Refine search Expand filter

Audit progress

- Any -

Sector

- Any -

Year

- Any -

Report type

- Any -

Topic

- Any -

Reports

Published

Sharing school and community facilities

Education
Infrastructure
Management and administration
Risk
Shared services and collaboration

Schools and the community would benefit if school facilities were shared more often. 

The Department of Education’s ‘Community Use of School Facilities Policy’ encourages but does not require schools to share facilities. Sharing depends heavily on the willingness of school principals and there are few incentives. There are many challenges in developing agreements with community users and there is only limited support available from the Department.

There are strategies and plans to support the sharing of facilities between schools and the wider community, but none are backed up with budgets, specific plans or timeframes.

Governments should strive for the best use of assets. This is particularly important in the context of a growing New South Wales population, fiscal constraints and increasing demand for services. 

Lack of available land, rising land costs and population growth highlighted in our April 2017 'Planning for school infrastructure' performance audit report mean that new and existing schools will need to share their facilities with communities more than is currently the case.

This audit assessed how effectively schools share facilities with each other, local councils and community groups. In making this assessment, the audit examined whether the Department of Education (Department):

  • has a clear policy to encourage and support facilities sharing
  • is implementing evidence-based strategies and procedures for facilities sharing
  • can show it is realising an increasing proportion of sharing opportunities.

Facilities sharing is the use of a physical asset, such as a building, rooms, or open spaces, by more than one group for a range of activities at the same time or at different times. For the purposes of this audit, we have divided sharing arrangements into two types: shared use and joint use.

Shared use refers to arrangements where existing school assets are hired out for non-school purposes, usually for a limited time. The assets remain under the control of the school. Generally, there is little alteration or enhancement to the asset required to enable shared use. Shared use can also refer to schools using external facilities, such as council pools, but these arrangements are not included within the scope of this audit. 

Joint use refers to arrangements where new or upgraded school and non-school facilities or community hubs are planned, funded, built and jointly shared between a school and other parties, usually involving significant investment. 

Both shared use and joint use agreements are governed by contractual obligations.

Conclusion
The sharing of school facilities with the community is not fully effective. The Department of Education is implementing strategies to increase shared and joint use but several barriers, some outside the Department’s direct control, must be addressed to fully realise benefits to students and the community of sharing school facilities. In addition, the Department needs to do more to encourage individual schools to share facilities with the community. 

A collaborative, multi-agency approach is needed to overcome barriers to the joint use of facilities, otherwise, the Department may need significantly more funds than planned to deliver sufficient fit-for-purpose school facilities where and when needed.
Government policies encourage, but do not mandate, shared and joint use of facilities.

Since the early 2000’s, several reviews in NSW and other jurisdictions have commented on the benefits of and need to increase the sharing of school facilities. 

Several NSW Government strategies and plans support shared and joint use of facilities between schools and the wider community, but none are backed up with financial incentives, or specific plans with implementation timeframes. In Victoria and Queensland whole-of-government processes are in place to support a more coordinated approach to planning, building and sharing community facilities. For example, Victoria has a comprehensive policy framework encompassing both existing and future use of community facilities and a $50 million program to seed the development of community facilities on school sites over the next four years.  
The Department recognises benefits from the shared use of school facilities, but provides insufficient support to Principals to ensure costs are recovered and that money raised from shared use can be spent by the school in a timely manner. 

There are examples of successful shared use, but more can be done. Information about the available facilities is not readily available to potential community users. Schools should work more closely with councils and other stakeholders to leverage shared use. 

Currently, the administrative burden, costs and risks associated with shared use can exceed the perceived benefits to schools, leading to reluctance amongst some Principals to share. In addition, a substantial backlog of school-initiated infrastructure proposals awaiting Departmental approval means that schools that raise money from sharing their facilities find it difficult to use the funds they raise on improved infrastructure. Some of these proposals have been waiting for approval for more than 12 months. 

