matter paragraph does not modify the auditor’s conclusion (see Appendix 1).

Audit findings

14. A total of 66 findings were reported to entities at the end of the final phase of the 2023–24 performance statements audits. These comprised 23 significant, 23 moderate and 20 minor findings.

15. The significant and moderate findings fall under five themes:

  • Accuracy and reliability — entities could not provide appropriate evidence that the reported information is reliable, accurate and free from bias.
  • Usefulness — performance measures were not relevant, clear, reliable or aligned to the entity’s purposes or key activities. Consequently, they may not present meaningful insights into the entity’s performance or form a basis to support entity decision making.
  • Preparation — entity preparation processes and practices for performance statements were not effective, including timeliness, record keeping and availability of supporting documentation.
  • Completeness — performance statements did not present a full, balanced and accurate picture of the entity’s performance, including all relevant data and contextual information.
  • Data — inadequate assurance over the completeness, integrity and accuracy of data, reflecting a lack of controls over how data is managed across the data lifecycle, from data collection through to reporting.

16. These themes are generated from the ANAO’s analysis of the 2023–24 audit findings, and no theme is necessarily more significant than another (see paragraphs 2.12 to 2.17).

Measuring and assessing performance

17. The PGPA Rule requires entities to specify targets for each performance measure where it is reasonably practicable to set a target.4 Clear, measurable targets make it easier to track progress towards expected results and provide a benchmark for measuring and assessing performance.

18. Overall, the 14 entities audited in 2023–24 reported against 385 performance targets in their annual performance statements. Entities reported that 237 targets were achieved/met5, 24 were substantially achieved/met, 24 were partially achieved/met and 82 were not achieved/met.6 Eighteen performance targets had no definitive result.7

19. Assessing entity performance involves more than simply reporting how many performance targets were achieved. An entity’s performance analysis and narrative is important to properly inform stakeholder conclusions about the entity’s performance (see paragraphs 2.37 to 2.44).

Connection to broader government policy initiatives

20. Performance statements audits touch many government policies and frameworks designed to enhance government efficiency, effectiveness and impact, and strengthen accountability and transparency. This is consistent with the drive to improve coherence across the Commonwealth Government’s legislative and policy frameworks that led to the PGPA Act being established.8 The relationship between performance statements audits and existing government policies and frameworks is illustrated in Figure S.1.

Figure S.1. Relationship of performance statements audits to government policies and frameworks

Figure S.1: Relationship of performance statements audits to government policies and frameworks

Source: ANAO analysis.

The future direction of annual performance statements audits

21. Public expectations and attitudes about public services are changing.9 Citizens not only want to be informed, but also to have a say between elections about choices affecting their community10 and be involved in the decision-making process, characterised by, among other things, citizen-centric and place-based approaches that involve citizens and communities in policy design and implementation.11 There is increasing pressure on Commonwealth entities from the Parliament and citizens demanding more responsible and accountable spending of public revenues and improved transparency in the reporting of results and outcomes.

22. A specific challenge for the ANAO is to ensure that performance statements audits influence entities to embrace performance reporting and shift away from a compliance approach with a focus on complying with minimum reporting requirements or meeting the minimum standard they think will satisfy the auditor.12 A compliance approach misses the opportunity to use performance information to learn from experience and improve the delivery of government policies, programs and services.

23. Performance statements audits reflect that for many entities there is not a clear link between internal business plans and the entity’s corporate plan. There can be a misalignment between the information used for day-to-day management and governance of an entity and performance information presented in annual performance statements. Periodic monitoring of performance measures is also not an embedded practice in all Commonwealth entities. These observations indicate that some entities are reporting measures in their performance statements that may not represent the highest value metrics for running the business or for measuring and assessing the entity’s performance (see paragraphs 4.32 to 4.35).

Developments in the ANAO’s audit approach

24. Working with audited entities, the ANAO has progressively sought to strengthen sector understanding of the Commonwealth Performance Framework. This includes a focus on helping entities to apply general principles and guidance to their own circumstances and how entities can make incremental improvements to their performance reporting over time. For example:

  • in 2021–22, the ANAO gave prominence to ensuring entities understood and complied with the technical requirements of the PGPA Act and the PGPA Rule;
  • in 2022–23, there was an increased focus on supporting entities to establish materiality policies that help determine which performance information is significant enough to be reported in performance statements and to develop entity-wide performance frameworks; and
  • in 2023–24, there was an increased focus on assessing the completeness of entity purposes, key activities and performance measures and whether the performance statements present fairly the performance of the entity (see paragraphs 4.36 to 4.38).

Appropriate and meaningful

25. For annual performance statements to achieve the objects of the PGPA Act, they must present performance information that is appropriate (accountable, reliable and aligned with an entity’s purposes and key activities) and meaningful (providing useful insights and analysis of results). They also need to be accessible (readily available and understandable).

26. For the 2024–25 audit program and beyond, the ANAO will continue to encourage Commonwealth entities to not only focus on technical matters (like selecting measures of output, efficiency and effectiveness and presenting numbers and data), but on how to best tell their performance story. This could include analysis and narrative in annual performance statements that explains the ‘why’ and ‘how’ behind the reported results and providing future plans and initiatives aligned to meeting expectations set out in the corporate plan.13

27. It is difficult to demonstrate effective stewardship of public resources without good performance information and reporting. Appropriate and meaningful performance information can show that the entity is thinking beyond the short-term. It can show that the entity is committed to long-term responsible use and management of public resources and effectively achieving results to create long lasting impacts for citizens (see paragraphs 4.39 to 4.45).

