Introduction

1.1 In May 2021, the Australian Government released the National Soil Strategy (the strategy) as Australia’s first national soil policy.³ It is a 20-year strategy that ‘provides a national vision and shared goals and objectives between the Australian Government and state and territory governments for managing soil across all landscapes’.

1.2 The strategy notes that Australia’s soil provides the nation with essential ecosystem and production services, contributing an estimated value of around $930 billion per year to the economy. The strategy’s national vision is for:

Australia’s soil to be recognised and valued as a key national asset by all stakeholders. It is better understood and sustainably managed, to benefit and secure our environment, economy, food, infrastructure, health, biodiversity, and communities – now and in the future.

1.3 The strategy has three overarching goals to be achieved by 2041.

• Goal 1: Prioritise soil health.
• Goal 2: Empower soil innovation and stewards.
• Goal 3: Strengthen soil knowledge and capability.

1.4 Each goal specifies a list of objectives and high-level progress measures. A full list of goals, objectives and progress measures is in Appendix 3.

1.5 The strategy was developed as a response to a 2017 recommendation from Australia’s first National Soils Advocate⁴, who called for the government to ‘[a]gree to a national soils policy with the objective of maintaining and restoring the health of the Australian agricultural landscape’. On 18 July 2019, the Prime Minister announced that the government will support the National Soils Advocate’s recommendation. At the meeting of the Agriculture Ministers’ Forum (AGMIN)⁵ on 25 October 2019, the ministers ‘agreed to collaborate on a national soils strategy led by the Commonwealth’.

1.6 The strategy is the joint responsibility of the Australian Government and state and territory governments. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry (the department) is the Australian Government entity leading the design and implementation of the strategy.⁶ The 2021–22 Budget provided the department with $5.9 million over four years to implement the strategy, including to develop a National Soil Action Plan (the national action plan) by June 2022.

Commonwealth Interim Action Plan

1.7 The strategy was released alongside the Commonwealth Interim Action Plan (the interim action plan) in May 2021. The interim action plan ‘outlines the Australian Government’s commitment to implementing the National Soil Strategy’. It listed 13 initiatives funded in the 2021–22 Budget to be implemented by the Australian Government to contribute to the objectives of the strategy in the lead up to the release of the national action plan. Two of these initiatives are being delivered by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW), and one by the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA).

1.8 Nine of the 13 initiatives in the interim action plan were announced under a $214.9 million package of measures to support the strategy (National Soil Package). The interim action plan also outlined 11 existing initiatives that support the strategy, such as the National Landcare Program⁷ funded under the Natural Heritage Trust (NHT).⁸

National Soil Action Plan

1.9 The strategy states that the national action plan would be developed by June 2022 and ‘detail specific actions (programs and activities) required to achieve the vision, goals and objectives of the Strategy’. The national action plan was launched on 28 November 2023, replacing the interim action plan. The national action plan covers a period of five years, with a new action plan for the next five-year period to be developed following evaluation of the first action plan.

1.10 The national action plan outlines four priority actions to achieve by 2028.

1. Develop an agreed national framework to support the measurement, monitoring, mapping, reporting and sharing of soil state and trend information to inform best practice management, decision-making and future investment in soil.

2. Partners to develop a holistic policy and strategy approach where soil function is recognised, valued, and protected for the environment, economy, food, infrastructure, health, biodiversity, and communities.

3. Accelerate the adoption of land use and management practices that protects soil to improve soil condition trends.

4. Identify and develop soil workforce and capabilities needed to meet current and future challenges for Australia and the region.

1.11 In the May 2023 Budget, $56 million in funding was announced for soil initiatives under the national action plan, comprising:

• $36 million through the NHT to: design and deliver a new National Soil Monitoring Program; make improvements to the Australian National Soil Information System (ANSIS); and continue to support the Regional Soil Coordinators Program and the National Soil Community of Practice; and
• $20 million ‘to fund states and territories to deliver initiatives that contribute to priority actions of the National Soil Action Plan’.

Rationale for undertaking the audit

1.12 The strategy sets out a national vision, goals and objectives to be delivered over 20 years, including to recognise, better understand and sustainably manage soil as a key national asset. The 2021–22 Budget provided $214.9 million in funding over four years for the National Soil Package, including $5.9 million to develop the national action plan and implement the strategy. The May 2023 Budget allocated a further $56 million to drive outcomes under the national action plan.

1.13 This audit examined the effectiveness of the department’s design and early implementation of the strategy and the national action plan. It provides assurance to the Parliament over the department’s design processes; arrangements in place to implement the strategy; and delivery of soil initiatives listed in the interim action plan.

Audit approach

Audit objective, criteria and scope

1.14 The audit objective was to examine the effectiveness of the design and early implementation of the National Soil Strategy and the supporting National Soil Action Plan.

1.15 To form a conclusion against the objective, the following high-level criteria were adopted.

• Were appropriate design processes established to support the achievement of the government’s objectives?
• Are effective arrangements in place to support implementation?

1.16 The audit focused on the department’s design and implementation of the strategy and the national action plan, including the delivery of the initiatives listed in the interim action plan. The audit did not examine the actions that are being implemented by state and territory governments and non-government and industry organisations; the effectiveness of initiatives listed in the interim and national action plans; or the delivery of other soil-related initiatives that are not part of the strategy or the interim and national action plans.

Audit methodology

1.17 The audit methodology included:

• examination of the department’s documentation;
• assessment of the implementation of initiatives listed in the interim action plan;
• meetings with DCCEEW and NIAA to discuss the initiatives they are delivering; and
• meetings with relevant departmental staff.

1.18 The ANAO also received three submissions from the public via the citizen contribution facility on the ANAO website.

1.19 The audit was conducted in accordance with ANAO Auditing Standards at a cost to the ANAO of approximately $271,606.

1.20 The team members for this audit were Se Eun Lee, Jordan Hallam, Jade Ryan and Corinne Horton.

2.1 The department⁹ led the development of the strategy and the national action plan in conjunction with state and territory governments and other stakeholders. The Australian Public Service Commission’s (APSC) ‘Delivering Great Policy’ model¹⁰ includes the following key elements that contribute to developing great policy advice:

• ensuring that policy and program design is informed by a robust evidence-base, sound analysis, and clear links to the achievement of policy objectives;
• involving key stakeholders within and outside the APS to ensure that government initiatives are reflective of diverse views and have broad support¹¹; and
• identifying and considering the key risks to design and implementation at early stages of policy development to support informed decision-making as initiatives are established and implemented.¹²

Was the development of the strategy and the national action plan evidence-based?

Development of the strategy

Recommendation from the National Soils Advocate

2.2 In December 2017, the National Soils Advocate¹³ delivered a report to the Prime Minister titled ‘Restore the Soil: Prosper the Nation’ (the report).¹⁴ The report drew together the National Soils Advocate’s consultations since June 2013 ‘to make a series of recommendations to improve the health of Australia’s soil, water and vegetation for the benefit of all Australians’.

2.3 The report noted that ‘Australian soil is a major national asset’ that is essential for food production, carbon and water cycles, and biodiversity, but that ‘[t]here is a very limited appreciation of the connection between these outcomes and sustainable soil management’. It stated that:

There is a need for a better coordinated and more focussed national effort to ensure that the critical issue of sustainable soil management is given sufficient attention. I believe that a national approach to soils is needed, and that this should be driven through the development of a comprehensive National Soils Policy which integrates soil, vegetation and water management to maintain and restore the health of Australia’s agricultural lands.