The Department could do more to support Principals by ensuring the fees charged for facilities cover the costs incurred by schools, that Principals can access help with negotiating and managing contracts, and that infrastructure proposals initiated and funded by schools are approved in a timely manner. 

The Department is not monitoring shared use across the State, and does not evaluate different approaches as evidence to influence policies and procedures.

Recommendations
By December, 2018, the Department should:
  • increase incentives and reduce impediments for school Principals to share school facilities, including:
    • review the methodology for calculating fees charged for facilities to ensure that shared use of school facilities does not result in a financial burden to schools or the Department 
    • improve support provided to Principals by School Infrastructure NSW, including reducing the backlog of school-initiated infrastructure proposals awaiting approval
    • develop service standards, including timeframes, for assessing and approving school-initiated infrastructure proposals.
  • provide readily-accessible information about available school facilities to community groups and local councils
  • implement processes to monitor and regularly evaluate the implementation of the shared use policy and promote better practice to drive improvements.
The Department is planning a more strategic approach to increase the joint use of school facilities. However, several barriers, some outside the Department’s control, must be addressed to fully realise benefits of joint use agreements.

As discussed in our 2017 audit report on ‘Planning for school infrastructure’, joint use agreements are a key direction of the School Assets Strategic Plan. Joint use of school facilities will be necessary to ensure that there will be enough fit-for-purpose learning spaces for students when and where needed. Under the ‘Community Use of School Facilities Policy’ Principals play the leading role in identifying opportunities, and developing and managing agreements for sharing school facilities. This is impractical for joint use projects which involve substantial investment in new or refurbished assets, in particular for joint use projects in schools that are yet to be built. In addition, the policy does not address joint-use facilities built on land not owned by the Department. For these reasons, the Department is developing a new policy. 

The Department is planning to develop joint use agreements in a more systematic way as part of school community planning, previously known as cluster planning, with a special focus on local councils. Several agreements are currently being piloted, and will be evaluated to provide an evidence-based foundation for this new approach. 

To develop or refurbish school facilities for joint use, the Department, councils and other key stakeholders must work together and prioritise joint use from the earliest stages of any project. A collaborative, multi-agency approach is needed to ensure sufficient fit-for-purpose facilities are available for school students within the funding framework proposed in the School Assets Strategic Plan. 

To increase shared and joint use, the Department is recruiting specialist staff in its Asset Division to assist with the brokerage, community engagement and development of agreements, but these staff are not dedicated to joint use projects and their available time may not be sufficient to provide the necessary support in the timeframes required.

Recommendations
By December, 2018, the Department of Education should:
  • ensure that the implementation of the new ‘Joint Use of School Facilities and Land Policy’ is adequately resourced, and has the support of Principals
  • implement processes to monitor and regularly evaluate the implementation of joint use policy and promote better practice to drive improvements.  

Appendix one - Response from agency

Appendix two - About the audit

Appendix three - Victoria's 30-Year Infrastructure Strategy

Appendix four - Not-for-profit hire changes

Appendix five - Performance Auditing

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #293 - released 1 November 2017

Published

Information and Communication Technologies in schools for teaching and learning

Education
Information technology
Infrastructure
Management and administration
Service delivery
Workforce and capability

Several factors are reducing effective use of information and communication technology (ICT) in the classroom.

These are primarily:

  • ageing ICT equipment and inadequate wireless networks
  • variable student access to devices at school
  • variable teacher access to centrally provided devices for use outside of the classroom.

Information and communication technologies (ICT) are pervasive in modern life. Australian research has identified that the workforce demand for digital literacy and advanced digital skills is growing across most areas of work. There is broad agreement internationally and in Australian school systems that digital literacy is a core skill for the workforce and students will need to be confident with ICT. Education systems around the world are using ICT in classrooms to support learning and employment goals.  