Linking financial and performance information

28. The ‘Independent Review into the operation of the PGPA Act’14 noted that there would be merit in better linking performance and financial results, so that there is a clear line of sight between an entity’s strategies and performance and its financial results.15

29. Improving links between financial and non-financial performance information is necessary for measuring and assessing public sector productivity. As a minimum, entities need to understand both the efficiency and effectiveness of how taxpayers’ funds are used if they are to deliver sustainable, value-for-money programs and services. There is currently limited reporting by entities of efficiency (inputs over outputs) and even less reporting of both efficiency and effectiveness for individual key activities.

30. Where entities can demonstrate that more is produced to the same or better quality using fewer resources, this reflects improved productivity.

31. The ANAO will seek to work with the Department of Finance and entities to identify opportunities for annual performance statements to better link information on entity strategies and performance to their financial results (see paragraphs 4.46 to 4.51).

Cross entity measures and reporting

32. ANAO audits are yet to see the systemic development of cross-sector performance measures as indicators where it has been recognised that organisational performance is partly reliant on the actions of other agencies. Although there are some emerging better practices16, the ANAO’s findings reveal that integrated reporting on cross-cutting initiatives and linked programs could provide Parliament, government and the public with a clearer, more unified view of performance on key government priorities such as:

  • Closing the Gap;
  • women’s safety;
  • housing;
  • whole-of-government national security initiatives; and
  • cybersecurity.

33. Noting the interdependence, common objectives and shared responsibility across multiple government programs, there is an opportunity for Commonwealth entities to make appropriate reference to the remit and reporting of outcomes by other entities in annual performance statements. This may enable the Parliament, the government and the public to understand how the work of the reporting entity complements the work done by other parts of government.17

34. As the performance statements audit program continues to broaden in coverage, there will be opportunities for the ANAO to consider the merit of a common approach to measuring performance across entities with broadly similar functions, such as providing policy advice, processing claims or undertaking compliance and regulatory functions. A common basis for assessing these functions may enable the Parliament, the government and the public to compare entities’ results and consider which approaches are working more effectively and why (see paragraphs 4.52 to 4.56).

Type: Financial statement audit
Report number: 22 of 2024-25
Portfolios: Across Entities
Entities: Across Entities
Date tabled:
Audit Summary : show

Executive summary

The Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) publishes an annual audit work program (AAWP) which reflects the audit strategy and deliverables for the forward year. The purpose of the AAWP is to inform the Parliament, the public, and government sector entities of the planned audit coverage for the Australian Government sector by way of financial statements audits, performance audits, performance statements audits and other assurance activities. As set out in the AAWP, the ANAO prepares two reports annually that, drawing on information collected during financial statements audits, provide insights at a point in time of financial statements risks, governance arrangements and internal control frameworks of Commonwealth entities. These reports provide Parliament with an independent examination of the financial accounting and reporting of public sector entities.

These reports explain how entities’ internal control frameworks are critical to executing an efficient and effective audit and underpin an entity’s capacity to transparently discharge its duties and obligations under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act). Deficiencies identified during audits that pose either a significant or moderate risk to an entity’s ability to prepare financial statements free from material misstatement are reported.

This report presents the final results of the 2023–24 audits of the Australian Government’s Consolidated Financial Statements (CFS) and 245 Australian Government entities. The Auditor-General Report No. 42 2023–24 Interim Report on Key Financial Controls of Major Entities, focused on the interim results of the audits of 27 of these entities.

Consolidated financial statements

Audit results

1. The CFS presents the whole of government and the General Government Sector financial statements. The 2023–24 CFS were signed by the Minister for Finance on 28 November 2024 and an unmodified auditor’s report was issued on 2 December 2024.

2. There were no significant or moderate audit issues identified in the audit of the CFS in 2023–24 or 2022–23.

Australian Government financial position

3. The Australian Government reported a net operating balance of a surplus of $10.0 billion ($24.9 billion surplus in 2022–23). The Australian Government’s net worth deficiency decreased from $570.3 billion in 2022–23 to $567.5 billion in 2023–24 (see paragraphs 1.8 to 1.26).

Financial audit results and other matters

Quality and timeliness of financial statements preparation

4. The ANAO issued 240 unmodified auditor’s reports as at 9 December 2024. The financial statements were finalised and auditor’s reports issued for 79 per cent (2022–23: 91 per cent) of entities within three months of financial year-end. The decrease in timeliness of auditor’s reports reflects an increase in the number of audit findings and legislative breaches identified by the ANAO, as well as limitations on the available resources within the ANAO in order to undertake additional audit procedures in response to these findings

5. A quality financial statements preparation process will reduce the risk of inaccurate or unreliable reporting. Seventy-one per cent of entities delivered financial statements in line with an agreed timetable (2022–23: 72 per cent). The total number of adjusted and unadjusted audit differences decreased during 2023–24, although 38 per cent of audit differences remained unadjusted. The quantity and value of adjusted and unadjusted audit differences indicate there remains an opportunity for entities to improve quality assurance over financial statements preparation processes (see paragraphs 2.138 to 2.154).

Timeliness of financial reporting

6. Annual reports that are not tabled in a timely manner before budget supplementary estimates hearings decrease the opportunity for the Senate to scrutinise an entity’s performance. Timeliness of tabling of entity annual reports improved. Ninety-three per cent (2022–23: 66 per cent) of entities that are required to table an annual report in Parliament tabled prior to the date that the portfolio’s supplementary budget estimates hearing commenced. Supplementary estimates hearings were held one week later in 2023–24 than in 2022–23. Fifty-seven per cent of entities tabled annual reports one week or more before the hearing (2022–23: 12 per cent). Of the entities required to table an annual report, 4 per cent (2022–23: 6 per cent) had not tabled an annual report as at 9 December 2024 (see paragraphs 2.155 to 2.166).