2.4 The report made 10 recommendations, including for the government to:

Agree to a national soils policy with the objective of maintaining and restoring the health of the Australian agricultural landscape through a coordinated and integrated approach involving the portfolios responsible for agriculture, environment, health, education, defence, Australian Aid, Indigenous affairs, regional development and industry.

2.5 On 18 July 2019, the Prime Minister announced that the government will support the National Soils Advocate’s recommendation. On 25 October 2019, the Agriculture Ministers’ Forum (AGMIN)¹⁵ ‘agreed to collaborate on a national soils strategy led by the Commonwealth’.

Development and approval of the strategy

2.6 In January 2020, the department provided two briefs to the Minister for Agriculture outlining initial options for a national soil strategy. It contained three recommendations proposing funding in the 2020–21 Budget, including a proposal for $5.5 million in funding over five years to develop a national soil strategy.

2.7 The recommendations were approved by the minister in February 2020; however, these proposals did not proceed to the 2020–21 Budget process. The department commenced working on developing the strategy without receiving additional funding. The strategy was released with the 2021–22 Budget on 11 May 2021, along with a package of soil initiatives to implement the strategy. The development process is summarised in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Timeline of the strategy development process

Source: ANAO summary of the strategy development process.

Evidence and advice underpinning the strategy

2.8 The strategy sets out three goals and 12 objectives ‘aimed at restoring and protecting soil nationally, by driving collaborative and coordinated on-ground action, research, education, monitoring and governance’. Each objective specifies a number of high-level ‘progress measures’. A full list of goals, objectives and progress measures is in Appendix 3.

2.9 The department advised the ANAO in August 2023 that the goals and objectives of the strategy ‘were determined through workshops and a consultation process with states/territories and their stakeholders, Commonwealth agencies, and other expert groups’. The stakeholder consultation process to develop the strategy is examined further at paragraphs 2.61 to 2.68.

2.10 In addition to stakeholder consultation, the department drew upon the following evidence sources to inform its development of the strategy:

• a preliminary stocktake of soils work across the country, conducted by the department in early 2020; and
• the 2014 National Soil Research, Development and Extension (RD&E) Strategy and the independent review of its implementation undertaken in 2019.

2.11 The department developed a draft scope statement on a ‘National Soil Stocktake 2020’ in February 2020. The draft scope statement outlined a three-phase work program to deliver a ‘final analytical report’ that will ‘provide a clear national picture of significant research, development, extension and management activities’ in soil, and identify areas to improve effectiveness and efficiency ‘in order to address a range of important policy issues under a comprehensive national soil strategy’. The three-phase work program comprised:

• Phase 1: Report developed by the department from the feedback provided by states/territories on their soil related work.
• Phase 2: Report developed by the department that builds on the soil stocktake undertaken for the National [Soil RD&E] Strategy. This will involve going back to the soil researchers and managers surveyed to ask them what work has been completed since they were survey[ed] last.
• Phase 3: Report developed by consultant that reviews the existing data portals being used and the soil monitoring data collected.

2.12 Comments in the draft document noted that the first of the three phases of work had been completed. Phase 2 stocktake activities were not undertaken. Phase 3 was delivered as part of the National Soil Data Review program following the launch of the strategy. The final analytical report was not delivered.

2.13 The results of the phase 1 stocktake were summarised in a 2020 discussion paper, ‘Developing a National Soil Strategy’¹⁶, which noted that many jurisdictions had not developed a dedicated soil strategy, and that they identified a wide range of priorities and ideas for a national soil strategy. The discussion paper also identified ‘key investment and diplomatic activities undertaken by the Australian Government’ in relation to soil, such as the National Landcare Program and the Emissions Reduction Fund.

2.14 The National Soil RD&E Strategy was published in 2014 under the National Primary Industries Research, Development & Extension Framework.¹⁷ The discussion paper noted that an independent review of the implementation of the National Soil RD&E Strategy was conducted and completed in December 2019, which ‘presents an opportunity for a national soil strategy to build on, and enhance, the work completed under the Soil RDE Strategy’. A brief to the minister in May 2020 also stated that the draft strategy ‘will build off’ the National Soil RD&E Strategy.

2.15 The 2019 review outlined progress in implementing the National Soil RD&E Strategy to date and made three recommendations to improve communication and clarify roles and responsibilities for implementation, including for monitoring and reporting on progress. The findings from the review did not inform the development of the strategy. For example, barriers to implementation or key gaps in soil RD&E identified by the review were not discussed or incorporated into the new soil strategy that was being developed.

2.16 The status and relevance of the National Soil RD&E Strategy to the new soil strategy being developed was first discussed with stakeholders in August 2020, and remained unresolved as at the conclusion of the development of the national action plan in May 2023.

2.17 There was no clear evidence-base for the development of the National Soil Strategy. The goals and objectives of the strategy were not informed by analysis of prior and existing work, critical gaps in government investment, and future priorities for soil — for example, based on the implementation of the National Soil RD&E Strategy to date.

2.18 The department’s advice to the minister on the development of the strategy from January 2020 to April 2021 provided limited evidence to support the need for Australian Government investment, or where this investment should be best targeted, especially in light of existing programs such as the National Landcare Program and the Future Drought Fund. For instance, while a number of ministerial briefs stated that there was a need for greater national coordination and leadership to more effectively deliver soil outcomes across Australia, there was no further evidence to support the assertion that soil outcomes were not being achieved, or that national coordination would help better achieve these outcomes.

2.19 Although reports were commissioned by the department in 2021 to inform the development of some of the initiatives proposed to implement the strategy¹⁸, briefs provided to the minister on the proposed package of initiatives did not present analysis of specific gaps or problems to support the need for these initiatives. The ministerial briefs did not outline the expected contribution of the proposed initiatives towards the goals and objectives of the strategy. There was no information provided to the minister on how outcomes of these initiatives would be measured or evaluated.

2.20 When developing a new policy, entities should be clear on the intent of the policy, including clearly defining the problem they are trying to solve, being able to articulate why government intervention is needed, and being clear on the intended outcomes and how they will be measured. Policy development should also be informed by evidence both qualitative and quantitative, and incorporate lessons learned from the past.¹⁹

2.21 Records of these activities should be retained in accordance with government record keeping requirements, including through administrative actions such as machinery of government changes as outlined in the APSC and Department of Finance’s Machinery of Government changes: a guide for entities.²⁰ A 2022 ANAO audit of the department had noted that its record keeping policy was first published in August 2014 and not reviewed or updated.²¹ The department’s revised record keeping policy was approved in October 2023 and made available to staff in December 2023.

Development of the Commonwealth Interim Action Plan

2.26 The strategy states that:

Prior to the release of the National Soil Strategy Action Plan in June 2022, the Australian Government will implement soil-related measures which contribute to the objectives of this Strategy under a Commonwealth Interim Action Plan, to be released alongside the Strategy.

2.27 The interim action plan was developed concurrently with the strategy and released at the same time in May 2021.²² The interim action plan outlines 13 ‘new actions’ to be implemented by the Australian Government. These include the nine soil initiatives that were announced as part of the National Soil Package in the 2021–22 Budget.

2.28 Two of the 13 initiatives are being implemented by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW), and one by the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA). Paragraphs 3.20 to 3.30 outline implementation of the initiatives in the interim action plan in more detail.

