This performance audit indicates that the Service has considerable work to do to reach its aspirations of being recognised amongst leading examples of best practice services. The commitment of the Service to serving the community and the professionalism of the Service's officers is not in question. It is, however, apparent that a number of barriers to performance will need to be overcome for the Service to perform as well as it would wish.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #80 - released 7 March 2001

The Audit Office recognises that TAFE NSW has undergone significant change in the last decade in order to improve service delivery. Whilst the focus of change has been TAFE NSW's core educational role, administration has also benefited. The Quality Management Systems introduced by the Institutes are an example.

The Audit Office is of the opinion that TAFE NSW needs a means by which the efficiency and effectiveness of administrative functions can be assessed notwithstanding initiatives by certain Institutes to introduce monitoring, benchmarking and reporting of administration. In the interests of accountability, TAFE NSW requires the establishment of a common performance reporting framework for administration in each Institute and across Institutes. Along with other key result areas of TAFE NSW’s operations, a reporting framework would better able the TAFE Commission Board (the Board) to inform the Minister for Education, in compliance with the Act, of the efficiency and effectiveness of the administrative functions.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #79 - released 6 February 2001

Guidelines for staff are available for each of the three schemes, but they do not yet provide staff with sufficient information on how to attract proposals, undertake assessments, negotiate agreements and monitor assistance. Some training of staff responsible for assessing proposals, negotiating agreements and monitoring outcomes has been provided, but needs to be enhanced. In particular, The Audit Office believes that there is insufficient guidance for staff in undertaking economic assessment of proposals. 

There is a prevailing view amongst Department of State and Regional Development staff that guidelines are just that, and need not be followed. It was apparent, however, that assumptions made in assessments were not always appropriate and may lead to poor decisions. Flexibility need not be impaired by requiring greater adherence to guidelines. This would help ensure minimum standards of process and rigour in all cases.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #60 - released 21 December 1998

NSW Health has progressed in identifying and addressing key R&D issues in a complex and difficult environment. The Infrastructure Grants Program (IGP) is an innovative program and reflects a commitment by Government to support research infrastructure. The IGP has as its aims the provision of significant funding accompanied by clear research objectives and criteria for accountability and introduces a rational basis for the allocation of infrastructure grants.

While NSW Health has progressed, there is an opportunity to make the IGP more efficient and effective. These opportunities are in the areas of addressing longer term planning issues in health, streamlining and clarifying eligibility and selection criteria, improving decision-making structures and processes and improving accountability.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #56 - released 25 November 1998

At the request of the Department of Gaming and Racing, the audit reviewed the efficiency and effectiveness of the organisation and management of casino surveillance undertaken pursuant to the Casino Control Act, 1992 (the Act).

Implicitly the Act requires an effective level of cooperation and coordination between the agencies to achieve their statutory roles and responsibilities. However, The Audit Office is of the opinion that this has not been achieved. As a consequence, the efficiency and effectiveness of the surveillance roles and processes carried out under the Act can be improved.

Revision is required to the surveillance methodology and its implementation, to the skills base within Director of Casino Surveillance (DCS) and the underlying working and to organisational arrangements between and within DCS and the New South Wales Casino Control Authority. Until such revision has been finalised, it is not possible to determine the level of resources or type of surveillance that needs to be undertaken and funded.

Parliamentary reference - Report number #50 - released 10 June 1998