Official hospitality

7. Eighty-one per cent of entities permit the provision of hospitality and the majority have policies, procedures or guidance in place. Expenditure on the provision of hospitality for the period 2020–21 to 2023–24 was $70.0 million. Official hospitality involves the provision of public resources to persons other than officials of an entity to achieve the entity’s objectives. Entities that provide official hospitality should have policies, and guidance in place which clearly set expectations for officials. There are no mandatory requirements for entities in managing the provision of hospitality, however, the Department of Finance (Finance) does provide some guidance to entities in model accountable authority instructions. Of those entities that permit hospitality 83 per cent have established formal policies, guidelines or processes.

8. Entities with higher levels of exposure to the provision of official hospitality could give further consideration to implementing or enhancing compliance and reporting arrangements. Seventy-four per cent of entities included compliance requirements in their policies, procedures or guidance which support entity’s obtaining assurance over the conduct of official hospitality. Compliance processes included acquittals, formal reporting, attestations from officials and/or periodic internal audits. Thirty-one per cent of entities had established formal reporting on provision of official hospitality within their entities (see paragraphs 2.36 to 2.56).

Artificial intelligence

9. Fifty-six entities used artificial intelligence (AI) in their operations during 2023–24 (2022–23: 27 entities). Most of these entities had adopted AI for research and development activities, IT systems administration and data and reporting.

10. During 2023–24, 64 per cent of entities that used AI had also established internal policies governing the use of AI (2022–23: 44 per cent). Twenty-seven per cent of entities had established internal policies regarding assurance over AI use. An absence of governance frameworks for managing the use of emerging technologies could increase the risk of unintended consequences. In September 2024, the Digital Transformation Agency (DTA) released the Policy for the responsible use of AI in government, which establishes requirements for accountability and transparency on the use of AI within entities (see paragraphs 2.67 to 2.71).

Cloud computing

11. Assurance over effectiveness of cloud computing arrangements (CCA) could be improved. During 2023–24, 89 per cent of entities used CCAs as part of the delivery model for the IT environment, primarily software-as-a-service (SaaS) arrangements. A Service Organisation Controls (SOC) certificate provides assurance over the implementation, design and operating effectiveness of controls included in contracts, including security, privacy, process integrity and availability. Eighty-two per cent of entities did not have in place a formal policy or procedure which would require the formal review and consideration of a SOC certificate.

12. In the absence of a formal process for obtaining and reviewing SOC certificates, there is a risk that deficiencies in controls at a service provider are not identified, mitigated or addressed in a timely manner (see paragraphs 2.57 to 2.66).

Audit committee member rotation

13. Audit committee member rotation considerations could be enhanced. The rotation of audit committee membership is not mandated, though guidance to the sector indicates that rotation of members allows for a flow of new skills and talent through committees, supporting objectivity. Forty-six per cent of entities did not have a policy requirement for audit committee member rotation.

14. Entities could enhance the effectiveness of their audit committees by adopting a formal process for rotation of audit committee membership, which balances the need for continuity and objectivity of membership (see paragraphs 2.16 to 2.21).

Fraud framework requirements

15. The Commonwealth Fraud Control Framework 2017 encourages entities to conduct fraud risk assessments at least every two years and entities responsible for activities with a high fraud risk may assess risk more frequently. All entities had in place a fraud control plan. Ninety-seven per cent of entities had conducted a fraud risk assessment within the last two years. Changes to the framework which occurred on 1 July 2024 requires entities to expand plans to take account of preventing, detecting and dealing with corruption, as well as periodically examining the effectiveness of internal controls (see paragraphs 2.16 to 2.21).

Summary of audit findings

16. Internal controls largely supported the preparation of financial statements free from material misstatement. However, the number of audit findings identified by the ANAO has increased from 2023–24. A total of 214 audit findings and legislative breaches were reported to entities as a result of the 2023–24 financial statements audits. These comprised six significant, 46 moderate, 147 minor audit findings and 15 legislative breaches. The highest number of findings are in the categories of:

  • IT control environment, including security, change management and user access;
  • compliance and quality assurance frameworks, including legal conformance; and
  • accounting and control of non-financial assets.

17. IT controls remain a key issue. Forty-three per cent of all audit findings identified by the ANAO related to the IT control environment, particularly IT security. Weaknesses in controls in this area can expose entities to an increased risk of unauthorised access to systems and data, or data leakage. The number of IT findings identified by the ANAO indicate that there remains room for improvement across the sector to enhance governance processes supporting the design, implementation and operating effectiveness of controls.

18. These audits findings included four significant legislative breaches, one of which was first identified since 2012–13. The majority (53 per cent) of other legislative breaches relate to incorrect payments of remuneration to key management personnel and/or non-compliance with determinations made by the Remuneration Tribunal. Entities could take further steps to enhance governance supporting remuneration to prevent non-compliance or incorrect payments from occurring (see paragraphs 2.72 to 2.137).

Financial sustainability

19. An assessment of an entity’s financial sustainability can provide an indication of financial management issues or signal a risk that the entity will require additional or refocused funding. The ANAO’s analysis concluded that the financial sustainability of the majority of entities was not at risk (see paragraphs 2.167 to 2.196).