2.29 On 22 February 2021, the department sought information from selected Australian Government entities, via a template feedback form, on whether the entities had any ‘current and active’ or ‘in development’ programs ‘that align with the progress measures of the National Soil Strategy and might be included in the Interim Commonwealth Action Plan’.

2.30 The department did not keep records on how many entities returned the feedback form. The department saved one internal response from its Waste Policy and Planning Branch. The ANAO received two more responses from the NIAA and Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) in DCCEEW²³ during the audit. The department informed the ANAO that:

After conducting a search, the department was unable to locate any further records of information received from agencies as input to the Commonwealth Interim Action Plan. The department is unable to confirm if additional inputs were received.

2.31 Two of the programs mentioned by the AAD and NIAA as being ‘in development’ were incorporated into the interim action plan: the ‘Fast Track to Clean Up Antarctica’ project; and the seven-year extension of the Indigenous Rangers Program.

2.32 The ‘Fast Track to Clean Up Antarctica’ project is listed in the interim action plan with funding of $2.5 million. The project was not funded in the 2021–22 Budget.

2.33 The NIAA informed the ANAO in July 2023 that the funding listed in the interim action plan for the Indigenous Rangers Program ($761 million) reflected a figure that had not been finalised. The funding allocated for the seven-year extension of the Indigenous Rangers Program was $746.1 million, as jointly announced by the Minster for Indigenous Australians and the Minister for the Environment on 10 March 2020. The funding amount was increased in July 2023 to $748.3 million.

2.34 There were two other initiatives listed in the interim action plan that were not part of the National Soil Package:

• National Soil Carbon Innovation Challenge, which is a competitive grant program being delivered by DCCEEW; and
• Future Drought Fund: Drought Resilient Soils and Landscapes, which is a grant program under the Future Drought Fund being delivered by the department.

2.35 The program teams were largely unaware of how the initiatives they were delivering came to be listed in the interim action plan. Both teams noted that they had engaged with the team developing the strategy at various points due to linkages to soil in their programs.

2.36 In July and August 2023, and in response to the draft report in December 2023, the department advised the ANAO that the interim action plan was intended to be ‘a summary of existing activities that support soil undertaken by the Commonwealth rather than any deliberately designed approach to address the National Soil Strategy’. The department stated the initiatives listed in the interim action plan were ‘not delivered or funded under the auspice of it [emphasis in original]’, and that the interim action plan was not intended to be the mechanism for driving the actions.

2.37 This is inconsistent with the department’s 2021–22 Budget proposal to the Australian Government, seeking funding for a package of measures to ‘implement the National Soil Strategy and the associated Commonwealth Government Action Plan’. The proposal stated that the interim action plan ‘sets out immediate practical actions outlined in this proposal’ for implementation, as well as providing information on existing measures. The department received $5.9 million over four years to implement the strategy and the interim action plan in the 2021–22 Budget. Implementation of the initiatives in the interim action plan is examined at paragraphs 3.20 to 3.30.

Development of the national action plan

2.38 The strategy states that:

By June 2022, the National Soil Strategy Action Plan (the National Action Plan) will be developed to implement this 20-year Strategy. The National Action Plan will detail specific actions (programs and activities) required to achieve the vision, goals and objectives of the Strategy. These actions will meet the SMART principles – that is, Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound.

2.39 The strategy also notes that the national action plan will replace the interim action plan once it is published, with ‘[a]ctions from the Interim Action Plan [to] be integrated into and inform the actions in the National Action Plan’.

Development and approval of the national action plan

2.40 The department commenced working on drafting the national action plan in August 2021. It established the National Soil Strategy Implementation Steering Committee (NSSISC) and the National Action Plan Working Group (NAPWG) for consultation and input during the development process. The department chaired both bodies. The operation of the two bodies and the stakeholder consultation process for the national action plan are examined further at paragraphs 2.69 to 2.81.

2.41 As specified in the strategy, the national action plan was intended to be developed by June 2022. The terms of reference for both the NSSISC and the NAPWG specified the intention to develop the national action plan by 30 June 2022, and an initial workplan presented to both bodies outlined a pathway to meet the timeframe. This timeframe was not met. The timeframe was not raised or discussed at the NSSISC or NAPWG meetings held after June 2022. A revised timeframe was not proposed for finalising the national action plan at either the NSSISC or the NAPWG.

2.42 The department advised the ANAO in June 2023 that it delayed the development of the national action plan during the caretaker period for the 2022 federal election in April 2022, and during the implementation of the machinery of government changes of July 2022.

2.43 There were further delays to finalising the national action plan during the final endorsement process. The department advised the ANAO in July and August 2023 that the launch of the national action plan was being delayed until all partners provided ‘statements of support’ to be included in the national action plan, and for states and territories to brief their ministers on the upcoming launch of the national action plan.

2.44 The department briefed the minister in June 2023 regarding potential sensitivities relating to the delay, in a ministerial brief that was returned unsigned pending finalisation of the national action plan. The delay was noted as a potential sensitivity in the final approval brief for the launch of the national action plan, which was signed by the minister on 27 November 2023.

2.45 The national action plan was launched on 28 November 2023, replacing the interim action plan. The department advised the ANAO in December 2023 that the actions in the interim action plan that are still being implemented remain relevant to the national action plan. Table 2.1 outlines how the initiatives in the interim action plan are referenced in the national action plan. Three initiatives that are in progress are not referenced in the national action plan or its website.

Table 2.1: Initiatives in interim and national action plans

Note a: These initiatives were not part of the package of measures funded to support the National Soil Strategy in the 2021–22 Budget.

Source: ANAO analysis of initiatives in the interim and national action plans.

Assessment of actions in the national action plan

2.46 The national action plan outlines four priority actions for 2023 to 2028. Each priority action contains ‘statements of commitment’, comprising a list of activities to be delivered by national action plan partners by 2028. A full list of statements of commitment under each priority action is in Appendix 4.

2.47 The strategy states that the actions in the national action plan will meet the SMART principles — ‘that is, Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound’. The ANAO examined whether the four priority actions and the statements of commitments meet the SMART criteria, defined as:

• Specific: Actions are clearly defined, use simple language, and are not vague.
• Measurable: Actions specify how achievement and success will be measured.
• Achievable: Actions are realistic and consider available resources, authority and control.
• Relevant: Actions are aligned to the goals and objectives of the National Soil Strategy.
• Time-bound: Actions include specific timeframes for the completion.

2.48 Of the four priority actions, the ANAO assessed two as meeting all elements of the SMART criteria (Table 2.2).

Table 2.2: Assessment of priority actions in the national action plan

Key: ◆ The action meets all elements of the criteria, or a reasonable level of consideration has been given to majority of the elements of the criteria. ▲ The action meets some of the elements of the criteria. ■ The action does not meet any of the elements of the criteria.

Source: ANAO analysis of priority actions in the national action plan.

2.49 Of the 22 statements of commitment, five (23 per cent) were assessed as meeting all elements of the SMART criteria (Table 2.3).

Table 2.3: Assessment of statements of commitment in the national action plan

Key: ◆ The action meets all elements of the criteria, or a reasonable level of consideration has been given to majority of the elements of the criteria. ▲ The action meets some of the elements of the criteria. ■ The action does not meet any of the elements of the criteria.

Note: Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

Source: ANAO analysis of statements of commitment in the national action plan.

2.50 While all priority actions and statements of commitment were assessed as relevant and time-bound, most were assessed as either partially meeting or not meeting the criteria for ‘specific’ or ‘measurable’. The lack of specificity and measurability also affected the ANAO’s assessment of whether the action was achievable.