The New South Wales Department of Education’s (the Department’s) overall strategic directions for teaching and learning with ICT are set in the 'Strategic Information Technology Plan 2016–19'. The Department centrally provides a base level of resources to schools for ICT and schools supplement funding from their existing school budget and Parents and Citizens Associations. Each school decides how to allocate these funds to meet local needs. Schools also set expectations for how teachers and students will use technology to help deliver outcomes.

This audit assessed how well New South Wales public schools are using ICT to improve teaching and learning. It focussed on planning and teacher and student use of ICT. We examined whether:

  • the Department identifies key strategic opportunities to enhance the use of ICT platforms and technologies in schools
  • teachers are integrating ICT into classroom practice
  • the Department monitors the impact of ICT on student learning.
Conclusion 

Several factors are reducing the effective use of ICT in the classroom. These are primarily:

  • ageing ICT equipment and inadequate wireless networks
  • variable student access to devices at school
  • variable teacher access to centrally provided devices to use outside of the classroom.

Many schools are struggling to keep up with growing ICT needs within available funding. The Department needs to review whether its current technology programs provide schools with sufficient resources and support to meet the Department’s strategic goals for 21st Century classrooms. The Department should also target additional support to schools to improve planning for ICT resources.  

Most teachers are using ICT in the classroom, however, teacher access to devices outside the classroom varies between schools. In practice, teacher working days extend outside classroom hours. Teachers need access to devices for activities such as lesson preparation and student assessment. With limited access to devices outside of the classroom, teachers may not be able to effectively integrate ICT into lessons. Teachers also require further professional learning to support them to develop their skills in using ICT.  

The Department is not sufficiently monitoring the digital literacy of New South Wales students, which has declined in national tests. Teachers could benefit from support to assess these skills at a school level. The Department also needs to investigate links between student use of ICT and learning outcomes, so they can better support teachers with evidence-based approaches to enhancing learning through ICT.

Old equipment and wireless networks are not keeping pace with modern demands

The Department’s vision for ICT is to enable ‘any learning opportunity, anywhere, anytime’. This vision is at risk due to an ageing stock of devices and wireless networks. The average age of devices in New South Wales schools is over four years. Older devices are less reliable, require greater maintenance and support, and cannot run demanding applications. Further, many school wireless networks are beyond the end of their useful life. This limits the number of teachers and students who can access online content on wireless networks at the same time.

The central funding model for ICT in schools is not meeting current needs

Funding for the Technology for Learning program to deliver ICT in schools has not increased since 2004, despite an increase in the number of students and emphasis placed on ICT in teaching and learning during this time. Schools supplement funding for ICT from their existing school budget and Parents and Citizens Associations.  

The Department’s current funding model for ICT is not adequately addressing a growing gap in the provision of contemporary ICT in classrooms between schools able to access funding from other sources and those which cannot. The Department needs to review whether the Technology for Learning program is equitable in equipping all schools with the modern technology needed to achieve its vision.

Many teachers are not provided with devices for use outside of the classroom

School Principals we interviewed reported that technology is an essential part of a modern classroom and teacher access to devices outside of the classroom can impact how they use ICT. This is because, in practice, teacher working days extend outside classroom hours and teachers need access to devices for activities such as lesson preparation and student assessment. The Department provides teachers with access to a suite of software tools for these tasks.

The Commonwealth Government’s Digital Education Revolution program provided teachers of secondary school students with laptops from 2009 to 2013. The Department’s evaluation of the Digital Education Revolution program found that teachers reported greater confidence with, and use of, ICT throughout the program.  
Providing desktop computers, laptops or tablets for teachers is now a school level decision and arrangements vary across schools. Each school must trade-off between allocating devices for students and teachers. Most other States and Territories provide all teachers with a laptop for use in and outside of the classroom or offer subsidised access to one.  