Reporting and auditing frameworks

Changes to the Australian public sector reporting framework

20. The development of a climate-related reporting framework and assurance regime in Australia continues to progress. ANAO consultation with Finance to establish an assurance and verification regime for the Commonwealth Climate Disclosure (CCD) reform is ongoing (see paragraphs 3.20 to 3.24).

21. Emerging technologies (including AI) present opportunities for innovation and efficiency in operations by entities. However, rapid developments and associated risks highlight the need for Accountable Authorities to implement effective governance arrangements when adopting these technologies. The ANAO is incorporating consideration of risks relating to the use of emerging technologies, including AI, into audit planning processes to provide Parliament with assurance regarding the use of AI by the Australian Government (see paragraphs 3.25 to 3.33).

22. The ANAO Audit Quality Report 2023–24 was published on 1 November 2024. The report demonstrates the evaluation of the design, implementation and operating effectiveness of the ANAO’s Quality Management Framework and achievement of ANAO quality objectives (see paragraphs 3.34 to 3.39).

23. The ANAO Integrity Report 2023–24 and the ANAO Integrity Framework 202425 were also published on 1 November 2024 to provide transparency of the measures undertaken to maintain a high integrity culture within the ANAO (see paragraphs 3.44 to 3.46).

Cost of this report

24. The cost to the ANAO of producing this report is approximately $445,000.

Type: Major projects report
Report number: 20 of 2024-25
Portfolios: Defence
Entities: Department of Defence
Date tabled:
Audit Summary : show

Due to the complexity of material and the multiple sources of information for the 2023–24 Major Projects Report, we are unable to represent the entire document in HTML. You can download the full report in PDF or view selected sections in HTML below. PDF files for individual Project Data Summary Sheets (PDSS) are also available for download.

Type: Performance audit
Report number: 18 of 2024-25
Portfolios: Foreign Affairs and Trade
Entities: Tourism Australia
Date tabled:
Audit Summary : show

Summary and recommendations

Background

1. Tourism Australia (TA) was established in 2004 under the Tourism Australia Act 2004 (TA Act). Its corporate plan states that its purpose is to ‘grow demand to enable a competitive and sustainable Australian tourism industry’.1 The accountable authority for TA is the Board of Directors. TA reports having around 220 staff.

2. TA is a corporate Commonwealth entity within the Foreign Affairs and Trade portfolio. It is subject to the Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs) issued by the Minister for Finance under section 105B of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.

3. According to its audited financial statements, payments to suppliers represented 74 per cent of TA’s total expenses in 2023–24. Of its total budgeted expenses for 2024–25, 73 per cent were attributable to supplier expenses. As at 30 June 2024, TA had reported 55 contracts on AusTender with a start date falling within the last three financial years, valued at $265.6 million (including contract amendments).

Rationale for undertaking the audit

4. Noting that nearly three-quarters of organisational expenses relate to contracting suppliers, this audit provides assurance to the Parliament over the effectiveness of TA’s procurement and contract management activities.

Audit objective and criteria

5. The audit objective was to assess whether TA’s procurement and contract management activities are complying with the CPRs and demonstrating the achievement of value for money.

6. To form a conclusion against the objective, the following high-level criteria were applied:

  • Do the procurement processes demonstrate the achievement of value for money?
  • Are the contracts being managed appropriately to achieve the objectives of the procurement?

Conclusion

7. TA’s procurement and contract management activities are not effective in complying with the CPRs and demonstrating the achievement of value for money.

8. TA’s procurement processes have not demonstrated the achievement of value for money. TA makes insufficient use of open and competitive procurement processes, with 70 per cent of the 33 procurements examined in detail by the ANAO not involving open competition. An appropriate procurement policy framework is not in place and TA’s conduct of procurement activities regularly fails to adhere to requirements under the CPRs such as:

  • including evaluation criteria in request documentation and using those criteria to select the candidate that represents the best value for money;
  • acting ethically including fair treatment of suppliers and through the declaration and management of any conflicts of interest2; and
  • maintaining appropriate records commensurate with the scale, scope and risk of the procurement.

9. TA has not effectively managed contracts to achieve the objectives of the procurement. In relation to the 33 contracts examined in detail by the ANAO:

  • none had a contract management plan, including some high-risk and high-value arrangements;
  • for more than half (55 per cent), TA had not included clear performance requirements in the contract. There were also shortcomings in TA’s monitoring of contractor performance across the sample examined by the ANAO;
  • contract variations are common, with 33 per cent of contracts examined by the ANAO being varied. None of the variations had records created and retained by TA that demonstrated that the variation represented value for money; and
  • invoicing and payments for 64 per cent did not adhere to the contracts and/or requirements under TA’s policies.

10. TA has also not been meeting its AusTender reporting requirements.

Supporting findings

Procurement processes

11. An appropriate procurement policy framework is not in place. The two versions of the Procurement Policy in place for the period covered by this ANAO performance audit do not fully reflect, or address, the principles, prescriptive requirements and mandatory rules set out in the CPRs. (See paragraphs 2.2 to 2.19)

12. Based on TA’s AusTender reporting, the majority (62 per cent) of procurements valued at or above the $400,000 threshold set by the CPRs did not involve open approaches to the market. (See paragraphs 2.23 to 2.39)

13. A competitive procurement approach was evident in the establishment of 55 per cent of the contracts examined by the ANAO. For 36 per cent of the contracts, a non-competitive approach was taken and in nine per cent there were insufficient records maintained to evidence the procurement approach taken by TA. For 10 of the procurements (30 per cent) examined by the ANAO, it was evident from the evaluation records that TA had favoured existing or previous suppliers when evaluating competing offers through panel procurement or when deciding which potential provider(s) should be invited to participate in a limited tender. Favouring existing or previous suppliers in the conduct of procurement processes is inconsistent with the CPRs. (See paragraphs 2.40 to 2.63)