2.51 The lack of specificity and measurability of the actions was a recurring issue raised by stakeholders during the development of the national action plan (see paragraphs 2.82 to 2.85). The department advised the ANAO in December 2023 that the national action plan was designed to be a ‘higher level document’ to provide flexibility and ensure support from states and territories.

2.52 The strategy states that the national action plan ‘will include specific and measurable targets to underpin the progress measures and ensure the success of the Strategy can be clearly measured, monitored and communicated’. The national action plan does not contain specific and measurable targets against the progress measures. Performance monitoring for the strategy is examined further at paragraphs 3.39 to 3.46.

Evidence and advice underlying the national action plan

2.53 As with the strategy, there was a limited evidence-base used by the department to support the development of the national action plan.

2.54 The department undertook a gap analysis in March 2022 to inform the second draft of the national action plan. It outlined, under each of the three goals of the strategy:

• what is currently happening; and
• gaps that could be filled with future actions.

2.55 The department did not document its approach to analysis and the evidence used to determine the scope of current activities and gaps. For example, the document identified a potential gap in relation to ‘fundamental science and research into soil physics, and the soil microbiome and its influence on soil condition’. The document did not outline evidence indicating that there is a lack of such research being undertaken, or the need for such research to be undertaken more frequently.

2.56 The second draft of the national action plan contained new sections outlining some of the gaps and potential future actions identified in the gap analysis. These sections were removed in the next draft of the national action plan. Changes made to draft versions of the national action plan are examined further at paragraphs 2.76 to 2.78.

2.57 A spreadsheet titled ‘NSAP support document – References list’ was developed in July 2022. It outlined a list of 31 reference sources, such as books, reports and government publications, on topics relating to agriculture, environment, soil, sustainability, climate and other matters, for incorporation in the national action plan. None of the 31 reference sources in the spreadsheet are listed in the national action plan reference list.

Link to strategy’s goals and objectives

2.58 The national action plan states that ‘[e]ach priority action contributes to multiple objectives and goals of the strategy’. The linkages between the priority actions and the strategy’s goals and objectives are not outlined in the national action plan.

2.59 In March 2023, the department mapped the four priority actions to each of the three goals of the strategy, as summarised in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4: Alignment between the strategy’s goals and priority actions

Source: ANAO summary of departmental documentation.

2.60 In April 2024, the department reviewed and updated its website to specify the linkages between the national action plan’s priority actions and the strategy’s overarching goals.

Was there appropriate engagement with stakeholders during the design processes?

Stakeholder consultation arrangements for the development of the strategy

2.61 The department identified relevant stakeholders for the development of the strategy, and maintained stakeholder lists until the release of the strategy in May 2021. The list included stakeholders from within the department, the Australian Government, states and territories, non-government organisations and members of the public.

2.62 The department established six key stakeholder consultation arrangements for the development of the strategy (Table 2.5).

Table 2.5: Stakeholder consultation arrangements for the development of the strategy

Source: ANAO analysis of departmental documentation.

Initial consultation on strategy’s objectives

2.63 The department drafted a discussion paper on developing a national soil strategy in 2020 (see paragraph 2.13). It outlined five proposed outcomes and associated actions for the strategy. The discussion paper was provided to the attendees of the 2020 state and territory workshops to support discussion on proposed objectives of the strategy, and published online to inform the first public consultation held from August to September 2020.

2.64 The department received 254 responses to the first public survey. The survey respondents were asked to rate the five proposed objectives for the strategy outlined in the discussion paper, plus three others identified at the state and territory workshops, by importance. Most survey respondents agreed that all proposed strategy objectives were ‘extremely important’ or ‘very important’ (Figure 2.2).

Figure 2.2: Public survey — importance of proposed strategy objectives

Source: ANAO analysis of departmental documentation.

2.65 The final goals and objectives of the strategy largely reflect the proposed national objectives identified as the most important by respondents in the public survey.

Consultation on draft versions of the strategy

2.66 The NSSSC was established on 27 August 2020 to provide advice and support to AGMIN²⁴ on the development of the strategy. Membership of the NSSSC comprised the department as chair, and representatives from state and territory governments and the National Soils Advocate. The NSSSC received and considered seven drafts of the strategy between November 2020 and April 2021. It ceased operations in July 2021 following the launch of the strategy.

2.67 Stakeholders, both within the NSSSC and externally, advised the department that the timeframes specified by the department for feedback were very short. The department acknowledged the ‘tight timelines with the development of the strategy’ at the fourth NSSSC meeting in February 2021. At the ninth and last meeting of the NSSSC in July 2021, the department ‘emphasised that the consultative groups [for the development of the national action plan] will allow more frequent and broader consultation’.

2.68 Table 2.6 outlines the timeframes provided by the department for stakeholder engagement opportunities during the development of the strategy. See paragraph 2.80 for analysis on timeframes for feedback during the development of the national action plan.

Table 2.6: Timeframes for feedback during the development of the strategy

Note a: The fifth and sixth drafts were omitted from this analysis. No due date was given for feedback of these drafts by the department, other than ‘as soon as possible’. The changes in these drafts were either stylistic or related to case studies and were not substantive changes to the strategy.

Note b: The duration of the consultation period was calculated by the ANAO by considering when the department first sent a communication requesting feedback, and the deadline given by the department for feedback.

Note c: The department received and considered feedback sent by respondents after the deadline provided.

Source: ANAO analysis of departmental documentation.

Stakeholder consultation for the development of the National Soil Action Plan

2.69 The department established five stakeholder consultation arrangements for the development of the national action plan (Table 2.7).

Table 2.7: Stakeholder consultation arrangements for the development of the national action plan

Note a: 17 May 2023 was the last meeting of the NSSISC that focused on development of the national action plan. The NSSISC is still current. It met on 22 February 2024 to discuss next steps for the national action plan and the role of the committee going forward.

Source: ANAO analysis of departmental documentation.

NSSISC and NAPWG

2.70 Following the cessation of the NSSSC in July 2021, the department established the NSSISC in August 2021. The NSSISC was ‘responsible for overseeing the development of the National Action Plan by 30 June 2022 by the National Action Plan Working Group’.

2.71 Membership of the committee consisted of representatives from state and territory governments, Australian Government entities, the soil science and research community, not-for-profit organisations, Natural Resource Management (NRM) organisations, and industry bodies. Nine meetings of the NSSISC were held from 26 August 2021 to 17 May 2023 to develop the national action plan. At its tenth meeting held on 22 February 2024 following the launch of the national action plan, the NSSISC discussed the next steps for the implementation of the national action plan and the committee’s role going forward.

2.72 The NAPWG was established in September 2021 to support the development of the national action plan. Membership of the NAPWG included the department, and representatives from each state and territory government; industry; research organisations; Rural Research and Development Corporations; and Indigenous soil stakeholders. Eight meetings of the NAPWG were held from 21 September 2021 to 30 November 2022. Minutes were not documented for NAPWG meetings 3 to 6.

2.73 The department chaired both bodies. The NSSISC received updates from the NAPWG on the development of the national action plan from its third meeting in February 2022 until its sixth meeting in September 2022. In November 2022, a joint meeting of the NSSISC and NAPWG was held to discuss the draft national action plan in detail.

2.74 The department developed eight versions of the national action plan between February 2022 and June 2023. Of these, six were circulated to stakeholders and five received feedback from more than one stakeholder.