There is limited teacher professional learning in the use of ICT

The Department’s research has identified that professional learning is an important factor in how effectively teachers use ICT to enhance teaching and learning. Despite this, the Department provides few courses on using ICT in the classroom directly, and most of these are offered in Sydney. This limits accessibility for teachers outside of the metropolitan area. Schools we visited reported that the costs of courses and providing relief teachers limits the number of external courses or events that teachers attend, especially for rural and regional schools. Increasing the use of online learning would improve access for teachers in these areas.  

The Department is not adequately monitoring trends in professional learning in ICT or evaluating the overall effectiveness of courses. A recent upgrade to the professional learning system may provide the Department with better quality data to do this.

Greater monitoring and reporting on technology use in schools is required

The Local Schools, Local Decisions policy gives schools greater authority to make strategic decisions on the use of ICT appropriate to their local contexts. To support this, the Department needs to better monitor current trends, and identify emerging needs to determine future direction and how best to support schools.  

For example, the Department does not currently know how many devices are allocated to teachers or how many schools have implemented a student Bring Your Own Device scheme. This affects how schools are using ICT, and places demand on the network and the type of support the Department must provide. An assessment of the ICT maturity of schools would help the Department target its resources to schools requiring greater assistance with planning.

The Department does not regularly monitor or report on student capabilities with ICT. A national assessment found that the ICT literacy of a sample of Year 6 and Year 10 New South Wales students fell between 2011 and 2014. The fall was greater in New South Wales than in other States and Territories. Without more regular assessment or reporting, the reasons behind this fall and the distribution of student capabilities between schools will remain unknown. 

By July 2018, the Department of Education should:

  1. Review the Technology for Learning program and school ICT support resourcing to determine whether resourcing is adequate for modern school requirements.
     
  2. Develop a program to improve wireless networks in all NSW schools, for instance by expanding the Connecting Country Schools Program to all NSW schools.  
     
  3. Implement an assessment of school ‘ICT maturity’ and use this to target assistance to those schools requiring support with forward planning for ICT.
     
  4. Improve the use of evidence to inform plans and strategies, including:
    • more detailed monitoring of teacher and student access to and use of ICT
    • evaluating the impact of teacher professional learning on student outcomes 
    • further examining the links between ICT and student outcomes.
       
  5. Improve teacher access to devices for use outside of the classroom to improve how effectively they integrate ICT into teaching and learning.
     
  6. Improve teacher professional learning by providing more:
    • online learning opportunities for teachers in regional and remote areas
    • courses focused on pedagogy to make best use of ICT.
       
  7. Identify the ICT skills students need, and provide teaching resources to develop these skills and monitor their achievement.

Appendix One - Response from the Agency

Appendix Two - About the audit

Appendix Three - Performance auditing

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #289 - released 6 July 2017 

Published

Contingent workforce - management and procurement

Industry
Management and administration
Procurement
Workforce and capability

The Department of Industry, Transport for NSW and the Department of Education were not able to demonstrate that the use of contingent labour is the best resourcing strategy to meet their business needs or deliver value for money.

NSW Government agencies use contingent labour to help deliver services to the community. The NSW Public Service Commission (PSC) defines contingent labour as people employed by a recruitment agency and hired by government agencies to provide labour or services. Agencies use contingent labour to fill a gap in skills or capability, for example, to fill a position while a staff member is on leave or where specialist knowledge may be needed on a short-term basis. The PSC estimated that in 2016 the contingent workforce represented 2.3 per cent of the public sector workforce, equivalent to 7,571 full-time employees.

The PSC recommends that contingent labour only be used when it is the most efficient and effective option available to respond to an agency’s business needs. It also recommends that agencies’ use of contingent labour be informed by workforce planning. 

Government spending on contingent labour has increased significantly over the last five years, from $503 million in 2011–12 to $1.1 billion in 2015–16. To reduce spend in this area, the NSW Government has introduced the Contingent Workforce Renewal Strategy, overseen by NSW Procurement. The Strategy aims to achieve greater efficiency and effectiveness in the use of contingent labour. It has four pillars:

  • prequalification scheme – a list of approved contingent labour suppliers
  • vendor management system – an information system to manage contingent workers
  • managed service provider – a recruitment agency broker
  • contractor management organisations – organisations that manage a contingent labour database, which agencies can source labour from.