14. Relevant evaluation criteria were included in request documentation for 52 per cent of the contracts examined in detail by the ANAO. For the remaining 48 per cent, either the request documentation did not include any evaluation criteria (12 per cent) or there were no records of the request documentation on file (36 per cent). This situation is not consistent with the CPRs which require evaluation criteria to be included in the request documentation. (See paragraphs 2.67 to 2.69)

15. Just over half of the contracts examined by the ANAO were awarded to the candidate where records demonstrated that it had been assessed by TA to offer the best value for money. For the remaining 48 per cent of contracts where value for money outcomes had not been demonstrated, this was primarily the result of insufficient analysis being presented commensurate with the scale of the procurement, or insufficient documentation being maintained. (See paragraphs 2.72 to 2.83)

16. TA had not conducted procurements to a consistent ethical standard as required under the CPRs. Of note was that:

  • conflict of interest declarations were not completed by all evaluation team members in four per cent of the contracts examined where there was sufficient documentation on file;
  • for eight per cent of the contracts where advisers were appointed to assist with the procurement process, TA’s records did not include a complete list of the individuals involved; and
  • the procurements of external probity advisers were deficient in relation to how those advisers were engaged as well as the limited scope of probity services obtained by TA. (See paragraphs 2.86 to 2.110)

17. TA did not maintain appropriate records commensurate with the scale, scope and risk of the procurement (which is what the CPRs require). Forty-eight per cent of contracts examined by the ANAO were missing one or more important documents. In addition, for those contracts where adequate records were available, more than half of the contracts involved work commencing before a contract was in place. (See paragraphs 2.113 to 2.132)

Contract management

18. TA’s reporting of contracts on AusTender was not compliant with the CPRs. TA accurately reported 19 per cent of the relevant contracts examined in detail by the ANAO within the required timeframe. Key information on contract values and contract start and end dates have been reported inaccurately with contract amendments usually not reported at all. (See paragraphs 3.2 to 3.17)

19. An appropriate contract management framework is not in place. None of the 33 contracts examined by the ANAO had a contract management plan and none had a risk management plan. This included a five-year $311.3 million contract that relates to a key element of TA’s marketing efforts. (See paragraphs 3.18 to 3.32)

20. Less than half (45 per cent) of the contracts examined by the ANAO included clear performance requirements. Methods for monitoring performance were included for 79 per cent of contracts examined, including a number of contracts where performance requirements had not been specified (that is the monitoring arrangements, such as reporting and/or progress meetings, were not against a clear performance requirement). Further, TA has not consistently adhered to the performance framework set out in the contracts and it was common for there to be gaps in the records to evidence the contract management activities undertaken that TA was paying for. (See paragraphs 3.33 to 3.40)

21. For the procurements examined by the ANAO, TA has not consistently managed contracts effectively to deliver against the objectives of the procurements and to achieve value for money.

  • Of the 33 contracts examined by the ANAO, 11 (33 per cent) had records of at least one variation being executed. None of the variations had supporting evidence of records to the delegate documenting the decision-making process and demonstrating that the variation represented value for money. Some variations have significantly increased the value of the contract (by up to 105 per cent) and retrospectively added additional services already delivered and/or paid for. There have also been instances of contracts continuing to operate past their stated completion date without being varied.
  • Invoicing and payments under 21 of the 33 contracts examined by the ANAO did not adhere to the contracts and/or requirements under TA’s policies. This has included instances of full payments being made before final deliverables under the contract are received and payments exceeding the contracted amount. (See paragraphs 3.41 to 3.51)

Recommendations

Recommendation no. 1

Paragraph 2.20

Tourism Australia document a comprehensive procurement policy framework that gives full effect to the principles, prescriptive requirements and mandatory rules set out in the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 2

Paragraph 2.64

Tourism Australia increase the extent to which it employs open, fair, non-discriminatory and competitive procurement processes.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 3

Paragraph 2.70

Tourism Australia strengthen its procurement controls to ensure that procurement request documentation includes:

  1. the evaluation criteria that will be applied, together with any weightings; and
  2. the way that prices will be considered in assessing the value for money offered by each candidate.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 4

Paragraph 2.84

Tourism Australia strengthen its procurement practices so that it can demonstrate that contracts are awarded to the candidate that satisfies the conditions for participation, is fully capable of undertaking the contract and will provide the best value for money as assessed against the essential requirements and evaluation criteria specified in the approach to market and request documentation.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 5

Paragraph 2.111

Tourism Australia engage probity advisers through transparent procurement processes and, where a probity adviser has been appointed, Tourism Australia actively engage and manage the adviser to ensure probity has been maintained during the procurement process.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 6

Paragraph 2.128

Tourism Australia improve its record keeping processes to ensure that business information and records are accurate, fit for purpose and are appropriately stored within entity systems.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 7

Paragraph 2.133

Tourism Australia strengthen its procurement controls to better address the risk of work commencing before a contract is in place.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 8

Paragraph 3.14

Tourism Australia:

  1. place greater emphasis on timely and accurate reporting of its procurement activities; and
  2. implement a monitoring and assurance framework over its compliance with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules including for AusTender reporting.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 9

Paragraph 3.52

Tourism Australia strengthen its contract management including by:

  1. establishing and maintaining a contract register that contains details of all entity contracts, and implementing a quality assurance process to ensure that the information recorded is complete and accurate, and updated in a timely manner;
  2. documenting risk management and contract management plans for high-risk, high-value contracts;
  3. including clear performance requirements in contracts and applying contracted performance monitoring approaches in the management of contracts; and
  4. introducing effective controls over invoicing and payments under contracts.