Consultation on priority actions

2.75 The priority actions in the national action plan were developed in consultation with stakeholders through an iterative process. Throughout the consultation process, the department collated the feedback received into high-level themes and discussed how it proposed to address them with NSSISC members.

2.76 As noted at paragraph 2.56, the second draft of the national action plan outlined potential future actions required to address the gaps identified through the department’s March 2022 gap analysis. These sections were removed in the next draft of the action plan and replaced with five priority actions to be delivered by 2027. Following further feedback from the NAPWG, a sixth priority action was added to the fourth draft of the action plan (see Table 2.8).

2.77 The six priority actions were released for public consultation from September to November 2022. There were 57 responses to the public survey²⁵, with the majority of respondents supporting the six priority actions (Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.3: Public survey respondents on whether they support the proposed priority actions

Source: ANAO analysis of public survey response.

2.78 At a joint meeting of the NSSISC and NAPWG held on 30 November 2022, the department presented its analysis of feedback provided by stakeholders for each of the six priority actions. Based on the feedback received, the department proposed to consolidate the six priority actions into four (Table 2.8).

Table 2.8: Implementation of feedback of the proposed priority actions

Source: ANAO summary of departmental documentation.

2.79 Further changes were made to the four priority actions following this meeting to incorporate feedback from the NSSISC and NAPWG members. The final priority actions, along with ‘statements of commitments’ that outline activities to be delivered by 2028, are listed in full in Appendix 4.

2.80 From the second NAPWG meeting of October 2021 until the public consultation in mid-2022, stakeholders continued to raise concerns with the department that timeframes for consultation were too short. The timeframes provided for feedback on the draft national action plans circulated to NSSISC and NAPWG members were between seven and 14 days in duration. The public consultation, initially planned to take place over four weeks, was extended to six weeks in response to feedback that this timeframe was too short.

Recurring themes in feedback

2.82 During the development of the strategy and the national action plan, there were four recurring themes in the feedback provided by stakeholders. The department undertook additional work and proposed changes to address these recurring themes (Table 2.9).

Table 2.9: Recurring themes in feedback provided by stakeholders

Key: ◆ Feedback was addressed. ▲ Feedback was not fully addressed. ■ Feedback was not addressed.

Note a: Different stakeholders with different specialities and interests had different perspectives on which areas should link more to soil. Consistent across all relevant feedback was that soil linkages to other areas should be explored and strengthened.

Note b: Priority action 2 is: ‘Partners to develop a holistic policy and strategy approach where soil function is recognised, valued, and protected for the environment, economy, food, infrastructure, health, biodiversity, and communities’.

Source: ANAO analysis of departmental documentation.

2.83 The department did not address the recurring feedback that the goals, objectives and progress measures in the strategy, and the actions in the national action plan, were ‘very broad and need to be made more tangible and measurable’, including that the priority actions did not expand on ‘how [they] will be actioned or implemented’.

2.84 The fourth draft of the national action plan, which was the version released for public consultation from September to November 2022, received the most extensive feedback with 76 responses provided to the department via the public survey platform on its website, email and written submissions.²⁶ Of these, 22 stakeholders (29 per cent) commented on the lack of implementation details in the action plan, with various respondents noting that the national action plan appeared to be ‘more of a call to action’, ‘a suggestion for focus’, ‘a guideline’, or a ‘statement of intent or direction’, than a plan to deliver concrete actions.

2.85 At the 22 February 2024 meeting of the NSSISC, the department proposed to the members that an ‘implementation progress tracker’ be developed, containing more details on the individual partner actions contributing to the four priorities of the national action plan, including key performance indicators, timeframes and allocated resources where appropriate. The NSSISC agreed for the department to commence developing the document. In April 2024, the department advised the ANAO that it has commenced development of the implementation tracker, and that it is expected to be finalised in mid-2024.

Were risks to design and implementation considered and measures put in place to manage them effectively?

2.86 Section 16 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) requires accountable authorities of entities to establish and maintain systems and appropriate internal controls for the oversight and management of risk. The Commonwealth Risk Management Policy ‘sets out the principles and mandatory requirements for managing risk in undertaking the activities of government’, and requires risk management to be ‘embedded into the decision-making activities of an entity’, including in program and policy design and implementation.²⁷

2.87 The APSC’s ‘Delivering Great Policy’ model emphasises the importance of identifying the key risks of various courses of action when developing policy advice. This enables considerations of risk to be embedded into the decision-making activities of an entity, and supports consistent management of risk when designing and implementing government initiatives.²⁸

2.88 The department drafted a risk assessment for the development of the strategy in June 2020, which was last modified in July 2020. The risk assessment was not finalised or approved.

2.89 The department prepared a risk plan for the development of the national action plan, which was incorporated into a project plan. The project plan, along with the risk plan, was endorsed by the First Assistant Secretary on 20 October 2022. Two risks were identified by the department (Table 2.10). The first risk identified one treatment that did not affect the risk rating. The second risk identified no controls or treatments, and the risk rating was changed from medium to low.

Table 2.10: National action plan risk plan

Note a: Actual risk ratings assess the consequence and likelihood of the risk eventuating, taking into account the effectiveness of the existing controls.

Note b: Residual risk rating is the revised assessment of risk after additional treatments are put in place.

Note c: The treatment was to commence bilateral contact with senior officials from states and territories to talk through issues and potential partnerships to support the national action plan.

Source: ANAO summary of departmental documentation.

2.90 Risk was not discussed at any of the meetings of the NSSSC, NSSISC or the NAPWG. Risks to the design and implementation of the strategy and national action plan were not communicated to or discussed by the department’s overarching governance bodies: the Executive Board²⁹; the Executive Leadership Team (ELT)³⁰; and the Executive Leadership Team+ (ELT+)³¹. The department’s briefs to the minister did not comment on any risks identified for the development of the strategy or the national action plan, or in relation to the proposed package of initiatives accompanying the strategy. Risk management for the implementation of the strategy is examined further at paragraphs 3.12 to 3.17.

3.1 The National Soil Package provided $214.9 million in funding over four years in the 2021–22 Budget for a suite of soil initiatives to be delivered under the interim action plan. The May 2023 Budget provided a further $56 million to implement the priority actions in the national action plan. The department³² is leading the implementation of the strategy and the two action plans.

3.2 The Australian Public Service Commission’s (APSC) ‘APS Craft’ series and associated resources outline key capabilities required to deliver great policy and services. These include:

• establishing arrangements to oversee implementation progress, enable coordination of responsibilities, and assist in the achievement of desired policy outcomes³³;
• identifying, implementing and delivering policy and services to ensure timely progress towards the achievement of desired outcomes³⁴; and
• establishing monitoring and evaluation arrangements to regularly review and test that outcomes are on track to being achieved.³⁵

Have appropriate oversight arrangements been established?

3.3 The strategy states that it is to be implemented through actions detailed in the national action plan. The strategy and the national action plan are the joint responsibility of the Australian Government and state and territory governments. The national action plan is being delivered in partnership with the soil science and research community, not-for-profit organisations, Natural Resource Management (NRM) organisations, and industry bodies.

3.4 The strategy states that prior to the release of the national action plan, ‘the Australian Government will implement soil-related measures which contribute to the objectives of this Strategy’ under the interim action plan. Of the 13 initiatives listed in the interim action plan, the department is responsible for implementing nine initiatives.