The prequalification scheme is mandatory for public sector agencies. Agencies are progressively rolling out the other pillars. The vendor management system and managed service provider are together called ‘Contractor Central’.

Within the context of sector reform aimed at promoting efficiency and effectiveness, the objective of this audit is to assess whether agencies’ approach to purchasing and managing their contingent workforce meets business needs and delivers value for money. In making this assessment, we reviewed three agencies each at a different stage of the reform:

  • Department of Education (Education) – Contractor Central introduced in August 2015
  • Department of Industry (Industry) – Contractor Central introduced in November 2016, after our review
  • Transport for NSW (Transport) – Contractor Central not in place.
Conclusion

None of the three agencies we reviewed were able to demonstrate that contingent labour is the best resourcing strategy to meet their agencies’ business needs or delivers value for money. There are three reasons for this. First, agencies’ use of contingent labour was not informed by workforce planning at an agency level, with limited work undertaken in this area. Second, two of the three agencies have limited oversight of their contingent workforce. Information is not reliable or accurate, reports are onerous to produce, and there is limited reporting to the agency’s executive. Finally, none of the agencies routinely monitor and centrally document the performance of contingent workers to ensure services are delivered as planned. Together, these factors make it difficult for agencies to ensure contingent labour is engaged only when needed, at reasonable rates, and delivers quality services.

Some of these issues will be addressed by Contractor Central, which had only been introduced at Education at the time of our review. The new software program enables staff to easily obtain real-time reports on its contingent workforce. The recruitment broker also has the potential to improve value through better negotiation and benchmarking of pay rates. However, Contractor Central will only address some of the issues highlighted above. Better workforce planning and performance monitoring are needed to ensure an agencies’ workforce, including contingent workers, meets its business needs and represents value for money.


The use of contingent labour neither informs nor is informed by agency level workforce plans

None of the three agencies we reviewed had an agency level workforce plan in place. Agencies could not demonstrate that they had analysed their use of contingent labour at an agency level, including how it is being used to address any skills gaps. An agency’s executive is responsible for ensuring that an agency level workforce plan is in place. An agency level workforce plan helps hiring managers to make decisions on the best resource strategy to meet their business needs. This is important because contingent labour should only be engaged after considering all other recruitment options and the agency’s workforce plan.

Contingent workforce data is not always reliable or accurate

The accuracy and reliability of contingent workforce data varied significantly across the three agencies we reviewed. In Industry and Transport, information on contingent labour is difficult to obtain because it must be drawn from different data sources, affecting its accuracy, reliability and timeliness. This information is also incomplete, with these agencies not having a full picture of their contingent workforce. Quality data is important because it improves an agency’s capacity to plan and monitor its use of contingent labour to ensure it meets business needs.

At the time of our review, only Education, through Contractor Central, was able to obtain timely and accurate data on its use of contingent labour. Contractor Central has also improved its reporting capability, with the agency’s executive now receiving quarterly reports on its contingent workforce. In contrast, executives in Industry and Transport received ad-hoc reports on the use of contingent labour that only gave them limited oversight of their contingent workforce.

Long tenure of contingent workers is an issue in agencies

We found that the maximum tenure of contingent labour varied across agencies from nine to more than 20 years. In Education and Transport, staff reported that hiring managers assume contingent workers are automatically renewed at the end of their contract, with no formal consideration about whether contingent labour is still needed. Also, contingent labour is used for significant capital projects in the information technology and infrastructure areas where a project may run for several years.