Tourism Australia response: Agreed.

Summary of entity response

22. The proposed audit report was provided to TA. The letter of response that was received for inclusion in the audit report is at Appendix 1. TA’s summary response is provided below.

Tourism Australia acknowledges the ANAO’s report and is fully committed to implementing its nine recommendations to improve the agency’s procurement and contract management practices.

Tourism Australia had already begun to make improvements to its procurement and contract management systems ahead of the audit, and the agency is in the process of implementing remedial actions relating to the recommendations. This includes enhancing the agency’s records management framework and processes, implementing a new procurement and contract management system and adding resources to its corporate services teams. Additional training will also be provided to all staff to improve capability to ensure that decisions are compliant, defensible, and clearly demonstrate value for money.

Some of the report’s findings relate to work undertaken during the unprecedented events of the Covid-19 pandemic, when Tourism Australia’s primary focus was on the emergency response to support an industry in crisis. Nevertheless, Tourism Australia accepts the recommendations for improvement to ensure that it can better demonstrate that the agency’s procurement and contract management activities comply with Commonwealth Procurement Rules and achieve value for money.

Key messages from this audit for all Australian Government entities

23. Below is a summary of key messages, including instances of good practice, which have been identified in this audit and may be relevant for the operations of other Australian Government entities.

Group title

Competitive processes

Key learning reference
  • Achieving value for money is the core rule of the Commonwealth Procurement Rules. Generally, the more competitive the procurement process, the better placed an entity is to demonstrate that it has achieved value for money. Competition also enables an entity to obtain a better view of the market, can provide the opportunity for candidates to put forward innovative solutions and the competitive tension can encourage respondents to offer better prices, improved terms and/or higher quality proposals.
Group title

Procurement

Key learning reference
  • Poorly conducted procurement processes by Australian Government entities, including those conducted without open and effective competition, can pose reputational risks to providers as well as the Australian Government.
  • When engaging an external probity adviser, it is important that entities conduct the procurement process in an ethical and transparent manner. It is also important that entities do not engage the same probity adviser on an ongoing basis to not threaten the adviser’s independence and objectivity.
  • Sufficient and appropriate records must be maintained at all stages of a procurement. Not maintaining adequate records impacts the entity’s ability to demonstrate that its conduct of a procurement has met the requirements under the Commonwealth Procurement Rules. Record keeping is the responsibility of every public servant and is required by law.
Group title

Contract management

Key learning reference
  • It is important that the most up-to-date version of the contract incorporating any variations and records of relevant decisions, including approvals and authorisations, is formally evidenced in writing and appropriately stored. This provides the basis for making payments and the ongoing management of the contract.
Type: Performance audit
Report number: 11 of 2024-25
Portfolios: Foreign Affairs and Trade
Entities: Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade
Date tabled:
Audit Summary : show

Summary and recommendations

Background

1. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) is responsible for issuing passports to Australian citizens in accordance with the Australian Passports Act 2005, with delivery of passport services in Australia and overseas being one of DFAT’s three key outcomes. In July 2006, DFAT established the Australian Passport Office as a separate division to provide passport services. The Australian Passport Office has offices in each Australian capital city and it collaborates with Australian diplomatic missions and consulates to provide passport services to Australians located overseas.

2. DFAT is also the entity responsible for Australia’s international trade agreements. The Commonwealth Procurement Rules (CPRs) incorporate the requirements of Australia’s international trade obligations and government policy on procurement into a set of rules. As a legislative instrument, the CPRs have the force of law.1 Officials from non-corporate Commonwealth entities such as DFAT must comply with the CPRs when performing duties related to procurement. Achieving value for money is the core rule of the CPRs.

Rationale for undertaking the audit

3. The issuing of passports to Australian citizens is an important function of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, undertaken by its Australian Passport Office. Between 1 July 2019 and 31 December 2023, the Australian Passport Office managed 331 contracts totalling $1.58 billion.

4. During the conduct of an earlier audit, Auditor-General Report No. 13 2023–24 Efficiency of the Australian Passport Office, the ANAO observed a number of practices in respect of the conduct of procurement by DFAT through its Australian Passport Office that merited further examination. The Auditor-General decided to commence a separate audit of whether the procurements DFAT conducts through its Australian Passport Office comply with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules and demonstrate the achievement of value for money.

5. The audit provides assurance to the Parliament of the effectiveness of the department’s procurement activities in achieving value for money, and the ethics of the department’s procurement processes, noting that procurement is an area of continuing focus by the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.2

Audit objective and criteria

6. The objective of the audit was to examine whether the procurements that DFAT conducts through its Australian Passport Office are complying with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules and demonstrating the achievement of value for money.

7. To form a conclusion against this objective, the following high-level criteria were applied.

  • Have open and competitive procurement processes been employed?
  • Has decision-making been accountable and transparent?

8. The audit focussed on procurement activities by the Australian Passport Office relating to contracts and contract variations that had a start date of between 1 July 2019 and 31 December 2023.

Conclusion

9. The procurements that DFAT conducted through its Australian Passport Office did not comply with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules and DFAT’s procurement policies, and did not demonstrate it had achieved value for money.