Oversight arrangements for the interim action plan

3.5 The department has arrangements to provide line management oversight for the implementation of individual initiatives it is responsible for delivering under the interim action plan. Three initiatives are being delivered by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water (DCCEEW) and the National Indigenous Australians Agency (NIAA). Figure 3.1 illustrates the division of responsibilities for the initiatives listed in the interim action plan.

Figure 3.1: Entities responsible for initiatives listed in the interim action plan

Note: The ‘Fast Track to Clean Up Antarctica’ project was listed in the interim action plan. It was not funded in the 2021–22 Budget and is not being implemented. It has been omitted from the above diagram.

Source: ANAO summary of implementation arrangements.

3.6 In August 2022, the department developed a proposal to establish arrangements to oversee the delivery of the initiatives in the National Soil Package. The brief to the First Assistant Secretary stated that ‘[d]elivering the National Soil Package requires good governance and delivery practices in accordance with the Project Management Framework’. It proposed that a three-tiered arrangement be established, comprising: a divisional-level policy board chaired by the First Assistant Secretary; an overarching Soil Program Board chaired by the Assistant Secretary; and project management committees chaired by responsible Directors.

3.7 The proposal was approved by the First Assistant Secretary on 31 August 2022. These arrangements were not established. The department advised the ANAO in December 2023 that ‘a decision was made to not proceed with establishing those arrangements’ when ‘it became clear that soils programs would not be expending the funds allocated’. The department was not able to provide analysis of program underspend that informed this decision and advised the ANAO in February 2024 that the decision was ‘made informally’.

3.8 Within the line management approach adopted by the department (illustrated in Figure 3.1), no whole-of-program oversight arrangements were established. The department did not monitor how the initiatives were performing against the overall goals and objectives of the strategy. The department also did not coordinate risk management (see paragraphs 3.12 to 3.17), program linkages (see paragraph 3.25), and reporting (see paragraphs 3.57 to 3.62) across all initiatives.

3.9 There are no arrangements between DCCEEW, NIAA and the department to share information on the progress in implementing the initiatives, including what outcomes are being achieved that may be relevant to the strategy. Paragraphs 3.40 to 3.46 outline the department’s monitoring arrangements.

Oversight arrangements for the national action plan

3.10 Under the Administrative Arrangements Orders, the department is the Australian Government entity responsible for matters relating to ‘soils and other natural resources’. Within the department, the Sustainability, Climate and Strategy Division holds responsibility for the implementation of the national action plan. Its 2023–24 divisional business plan lists as one of its ‘business as usual activities’ the:

Finalisation of the National Soils Action Plan to advance national leadership on the soils agenda and implementation of the National Soils Strategy and support its implementation through engagement with states and territories, research organisations and industry.

3.11 The national action plan lists statements of support from 17 partners to the action plan.³⁶ As at February 2024, there are no arrangements in place with national action plan partners to jointly oversee and coordinate the implementation of the priority actions in the national action plan. On 22 February 2024, the National Soil Strategy Implementation Steering Committee (NSSISC), which oversaw the development of the national action plan (see paragraphs 2.70 to 2.74), agreed for the department to commence developing a suite of documents to support oversight of progress in implementing the national action plan, including a progress tracker and a monitoring and evaluation plan. At the meeting, the NSSISC decided to revisit the role and purpose of the committee in relation to implementation, monitoring and reporting at a later date. In April 2024, the department advised the ANAO that ‘[e]arly indications suggest this will be possible before the end of 2024.’

Management of risk to implementation

3.12 The Department of Finance’s Resource Management Guide 211 on Implementing the Commonwealth Risk Management Policy outlines the importance of constantly identifying and managing risk, including shared risks and risk interdependencies between projects when managing a program. It states that good risk management involves incorporating dependencies and potential negative consequences into the strategic and operational decision making associated with designing and carrying out projects or programs.³⁷

3.13 The department’s Enterprise Risk Management Framework and Policy (ERMFP) was published in August 2020 and was last updated in November 2022. It describes the principles, expectations, accountabilities and responsibilities for staff in applying effective risk management practices, and sets out a model for encouraging a positive risk culture by ensuring that risk management activities are integrated into everyday activities and decision-making.

3.14 The accompanying Enterprise Risk Management Guide (the guide) provides guidance to staff on developing a risk strategy for large programs or business areas. The guide states that a risk strategy should:

• provide a structured and coherent approach to identifying, assessing and managing risk;
• outline a process for regularly updating and reviewing risk assessment;
• describe the roles and responsibilities for all stakeholders and the approach of any performance monitoring, review and reporting; and
• include an approach for the management and oversight of shared risks.

3.15 The department has not established arrangements to manage risk to the implementation of the strategy and the achievement of its goals and objectives. No risk assessments have been conducted and no risk strategy has been established.

3.16 The department had no arrangements to manage risk to the implementation of the interim action plan. There was no risk plan outlining how risk would be identified, assessed, escalated, or managed in a consistent manner across the initiatives. There was no process to aggregate risks identified for individual initiatives and consider them at a whole-of-program level. The department did not assess and manage the overall impact of risks across the initiatives to the achievement of the goals and objectives of the strategy, or make informed decisions on the direction of program delivery more broadly.

3.17 The department has not assessed the impact of the delay in finalising the national action plan to implementation, including to the achievement of the goals and objectives of the strategy. The department has not established arrangements to identify and manage shared risks with national action plan partners. At a meeting held on 22 February 2024, the NSSISC agreed to the department’s proposal to commence developing a risk strategy to ‘identify, evaluate and propose mitigations for collective risks to the implementation of the action plan’. In April 2024, the department advised the ANAO that the risk strategy is expected to be completed in the second half of 2024, ‘noting the need for engagement with the NSSISC before this document can be finalised’.

Are actions under the interim and national action plans being implemented effectively?

Implementation of the interim action plan

3.20 The interim action plan lists 13 initiatives to be implemented by the Australian Government (Table 3.1). Of these:

• nine are being delivered by DAFF;
• two are being delivered by DCCEEW;
• one is being delivered by NIAA; and
• one measure, the ‘Fast Track to Clean Up Antarctica’ project, was not funded in the 2021–22 Budget and is not an existing program (see paragraphs 2.29 to 2.32).

Table 3.1: Initiatives in the interim action plan

Source: ANAO summary of initiatives in the interim action plan.

3.21 Of the 12 initiatives being implemented, 11 had established a project plan (or a similar document) that outlined project background, scope, outputs, outcomes with project targets, high-level milestones, budget and resources. The remaining initiative, the Indigenous Rangers Program, was an extension of funding to an existing program.

3.22 All initiatives had established a risk plan, with eight of 10 initiatives that were being delivered via a procurement or a grant process establishing specific risk assessments for those processes.

3.23 The department engaged a probity adviser to provide probity services in relation to four initiatives in the National Soil Package. Initiatives that were not covered by this service established their own probity arrangements. Two of the initiatives, Australian National Soil Information System (ANSIS) and National Land Management Classification System, did not establish specific probity arrangements as they were respectively intra-government and internal departmental arrangements (Table 3.2).

Table 3.2: Summary of implementation planning

Source: ANAO analysis of implementation planning for initiatives in the interim action plan.

3.24 There was no planning at the whole-of-program level that mapped out the implementation of the 12 initiatives in the interim action plan and how they will contribute to the goals and objectives of the strategy. Each initiative was delivered as a separate program with its own deliverables and outcomes by the respective program teams, rather than as part of a broader package of initiatives intended to achieve a common policy objective.

3.25 There was limited consultation between program teams regarding how the initiatives are intended to link to or support each other, resulting in issues in coordination and timing during implementation. An example of two initiatives is examined in case study 1.