None of the agencies reviewed undertook an analysis to determine how to reduce tenure while ensuring business needs are met. This is particularly important for long-term use of contingent labour for large capital projects. Understanding whether contingent labour represents best value compared to other recruitment options, such as secondments or temporary employment, is essential. Contingent workers are engaged under different working conditions to employees. Long tenure can pose an industrial relations risk to agencies because contingent workers may believe they are entitled to the same working conditions as employees.

On and off-boarding processes could be strengthened

Agencies have processes to engage and release contingent labour, also called on boarding and off-boarding. This includes access to IT systems, building access, and the return of property. However, not all agencies had on boarding or off-boarding checklists with specific requirements for engaging or releasing contingent labour. In addition, agencies’ off boarding guidelines did not always provide for knowledge transfer. This was identified as a key risk by staff because it is important to ensure that critical skills and knowledge are retained.

Risk that agencies are being overcharged when engaging contingent labour

We found that in agencies without Contractor Central, there is limited assurance that recruitment agencies charge in line with the prequalification scheme fees. NSW Procurement estimates that the government was overcharged $1.3 million in 2015–16. In addition, there is a risk that hiring managers do not have sufficient information to benchmark pay rates when negotiating contingent labour engagements. Agencies with Contractor Central may be more likely to get reasonable rates by using a recruitment broker who has specialised market knowledge.

No system in place to monitor the performance of contingent workers

None of the agencies we reviewed had a system in place to monitor the performance of their contingent workforce at an agency level to ensure it delivers value for money. Hiring managers are not required to evaluate whether contingent labour delivers the services for which they are hired. For example, hiring managers do not routinely assess and centrally document the quality of services provided, including whether services are delivered on time and within budget. This means contingent workers who are not performing may be re-hired by other managers or agencies. With the implementation of Contractor Central, there is the means to capture agency-wide information on the performance of contingent workers.

Contractor Central has the potential to improve value for money

Contractor Central has the potential to improve value for money. This is because the recruitment broker has specialised market knowledge and is able to promote competition, and benchmark and negotiate pay rates. In addition, the new software can streamline invoice processing and ensure correct supplier rates are charged. Education reports that it achieved a net saving of $944,600 from August 2015 to May 2016 due to the introduction of Contractor Central. Industry also expects to achieve similar results with Contractor Central, which it advised was implemented in November 2016.

The Department of Industry and Transport for NSW should, by December 2017:

1. improve the accuracy and reliability of their data on contingent labour

2. routinely report the use of contingent labour to agency executive.

The Department of Industry, Department of Education, and Transport for NSW should:

by December 2017:

3. ensure agency-wide on-boarding and off-boarding guidelines or checklists detail the specific requirements for engaging or releasing contingent labour, including provisions for knowledge transfer.

by March 2018

4. ensure that contingent labour informs and is informed by workforce planning, by:

  • analysing agency-wide business needs, staff capability, and skills gaps
  • understanding how gaps are filled by contingent workers or other recruitment options
  • assessing whether long-term contingent worker engagements are the most economical and effective labour option
  • evaluating whether contingent workers meet agency business needs and deliver value for money.

5. assess and centrally document the performance of their contingent workforce to ensure that services are delivered as contracted

6. implement processes to ensure that hiring managers consider other recruitment options prior to engaging or re-engaging contingent workers.
    

Sector-wide learnings

This audit identified learnings that government agencies across the sector should consider when procuring and managing contingent labour:

1. Contingent workforce planning should be part of an agency’s broader workforce planning.

2. Using information systems to manage and procure contingent labour improves the accuracy, reliability and timeliness of contingent labour data. This information enables agencies to consistently assess contingent labour rates and to identify persistent skills gaps in their workforce.

3. Routine reporting of contingent labour to agency executives provides oversight of an agency’s use of contingent labour.

4. Hiring managers should consider all recruitment options, with advice from human resources staff, before engaging contingent labour to ensure that it is the most appropriate solution for a specific need.

5. Regularly assessing long tenure contingent labour engagements helps to ensure that such engagements are still the most economical and effective labour option.