10. DFAT did not employ open and competitive processes in the conduct of Australian Passport Office procurement. There were no procurements conducted between July 2019 and December 2023 by way of an open approach to the market. Of the 73 procurements examined in detail by the ANAO, 29 per cent involved competition where the department had not identified a preferred supplier prior to inviting quotes.

11. Procurement decision-making was not sufficiently accountable and was not transparent. Procurement practices have fallen short of ethical standards, with DFAT initiating inquiries of the conduct of at least 18 individuals, both employees and contractors, in relation to Australian Passport Office procurement activities examined by the ANAO.

Supporting findings

Open and competitive procurement

12. DFAT did not appropriately plan the procurement activities for its Australian Passport Office. There was no overarching procurement strategy. The department engaged a contractor to develop a multi-year procurement strategy that was never completed. Overall, only 15 per cent of the 62 approaches to market examined by the ANAO met the minimum requirements at planning stage. (See paragraphs 2.3 to 2.20)

13. None of the 243 contracts totalling $476.5 million the APO entered between 1 July 2019 and 31 December 2023 was let via an approach to the open market.

14. DFAT’s AusTender reporting indicates the APO procures by open tender from a panel arrangement 71 per cent of the time. The ANAO examined 53 contracts DFAT had reported this way and identified that for 15 contracts (28 per cent) the APO had deviated from the panel arrangement to the extent that the approach constituted a limited tender. The ANAO also examined 12 contracts valued over the $80,000 threshold reported by DFAT as let by limited tender. The approach taken for six of these contracts (50 per cent) did not demonstrably satisfy the limited tender condition or exemption from open tender that had been reported by DFAT. The department’s approach is inconsistent with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules which, in turn, reflect the requirements of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement (DFAT is the Australian Government entity responsible for Australia’s international trade agreements). (See paragraphs 2.22 to 2.50)

15. A competitive approach was used to establish only 29 per cent of the 73 contracts tested by number or 25 per cent by value. This involved the APO inviting more than one supplier to quote in a process that did not have a pre-determined outcome. On 19 occasions the procurement approach was not genuine as the purported competitive process did not, in fact, involve competition. (See paragraphs 2.51 to 2.70)

16. For 14 per cent of contracts tested, evaluation criteria were included in request documentation with those same criteria used to assess submissions. (See paragraphs 2.72 to 2.77)

17. There was not a documented approval to approach the market for 36 per cent of the 73 contracts examined in detail by the ANAO. Advice provided to approvers on the outcomes of approaches to market in most cases did not demonstrate how value for money was considered to have been achieved. Three-quarters of the time the approval was requested by an embedded contractor, often populating a template as an administrative function and sometimes at the direction of the approver telling them what to recommend.

18. One quarter of the time, approval was given within a week of the expected contract start date. A 2022–23 practice of approving commitments on the understanding that the Department of Finance would later agree to additional funding to cover the costs was not sound financial management. (See paragraphs 2.79 to 2.104)

Accountable and transparent decision-making

19. For 71 per cent of the procurements examined by the ANAO, an appropriate contractual arrangement was in place prior to works commencing and after approval had been obtained to enter the arrangement. (See paragraphs 3.3 to 3.13)

20. Sound and timely advice was not provided to inform decisions about whether to vary contracts. In aggregate, the contracts the APO entered between 1 July 2019 and 30 June 2023 doubled in value during that period through contract amendment. The approval records for contract variations did not include advice on how value for money would be achieved and, for a number of high value contracts, approval was sought after costs were incurred. A quarter of the variations tested were entered after the related services had commenced and/or costs incurred. (See paragraphs 3.14 to 3.35)

21. ANAO analysis of AusTender data between 1 July 2019 and 30 June 2023 indicated that DFAT did not meet the Commonwealth Procurement Rules requirement to report contracts and amendments within 42 days of execution at least 22 per cent of the time. The extent of non-compliance increased to 44 per cent when the analysis was based on ANAO examination of the departmental records in a sample of 230 contracts and amendments. The AusTender reporting of 70 APO contracts examined was largely accurate. The reported descriptions of the goods or services procured was usually applicable but was also usually lacking in detail. The reported reasons given for 112 contract amendments examined did not contain sufficient detail to meet the minimum instructions in the AusTender reporting guide 81 per cent of the time. (See paragraphs 3.37 to 3.52)

22. Procurement activities fell short of ethical requirements. In response to ethical findings made by the ANAO in relation to a number of the procurements examined as part of this performance audit, the department advised the ANAO that it considers there are clear indications of misconduct involving a number of current or former DFAT officials and contractors as well as clear cultural issues. The department has commenced, or is considering, investigation (or referral) activity in relation to the conduct of at least 18 individuals in relation to various procurements examined by the ANAO. (See paragraphs 3.53 to 3.83)

23. The department’s central procurement team has not exercised sufficient oversight of the APO’s procurement activities. Departmental risk controls that have been documented have not been complied with by the APO and this non-compliance should have been evident to the central procurement team, and addressed. The department also does not have adequate arrangements in place for the identification and reporting of breaches of finance legislation. (See paragraphs 3.85 to 3.105)

Recommendations

Recommendation no. 1

Paragraph 2.21

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade improve its planning of procurement activity for the Australian Passport Office, including but not limited to taking steps to assure itself that procurement planning requirements (internal to the department as well as those required by the Commonwealth Procurement Rules) are being complied with.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 2

Paragraph 2.71

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade strengthen its procurement processes for the Australian Passport Office so that there is an emphasis on the use of genuinely open competition in procurement to deliver value for money outcomes consistent with the requirements and intent of the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 3

Paragraph 2.78

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade include evaluation criteria in request documentation for all procurements undertaken for the Australian Passport Office, and procurement decision-makers ensure those criteria have been applied in the evaluation of which candidate represents the best value for money.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 4

Paragraph 2.106

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to strengthen its procurement policy framework by directly addressing the risk of officials being cultivated or influenced by existing or potential suppliers.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 5

Paragraph 3.36

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade strengthen its controls to ensure any contract variations are consistent with the terms of the original approach to market, and that officials do not vary contracts to avoid competition or other obligations and ethical requirements under the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 6

Paragraph 3.84

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade examine whether procurements not included in the sample examined by the ANAO also include ethical and integrity failures, and subject any such procurements to appropriate investigatory action.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade response: Agreed.