Status of initiatives in the interim action plan

3.26 Of the 12 initiatives being implemented under the interim action plan, seven were funded over two years and due to be completed by 30 June 2023 (see Table 3.1). Of these seven initiatives, five were completed by 30 June 2023. The Enhancing Soil Education and Expertise program and the Smart Farms Small Grants: Soil Extension Services program underwent variations to extend the activity end dates to May 2024 and June 2024 respectively.

3.27 The remaining five initiatives were funded over four years (to 2024–25) or more. These initiatives are in progress. Appendix 5 outlines the implementation status of the 12 initiatives in the interim action plan.

3.28 Not all completed initiatives achieved their planned objectives. There were two initiatives that recorded substantial underspends due to low uptake. The two initiatives are examined in case studies 2 and 3.

3.29 As noted at paragraphs 3.6 to 3.8, there was no overarching arrangement established to oversee the implementation of the initiatives at the whole-of-program level. While there was monthly project status reporting to relevant program delegates on the progress and outcomes of some of the initiatives (see analysis of internal reporting at paragraphs 3.57 to 3.62), these reports were not considered on an aggregate level against the goals and objectives of the strategy.

3.30 There is no information on how the five completed initiatives have contributed to the goals and objectives of the strategy. Similarly, the impact of some of the initiatives, such as those outlined in the case studies above, not meeting or partially meeting their planned targets to the achievement of the strategy’s goals and objectives has not been assessed or managed.

Implementation of the national action plan

3.31 The national action plan outlines four priority actions and a list of ‘statements of commitment’ under each priority action. A full list of statements of commitment under each priority action is in Appendix 4.

3.32 As outlined at paragraph 2.51, the department advised the ANAO in December 2023 that the national action plan was designed to be a ‘higher level document’ to provide ‘flexibility for jurisdictions to implement practical and appropriate initiatives, tailored to achieve local, regional and state-based outcomes, while still contributing progress towards the priority actions’. It does not contain details on who will be delivering the priority actions and commitments, what programs or initiatives those actions will comprise, or how progress will be measured.

3.33 On 13 October 2023, the department advised the ANAO that it is considering proposing to the NSSISC that an implementation plan for the national action plan be developed. At the NSSISC meeting held on 22 February 2024, the department proposed to the NSSISC that an ‘implementation progress tracker’ be developed to ‘track individual partner actions contributing to the 4 priorities of the action plan, key performance indicators, delivery timeframes and allocated resources (where appropriate)’. The NSSISC agreed for the department to commence developing the document.

3.34 Effective implementation planning helps to support the delivery of initiatives on time, within budget and to an acceptable level of quality.³⁸ Both the strategy and the national action plan are high-level documents that contain limited detail on what is being delivered, by whom and in what timeframe.

Initiatives funded in the May 2023 Budget

3.37 The May 2023 Budget provided $56 million in funding for soil initiatives under the national action plan. The initiatives are listed in the national action plan under roles and responsibilities for the Australian Government, which are ‘[i]n addition to the partner commitments made under the priority actions’. The National Soil Action Plan website (see paragraphs 3.71 to 3.73) outlines how the 2023–24 Budget measures are aligned to the priority actions (Table 3.3).

Table 3.3: Soil initiatives funded in the May 2023 Budget

Source: ANAO summary of May 2023 Budget initiatives.

3.38 In September 2023, the department advised the ANAO that it had commenced implementing the May 2023 Budget initiatives. Status of the initiatives as at February 2024 is outlined in Appendix 6.

Is there a sound performance monitoring framework, including reporting and evaluation arrangements?

Performance monitoring arrangements

3.39 In November 2021, the department procured an external service provider, ThinkPlace, to deliver monitoring and evaluation services for the National Soil Package.³⁹ Its deliverables included:

• developing a monitoring and evaluation plan for initiatives under the National Soil Package; and
• undertaking a mid-program and end-of-program evaluation.

Monitoring and evaluation framework

3.40 In June 2022, ThinkPlace delivered a draft monitoring and evaluation framework (the framework). The framework outlined monitoring and evaluation activities for the individual initiatives in the National Soil Package, as well as for the package overall. It outlined the ‘Package-level outcomes’ each initiative was expected to contribute to, as well as short- (0–2 years), medium- (2–5 years) and long-term (5–20 years) outcomes for the individual initiatives.

3.41 In January 2023, in accordance with a variation agreed with the department, ThinkPlace submitted a proposed workplan to develop a revised monitoring and evaluation plan. The workplan noted that a mid-term evaluation had been planned at this time, but due to challenges with implementation, ‘there would be value in a review of what has been put in place and what is still planned for implementation’. The workplan proposed to undertake ‘research and diagnosis’, and produce a final report by 5 April 2023 which would summarise the research undertaken and provide recommendations to ‘further improve program design towards achieving National Soil Strategy goals’.

3.42 On 14 March 2023, the department decided to conclude the contract with ThinkPlace early ‘due to the department’s budgetary pressures’.⁴⁰ The final deliverable completed by ThinkPlace was a progress report on the review of the monitoring and evaluation plan, provided at the end of March 2023.

3.43 The progress report made observations on challenges to measuring the impact of the strategy, including that ‘[t]he National Soil Strategy puts forward a vision, goals and objectives that are often blurring together three levels of concept’, which can lead to policy intent becoming ‘unclearly linked or lost’. It further noted that:

the current iteration of the Action Plan, similar to the Strategy itself, can benefit from a more clearly focused view [of] the pathway to impact. This would include aligning actions with clear Strategy outcomes and return on investment.

3.44 The progress report made 20 recommendations to better define the impact being sought, scale the impact, and sustain the impact over time. The recommendations have not been considered or actioned by the department.

3.45 As the contract was terminated early, the final report on revising the monitoring and evaluation plan was not delivered. The department advised the ANAO in August 2023 that:

The department intends that the … progress report can be used by individual program areas to support development of monitoring and evaluation approaches for continuing programs, and discussed with the National Soil Strategy [Implementation] Steering Committee to determine what can be evaluated across partner activities.

3.46 As at February 2024, the monitoring and evaluation plan has not been revised and remains in its June 2022 draft form. On 22 February 2024, the NSSISC agreed to the department’s proposal to ‘prepare a suite of documents to support tracking and Monitoring and Evaluation’, including a monitoring and evaluation plan ‘to ensure the action plan delivers against its priorities and intended outcomes and supports the NSSISC [to] assess progress and take strategic decisions on implementation’.

Evaluation

3.50 The Commonwealth Evaluation Policy states that:

Commonwealth entities and companies are expected to deliver support and services for Australians by setting clear objectives for major policies, projects and programs, and consistently measuring progress towards achieving these objectives.⁴¹

3.51 The accompanying Commonwealth Evaluation Toolkit further states that:

Effective monitoring and evaluation is important at all stages of the policy development and implementation cycle. From early design and decision-making in the Budget and Cabinet processes, to the ongoing measurement and assessment of activities and programs across performance reporting cycles.⁴²

3.52 The strategy states that it and the national action plan ‘will be reviewed every 5 years and revised to ensure changes to priorities and emerging science are reflected appropriately’.

3.53 As noted at paragraph 3.41, the mid-program evaluation originally planned to be conducted by ThinkPlace in November 2022 was not undertaken following a variation to the contract. The contract with ThinkPlace was terminated before the planned end-of-program evaluation activity in May 2023.

