Responses to Performance Audit Recommendations: Annual Status Update

Do public sector agencies implement our performance audit recommendations and respond to them in a timely way?

Key facts

Back to top

The Auditor‐General provides independent assurance to the Parliament of Victoria and the Victorian community on the performance of the state and local government public sectors.

Our performance audits assess whether agencies have effective programs and services and whether they are using their resources economically and efficiently. We also identify activities that work well and reflect better practice.

Our audit reports contain recommendations for audited agencies to improve key aspects of their operations. We ask agencies to respond to our audit recommendations by stating whether they accept them, what action they will take and how long they anticipate it will take them to complete them. We include their responses in the final report tabled in Parliament.

We track agency responses to our recommendations through an annual follow-up survey. Since 2020, we have publicly reported on each agency's progress in responding to our recommendations.

What we looked at

Between 2015–16 and 2019–20 we tabled 112 performance audits. For this review, we examined agencies' progress on recommendations from 76 of those audits. We looked at: 

• 41 performance audit reports published in 2018–19 and 2019–20
• two performance audits that tabled early in 2020–21
• 33 audits from earlier years that had unresolved recommendations.

Figure A sets out the audits, agencies and recommendations we reviewed

Figure A: Audits and recommendations included in the review

Note: *Data not shown by year as agencies can be included in multiple audits in multiple years.
Source: VAGO.

We asked agencies to complete a survey and provide detailed information about their responses to each audit recommendation, including the level of acceptance, actions taken, current status and the timing of completion. 

Agencies attested that their survey responses were accurate and complete as of 31 March 2021. This year's survey responses are included in Appendix F.

For a full list of the audits and agencies included in this review, see Appendix D.

What we left out and why

For audits that tabled in 2015–16 to 2017–18, we reviewed only the recommendations that were not complete in our previous survey (conducted November 2019). We did not focus on the completed recommendations from these audits in this review. 

For a more complete picture of agency performance, refer to the review dashboard on our website (www.audit.vic.gov.au), where we have included each agency's status and response to past recommendations.

Back to top

We consulted with the audited agencies and considered their views when reaching our conclusions. The agencies’ responses are in Appendix A. 

When do agencies accept our recommendations?

We asked the audited agencies to tell us whether they accepted our recommendations both before we tabled their report and at the time we conducted our review. 

Before tabling

Of the 1 063 recommendations included in this review, agencies accepted or supported 1 023 (96 per cent) of our recommendations at the time of the audit. There were 16 recommendations that were not accepted. For the remaining 24, agencies either did not respond, or did not clearly indicate whether they suppported a recommendation.

At the time of review

We again asked agencies whether they accepted our audit recommendations at the time of this review. This enabled us to gather new data, including from those agencies that did not respond previously. Agencies accepted 1 054 of the 1 063 recommendations (99 per cent) and rejected nine.

Figures 1A and 1B show acceptance rates at the time of tabling and at the time of review.

FIGURE 1A: Acceptance of recommendations at time of tabling

Source: VAGO.

FIGURE 1B: Acceptance of recommendations at time of review

Source: VAGO.

Reasons agencies rejected our recommendations

Agencies that did not accept our recommendations provided clear reasons for doing so. Examples include:

• existing records did not allow for indirect costs to be allocated to services
• mandatory training for all staff was not practical within expected timeframes.

Implementing accepted recommendations

Agencies attested that they had completed 63 per cent of the 1 054 accepted recommendations. Figure 1C shows accepted recommendations by status. 

Implementation by year

Figure 1D shows the status of recommendations by year.

FIGURE 1D: Recommendation status by year

Note: * Includes only unresolved recommendations at time of the last survey. There was a total 67 accepted recommendations for 2015–16 and 193 accepted recommendations for 2016–17 in the last survey.
Source: VAGO.

Status of 2018–19 to 2020–21 accepted recommendations

Of the audits we tabled over 2018–19 to 2020–21, agencies reported that they had completed 555 (64 per cent) of the 868 accepted recommendations. Actions are underway on another 296 recommendations.

There had been no action taken on 16 accepted recommendations. Agencies provided us with a number of reasons for this, including that their action depended on the following becoming available:  

• Royal Commission findings (nine recommendations)
• best practice guidelines (two recommendations) 
• Ministerial Advisory Committee findings (two recommendations)
• evaluation of another in-progress recommendation (one recommendation).

Status of 2015–16 to 2017–18 audit recommendations 

Recommendations from older audits are more likely to be complete because the agencies have had more time. Despite this, some recommendations remain unresolved for audits conducted over 2015–16 to 2017–18. There are 72 of the 186 unresolved recommendations (39 per cent) in the review. These recommendations are more than three years old and are directed at 27 different agencies across 28 different audits. 

We urge these agencies to resolve these recommendations immediately so that the risks we identified are addressed and necessary improvements made.

How different types of agencies performed 

We compared the completion status of the different types of agencies included in our review.

Departmental agencies

The nine government departments in our review had a greater number of accepted and unresolved recommendations than other types of agencies. This is largely because they are included in more of our audits.

Specifically, we found that: 

• The Department of Education and Training (DET) had the highest completion rate, reporting they completed 35 of their 47 surveyed recommendations (74 per cent). 
• The Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning (DELWP) had a relatively high completion rate, reporting they had completed 68 of their 97 surveyed recommendations (70 per cent).
• The Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) and the Department of Jobs, Precincts and Regions (DJPR) also had high completion rates, reporting they both completed 46 of their 64 surveyed recommendations (72 per cent).
• The Department of Justice and Community Safety (DJCS) had low completion rates, reporting they completed 24 of their 47 surveyed recommendations (51 per cent). 
• The Department of Premier and Cabinet's (DPC) completion rate was also relatively low, reporting they completed 24 of their 44 surveyed recommendations (55 per cent). 

