Reports
Actions for Government Advertising 2009
Government Advertising 2009
We found that the two NSW Health campaigns had followed the required approval processes and were appropriate. We had some concerns with the two Department of Premier and Cabinet (DPC) campaigns. The revised Guidelines, which incorporate recommendations from earlier audit reports, are a positive step towards reducing the risk that publicly funded advertising could be used inappropriately. But there are still parts of the Guidelines that require a subjective judgement and therefore do little to help manage this risk. While we did not have any concerns with the two NSW Health campaigns, the two DPC campaigns highlighted these risks.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #194 - released 9 December 2009
Actions for Government Licensing Project
Government Licensing Project
The Government Licensing Project (GLP) is standardising and simplifying processes of agencies which issue licences. However, it is currently running over the original anticipated completion date, exceeding the original budget and expected to produce savings less than originally planned.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #192 - released 7 October 2009
Actions for Grants Administration
Grants Administration
We found no significant difference in the funding of government and opposition electorates. However, more money was given to electorates that were safely held by the major parties. These seats received $1.29 for every dollar given to marginal and independent seats with government marginals getting the least. Electorates also receive different levels of funding according to which region they are in. Such variations may reflect valid agency objectives such as meeting State Plan targets or addressing socio-economic disadvantage.
But while agencies publish who gets what, they do not adequately evaluate or explain what grant programs have achieved. As a result, there is a risk that New South Wales may not get the best value for its spending. We recommend that agencies regularly evaluate their grant programs and publish the results.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #186 - released 6 May 2009
Actions for Managing Grants
Managing Grants
In our view, the agencies we studied cannot be sure that the grants they allocate align with their corporate objectives, and that program outcomes are achieved. This is mainly due to problems with grant selection and the evaluation of results. It was good to see that most of the grants programs had funding objectives which were fairly clear. But we found problems across most programs which could affect the fair and equitable selection of grants, such as, often no procedures for assessing applications, no assessment guidelines for advisory committees, often no clear rationale for assessments and poor documentation of the reasons for decisions.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #104 - released 4 December 2002
Actions for User-Friendliness of Websites
User-Friendliness of Websites
Of the sites examined, users would find that some offered a pleasant and productive experience. Using others would be onerous and frustrating. Some users would not be able in practice to access features on some sites. All sites, even the best, had aspects warranting better attention to users’ needs. The failure of some sites to provide important information about privacy, security and legal matters was of particular concern. For the sites evaluated there was little use of the web to foster two-way communication between the public and agencies on issues of concern or as part of the policy process. And it seems that consultation with users on site design is not always sufficiently undertaken. A website is more likely to be user-friendly if design is based on thorough consultation with users.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #99 - released 26 June 2002
Actions for Collecting Outstanding Fines and Penalties
Collecting Outstanding Fines and Penalties
SDRO deals well with very high volumes and collects substantial sums of money. However, there are a number of factors which limit the effectiveness of the fine enforcement process and affect SDRO’s capacity to recover debt. SDRO is confronted with conflicting roles as both law enforcer and debt collector. As a law enforcement agency, SDRO treats all matters the same. But as a debt collector, other approaches could be pursued which would recover more outstanding dollars.
Many of the factors which inhibit SDRO’s ability to collect unpaid fines are beyond its control and require legislative change or a coordinated inter-agency response. Until these problems are fixed, the credibility of the fine enforcement process, and people’s willingness to pay outstanding fines, will continue to be undermined.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #94 - released 17 April 2002
Actions for Government Property Register
Government Property Register
Despite the issue being on the agenda for many years (formally, at least since 1988), at present there is not a comprehensive record of all government property assets in NSW. Whilst initiatives currently underway are promising, they will require continued priority to achieve tangible results. And careful coordination will be required to avoid duplication and waste.
Parliamentary reference - Report number #93 - released 31 January 2002