6. Planning the engagement of contingent workers, including provisions for knowledge transfer, maximises the potential to obtain value for money from the use of contingent labour.

7. Assessing and centrally documenting the performance of contingent labour against agreed deliverables helps to ensure services are delivered as planned, including in terms of quality, and timeliness.

Download appendices for report on Contingent workforce

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #282 - released 27 April 2017

Published

Implementation of the NSW Government’s program evaluation initiative

Industry
Justice
Planning
Premier and Cabinet
Treasury
Environment
Financial reporting
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Risk
Service delivery
Shared services and collaboration
Workforce and capability

The NSW Government’s ‘program evaluation initiative’, introduced to assess whether service delivery programs achieve expected outcomes and value for money, is largely ineffective according to a report released today by NSW Auditor-General, Margaret Crawford.

Government services, in areas such as public order and safety, health and education, are delivered by agencies through a variety of programs. In 2016–17, the NSW Government estimates that it will spend over $73 billion on programs to deliver services.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #277 - released 3 November 2016

Published

Sale and lease of Crown land

Industry
Asset valuation
Compliance
Fraud
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Risk
Workforce and capability

The management of the sale and lease of Crown land is not effective because oversight of decision-making is inadequate and community involvement is limited, according to a report released today by NSW Auditor-General, Margaret Crawford.

The audit found limited oversight of sales and leases of Crown land by the Department of Industry - Lands. The Department has only just started monitoring whether tenants are complying with lease conditions, and does not have a clear view of what is happening on most leased Crown land. The majority of guidance provided to staff has not been updated in the past decade, contributing to staff not correctly implementing policies on rental rebates, unpaid rent, rent redeterminations and the direct negotiation of sales and leases on Crown land.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #273 - released 8 September 2016

Published

Early childhood education

Education
Compliance
Information technology
Management and administration
Project management
Regulation
Risk
Service delivery
Workforce and capability

Enrolments in quality early childhood education programs in New South Wales are increasing but are below the national benchmark, according to a report released today by the NSW Auditor-General, Margaret Crawford.

Ninety-five per cent of children should be enrolled in at least 600 hours in the year before school, but according to the latest NSW figures 77 per cent of children were enrolled in quality early childhood education programs. This 2015 figure is below the benchmark, but is a significant improvement on 2013 when 59 per cent were enrolled.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #271 - released 26 May 2016

Published

Supporting students with disability in NSW public schools

Education
Information technology
Management and administration
Service delivery
Workforce and capability

The Department of Education is doing a reasonable job in managing how well students with disability transition to a new school and supporting teachers to improve these students’ educational outcomes, according to a report released today by the NSW Auditor-General, Margaret Crawford.

The level of support provided to students with disability can vary between schools. This is partly due to cultural resistance in some schools and teachers not always having the necessary skills to support children with disability.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #270 - released 12 May 2016

Published

Public sector management reforms

Finance
Industry
Premier and Cabinet
Planning
Whole of Government
Environment
Management and administration
Workforce and capability

The Public Service Commission is making good progress with leading the implementation of public sector management reforms, according to a report released today by the Acting New South Wales Auditor-General, Tony Whitfield.

'The Commission developed a sound evidence base for the reforms and gained wide public sector support by engaging with agency heads and using public sector working groups to develop options', said the Acting Auditor-General. 'They developed good guidance for government agencies and have improved the senior executive structure in the NSW public sector', he added.

 

Parliamentary reference - Report number #264 - released 28 January 2016

Published

TAFE NSW: Review of Administration

Industry
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Shared services and collaboration

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

Published

Casino surveillance as undertaken by the Director of Casino Surveillance and the Casino Control Authority

Industry
Internal controls and governance
Management and administration
Risk
Workforce and capability

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

View our audit program
View audit program
EXPLORE
upcoming audits
Have your say
CONTRIBUTE