Recommendation no. 7

Paragraph 3.94

The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade strengthen oversight by its central procurement area of the procurement activities of the Australian Passport Office. This should include being represented on the evaluation team for each procurement activity of higher risk or value.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade response: Agreed.

Summary of entity responses

24. The proposed report was provided to DFAT. Extracts of the proposed report were also provided to Alluvial Pty Ltd, Brink’s Australia Pty Ltd, Compas Pty Ltd, Community and Public Sector Union, Customer Driven Solutions Pty Ltd, Datacom Systems (AU) Pty Ltd, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, Department of Finance, Grosvenor Performance Group Pty Ltd, Hays Specialist Recruitment (Australia) Pty Ltd, Mühlbauer ID Services GmbH, Peoplebank Australia Ltd, Procurement Professionals Pty Ltd, Propel Design Pty Ltd, Randstad Pty Ltd, Serco Citizen Services Pty Ltd, Services Australia, UiPath S.R.L, Verizon Australia Pty Ltd and Yardstick Advisory Pty Ltd. The letters of response that were received for inclusion in the audit report are at Appendix 1. Summary responses, where provided, are included below.

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade

The department values the ANAO’s independent review of procurement practices at the Australian Passport Office (APO). The audit came at a time when the department was assessing the effectiveness of the current procurement model. As a result of both reviews, the department’s procurement practices will be amended to improve compliance and efficiency. This will include the Finance Division taking more centralised and direct control over procurement activities, and additional resources to implement changes and provide enhanced oversight.

The ANAO audit highlighted the proactive steps the current Executive Director APO took to address procurement and cultural issues when she commenced with the department in early 2023. Work has continued, leading to the creation of a new Procurement, Finance and Assurance Section within APO. Additionally, the Internal Audit Branch has initiated a wide-ranging internal audit of procurement activities across the department.

Following the ANAO audit report and internal reviews, the department will also revise its Compliance and Assurance Framework as it relates to Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 obligations. The updated Framework will be purpose-built, adopt a risk-based approach, and include effective assurance mechanisms. The department has initiated activities to address specific areas of concern regarding actions of staff.

Compas Pty Ltd

Compas is concerned that the Proposed Report conveys an imputation that it has engaged in conduct that may not be in accordance with the Commonwealth Procurement Rules.

Such an imputation is incorrect.

The relevant evaluation process was an internal DFAT process over which Compas, rightly, had no visibility. Given this, Compas cannot respond to, nor is it privy to, what processes were taken by DFAT to address the Panel Member’s affiliation to it.

Any deficiencies in the evaluation process cannot be attributed to Compas, and the final report should make this expressly clear in its findings. Any failure to do so could result in a reader being under a misapprehension that Compas had the ability to influence the process, did in fact influence the process improperly and, as a result, gained an improper advantage or benefit.

Should such a misrepresentation occur, this would have an unreasonably adverse effect on Compas’ reputation that it has built over nearly 40 years and have a deleterious effect on our business.

Propel Design Pty Ltd

Propel Design notes the extract provided by the ANAO. Propel Design submitted its tender for the procurement in question in accordance with all requirements under the Digital Marketplace (now BUYICT) and was not aware of any individuals appointed to the evaluation panel. We believe our employee was selected as the preferred contractor based on their skills and experience, as set out in their resumé and our responses to the selection criteria.

Key messages from this audit for all Australian Government entities

25. Below is a summary of key messages that have been identified in this audit and may be relevant for the operations of other Australian Government entities.

Group title

Governance

Key learning reference
  • Good governance involves entity leaders developing a culture requiring and supporting actions which are not only in compliance with rule frameworks but also with the intent of those frameworks, including those which set standards for ethical practices.
  • Praising or otherwise rewarding staff for getting contracts in place quickly can influence staff to bypass procurement rules and to direct-source incumbent suppliers. Forward planning and reinforcement of rules and processes can remove or reduce time pressure.
Group title

Procurement

Key learning reference
  • Acting ethically when conducting procurement requires ethical principles to be applied to all actions throughout the entire procurement process and for management action to be taken when ethical issues are identified. It also requires good recordkeeping so that it can be transparently demonstrated that the procurement was conducted ethically.
  • Entities should treat all tenderers, and potential tenderers, in a fair and non-discriminatory manner. This means that entities should undertake genuinely competitive procurements by not identifying a preferred supplier in advance of conducting a procurement process. A practice of inviting market responses when a preferred supplier has already been identified also wastes the other suppliers’ time and resources and reduces trust in the integrity of government procurement.
  • Entities should ensure that their procurement frameworks specifically address how risks of incumbency advantage are managed so that the procurement process is conducted with no bias or favouritism, and to maximise value for money to the Australian Government through competitive selection processes. In addition, the risks of employees and/or contractors having a conflict of interest with potential/actual market respondents, including any incumbent, should be fully considered and addressed.