The objective of this audit was to assess the effectiveness of the Australian Research Council’s (ARC’s) administration of the National Competitive Grants Program (NCGP).

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

The audit objective was to form an opinion on the effectiveness of the NHMRC's grant administration. To meet this objective the NHMRC was assessed against four criteria:

• the NHMRC's governance arrangements provide appropriate accountability that it is meeting its objectives and obligations to Government (Chapter 2);
• there are strategic and systematic processes for developing and implementing grant programs (Chapter 3);
• the NHMRC manages grants post-award effectively, and complies with legislative requirements and program directives (Chapters 4 and 5); and
• the NHMRC monitors and evaluates its business to demonstrate that outcomes are being met (Chapter 6).

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of DIISTRE’s administration of the Research Block Grant schemes. The department’s performance was assessed against the following criteria:

• the schemes are effectively planned and administered;
• the processes and systems used for calculating and distributing funds reflect the allocation criteria specified for each scheme; and
• compliance with scheme guidelines is monitored and scheme performance and contribution to the broader goals of the RBG program is assessed.

The objective of the audit was to assess the implementation and effectiveness of the enhanced grants administration requirements relating to the development and approval of new grant guidelines and revision of existing grant guidelines.

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of FaHCSIA’s administration of Communities for Children under the Family Support Program.

The objective of the audit was to assess the administrative effectiveness of AGD's management of the Northern Territory Night Patrols Program.

The audit examined the effectiveness of DEEWR's: administrative framework for the program; management of the application, assessment and funding processes; and monitoring of and reporting on the program's performance.

In order to form an opinion against the audit objective, the ANAO primarily conducted fieldwork and documentation reviews at DEEWR's central office. A stratified random sample (in order to provide for representation from states, territories and school sectors) of 74 applications from Rounds 1 and 2 was also selected for detailed examination. Through this sample, the ANAO sought to determine whether funding applications had been assessed in accordance with the established assessment criteria and that quality assurance mechanisms for the assessment process were effective.

The audit objective was to assess the effectiveness of the Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education’s (DIISRTE’s) administration of the Education Investment Fund grants program.

(DIISRTE was the department that had responsibility for the administration of the EIF grants program during the course of the audit. The recommendations and suggestions for improvement are, however, directed to the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education because this department now has responsibility for the administration of the program).

The objective of the audit was to assess the effectiveness of CSIRO’s development and administration of selected National Research Flagships. In assessing CSIRO’s performance, the ANAO examined whether:

• mechanisms were in place to develop and implement the Flagships, within the context of the broader CSIRO change program;
• governance arrangements for Flagships incorporated sound oversight, planning and reporting arrangements; and
• periodic review activities were used to assess and improve the operation of the Flagships.