Figure 1E sets out department completion rates.

Non‐departmental agencies 

Of the 93 non‐departmental agencies included in this review, 35 reported that they had completed all of their recommendations. These agencies had 12 or fewer recommendations.

For a list of agency implementation status for this review, refer to Appendix F.

How long agencies took to complete our recommendations 

Agencies took a median of 396 calendar days, or 13 months, to complete a recommendation after we tabled the audit in Parliament. The range of time taken to complete a recommendation was between zero days and 58 months. Zero days to complete a recommendation indicates the agency completed the recommendation before we tabled the audit.

Between years, the time taken to complete recommendations decreased from a median of 52 months in 2015–16 to eight months in 2020–21, showing an improvement in overall timeliness. Figure 1F shows the spread of time taken to complete recommendations by the financial year the audit tabled. 

The time it takes to complete recommendations can be influenced by the volume and complexity of recommendations. There are also large differences in agency size and resources.

We asked agencies to indicate how long they expected it would take them to complete a recommendation when we tabled their audit. Agencies established initial timeframes for completion in 809 of the 1 023 accepted recommendations (79 per cent). Of these, they later revised timeframes of 336 recommendations (42 per cent). Six agencies exceeded their expected timeframes for 10 recommendations by a median of seven months.  

Department completion times

Departments took between zero days and 46 months, with a median of 13 months, to complete recommendations. 

Specifically, we found that: 

• DTF had the longest median completion times of any department. Its 46 completed recommendations required a median of 20 months, with a range of one to 39 months. 
• DPC followed DTF, its 24 completed recommendation required a median of 17 months, with a range of three to 36 months.
• All remaining departments had a median completion time of 13 months. DELWP was the most responsive, completing 68 recommendations with a median of 10 months and a range of zero days to 37 months. 

Figure 1G shows median departmental completion times.

When we took a broader perspective and looked at how long departments took to complete recommendations from 2015–16 to 2020–21, we found that timeliness had progressively improved. As shown in Figure 1H, there is a decrease in the median of months departments took to complete recommendations from 2015–16 and 2020–21. Departments completed recommendations from 2018–19 quicker than previous years, as the percentage of complete recommendations remained high (71 per cent) yet the time taken decreased by a median of 22 months in 2018–19. 

See Appendix E for a breakdown of between-year trends of departmental completion times. 

Maximum completion times

As expected, unresolved recommendations from 2015–16 audits have taken the longest to complete, with a median of 1 594 days (four years and four months). While many agencies completed recommendations from 2015–16 audits in previous years, five recommendations are still open following this review.

Some agencies have been slow to complete performance audit recommendations. Completion times for individual recommendations have extended up to 4.9 years after the audit tabling date.

Agencies, audits and recommendations that have taken four or more years to complete are listed in Figure 1I.

FIGURE 1I: Complete recommendations with extended times 

Source: VAGO. 

Back to top

We have consulted with the agencies listed in Appendix D, and we considered their views when reaching our review findings. As required by the Audit Act 1994, we gave a draft copy of this report to those agencies and asked for their submissions and comments. 

Responsibility for the accuracy, fairness and balance of those comments rests solely with the agency head.

Agencies attested that their survey responses were accurate and complete as of 31 March 2021. We have received responses from agencies seeking to provide updates beyond the attestation date of this review, we have noted these updates and will include them as part of our next review. 

Response provided by Secretary, Department of Education and Training

Response provided by Secretary, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning

Response provided by Secretary, Department of Justice and Community Safety

Response provided by Secretary, Department of Transport

Response provided by Chief Executive, The Royal Melbourne Hospital

Response provided by Chief Commissioner, Victoria Police

Back to top

Back to top

Back to top

This review includes 1 063 recommendations in 76 audits. We have listed audited agencies with recommendations in these audits below.

FIGURE D1: 2020–21 audits and agencies

Source: VAGO.

FIGURE D2: 2019–20 audits and agencies

Source: VAGO.

FIGURE D3: 2018–19 audits and agencies

Source: VAGO.

FIGURE D4: 2017–18 audits and agencies

Source: VAGO.

FIGURE D5: 2016–17 audits and agencies

Source: VAGO.

FIGURE D6: 2015–16 audits and agencies

Source: VAGO.

Back to top

Departments reported more timely completion rates for recommendations from 2015–16 to 2020–21. Departments completed recommendations from 2018–19 quicker than previous years, as overall completion rates dropped from a median of 35 months to in 2017–18 to 13 months in 2018–19. 

Figures E1 to E4 show a breakdown of between-year trends of department completion times. Due to the short timeframe between reviewing and publishing, we included only two audits from 2020–21. This is why we have excluded 2020–21 in the figures. 

Back to top

Agencies were required to self‐attest to the accuracy and completeness of their survey response. The survey sought information on the status of performance audit recommendations:

• from all VAGO performance audits tabled in Parliament in 2018–19 to 2019–20 and two audits that tabled in early 2020–21
• that were reported to us in our 2020 survey as unresolved from audits tabled in 2015–16 to 2017–18.

In total, the survey included 1 063 recommendations from 76 audits involving 102 agencies. 

In this Appendix, we have included the status and response of the agency to all recommendations in each audit included in this assurance review. Agency responses have not been edited by VAGO.

For audits that tabled in 2015–16 to 2017–18, agencies may have already completed some recommendations. To view a more complete picture of agency performance visit this report's dashboard at www.audit.vic.gov.au.

Click the link below to download a CSV copy of agency responses to this assurance review.

Click here to download agency responses to this assurance review.

Back to top