3.54 On 13 October 2023, the department advised the ANAO that since the ThinkPlace contract was concluded, the money set aside for evaluation is no longer available. The department further advised that there are no plans for an evaluation of the National Soil Package and how it contributed to the goals and objectives of the strategy, as ‘the strategy is a commitment of the previous government, and the current government’s priorities have evolved from this point’. Although background information about the strategy was provided to the minister as part of ‘briefing on other matters’, the department has not provided advice to the minister on how the strategy is meeting its intended outcomes.

Reporting

Internal reporting arrangements

3.57 The department’s Enterprise Project Management Framework (PMF) was first published in February 2021 and revised in May 2023. The purpose of the PMF is to establish a structured approach for the direction and management of the portfolio of programs and projects within the department.

3.58 The PMF outlines three tiers of projects.

• Tier 1: substantial projects. These projects have a major political profile with high sensitivities, constrained deadlines and a notional threshold of more than $5 million.
• Tier 2: significant projects. These projects have a minor to moderate political profile with some sensitivities, somewhat constrained deadlines and a notional threshold of between $1 million and $5 million.
• Tier 3: standard projects. These projects do not have a political profile, have low sensitivities, flexible deadlines and a notional threshold of less than $1 million.

3.59 Tier 1 and Tier 2 projects must report to a project board or a shared program board, and provide monthly status reports to the board and the Project Management Office (for Tier 1 projects) or the Senior Responsible Officer (for Tier 2 projects).

3.60 Of the nine initiatives in the interim action plan that the department is responsible for delivering, there is evidence of internal reporting to program delegates for seven initiatives (Table 3.4). Three Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects established a forum to oversee the delivery of the projects: ANSIS, the Enhancing Soil Education and Expertise program, and the National Soil Data Review. No project board or shared program boards were established for the remaining three Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects.

Table 3.4: Reporting for soil initiatives

Note a: The department advised that the delegate has approved for project status reporting frequency to move to quarterly from 30 June 2023.

Source: ANAO summary of internal reporting.

3.61 For the remaining two projects being delivered by the department:

• Smart Farms Small Grants: Soil Extension Activities — there was no internal project reporting; and
• Future Drought Fund: Drought Resilient Soils and Landscapes — the Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) Plan for the program outlines program reporting arrangements, comprising: a six-monthly MEL progress report; an annual MEL plan review; a final program report; and an end-of-program evaluation report.

3.62 There is no internal reporting on the progress of implementing the strategy. The progress reports for the individual initiatives were not aggregated to determine progress against the strategy’s goals and objectives.

External reporting arrangements

3.63 Australian Government entities are subject to performance measurement and reporting requirements under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act), the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014 (PGPA Rule) and accompanying guidance issued by the Department of Finance. These are collectively referred to as the Commonwealth performance framework.

3.64 Under the framework, entities must publish corporate plans for each financial year. Corporate plans must set out the entity’s purpose and provide performance measures that will measure the entity’s performance in achieving its purpose. Results against these performance measures are required to be provided in the entity’s annual performance statements, to provide information to the Parliament and the public.

3.65 In its 2021–22 Annual Report, the department reported against a performance measure for the ‘[d]elivery of the National Soil Strategy’, which specified the following targets:

• Review of historical soil data.
• Delivery of soil testing rebates.
• Development of a federated soil data platform.

3.66 The department reported that it had ‘partially achieved’ the target, by outlining its achievements in relation to the Pilot Soil Monitoring and Incentives Program to date.

3.67 This measure was removed in the department’s subsequent corporate plans. In the 2022–23 Corporate Plan, the strategy became one of several contributing programs to a broader performance measure on ‘[t]he percentage of farms using sustainable management practices’, with the 2022–23 target: ‘[s]hare of farms using sustainable management practices is maintained or increases by 2025’.

3.68 In its 2022–23 Annual Report, the department noted that the data it intended to use to report against the measure were not collected in 2022–23, and as such it was unable to accurately determine its progress towards the 2025 target. The department stated that ‘[a]t 30 June 2023, there was no evidence to suggest the 2025 target will not be met’, and reported that the measure was ‘on track’.

3.69 The ANAO’s audits of annual performance statements of Australian Government entities in 2022–23 noted the need for entities to consider carefully when planning their measures whether the limitations of systems and data will inhibit reporting of meaningful information, and identify strategies to address any identified limitations. The ANAO did not assess any of the 2022–23 performance statements auditees, including the department, as ‘mature’ in terms of their ability to use data and systems to generate and demonstrate complete and accurate performance results.⁴³

3.70 The same performance measure is included in the department’s 2023–24 Corporate Plan. There are no performance measures that report on progress in implementing the strategy.

National Soil Action Plan website

3.71 The national action plan states that the Australian Government will:

host a National Soil Action Plan portal on the department’s website which highlights and promotes work underway to address the action plan’s priorities and provide a regular e-newsletter for subscription.

3.72 The website was launched along with the national action plan on 28 November 2023.⁴⁴ It contains a high-level outline of different soil-related programs and projects being delivered by action plan partners under each priority action. The website does not contain information on progress in implementing the strategy’s goals and objectives.

3.73 On 22 February 2024, the department proposed to the NSSISC that it will lead a review of the action plan’s progress and provide a report to the NSSISC on a quarterly basis, and publish an annual progress report on the national action plan website. The NSSISC agreed for the department to commence developing an implementation progress tracker, which will be used to develop the quarterly and annual reports.

Appendix 1 Entity response

Appendix 2 Improvements observed by the ANAO

1. The existence of independent external audit, and the accompanying potential for scrutiny improves performance. Improvements in administrative and management practices usually occur: in anticipation of ANAO audit activity; during an audit engagement; as interim findings are made; and/or after the audit has been completed and formal findings are communicated.

2. The Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit (JCPAA) has encouraged the ANAO to consider ways in which the ANAO could capture and describe some of these impacts. The ANAO’s Corporate Plan states that the ANAO’ s annual performance statements will provide a narrative that will consider, amongst other matters, analysis of key improvements made by entities during a performance audit process based on information included in tabled performance audit reports.

3. Performance audits involve close engagement between the ANAO and the audited entity as well as other stakeholders involved in the program or activity being audited. Throughout the audit engagement, the ANAO outlines to the entity the preliminary audit findings, conclusions and potential audit recommendations. This ensures that final recommendations are appropriately targeted and encourages entities to take early remedial action on any identified matters during the course of an audit. Remedial actions entities may take during the audit include:

• strengthening governance arrangements;
• introducing or revising policies, strategies, guidelines or administrative processes; and
• initiating reviews or investigations.

4. In this context, the below action was observed by the ANAO during the course of the audit. It is not clear whether the action and/or the timing of the action was planned in response to proposed or actual audit activity. The ANAO has not sought to obtain assurance over the source of the action or whether it has been appropriately implemented.

• In December 2023, the department published the updated record management policies on its intranet (paragraph 2.21).
• In April 2024, the department updated its website to specify the link between the national action plan’s priority actions and the strategy’s overarching goals (paragraph 2.60).

Appendix 3 National Soil Strategy goals, objectives and progress measures

Source: National Soil Strategy.

Appendix 4 National Soil Action Plan priority actions and statements of commitment

Source: National Soil Action Plan.

Appendix 5 Status of initiatives in the interim action plan — as at February 2024

Appendix 6 Status of soil initiatives funded in May 2023 Budget — as at February 2024

Source: ANAO analysis of departmental documentation.