Effectively managing the Victorian Government's significant expenditure on goods and services is an opportunity to deliver or improve value for money for the community.
Spend across the VPS can be split into different expense and procurement categories. Good category planning relies on sound knowledge of the market, good quality procurement data and robust information systems to provide a comprehensive picture of spend.
VPS is a major purchaser of goods and services. Spending on goods and services is typically the largest item of agency expenditure after employee costs. As Figure 1A shows, the value of VPS expenditure on goods and services reported in the 2016–17 Annual Financial Report of the State of Victoria was $18.6 billion for the year.
Figure 1A
Overview of Victorian Government operating expenditure, 2016–17
The Victorian public sector (VPS) buys a lot of goods and services—$18.6 billion worth in 2016–17. One way that this purchasing power is harnessed is through State Purchase Contracts (SPC). SPCs aggregate demand for commonly used goods and services such as utilities, office consumables, information and communication technology (ICT), staffing and travel services.
|
ANZSIC |
Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification |
|
ASR |
Annual Supply Report |
|
CAFAS |
Commercial and Financial Advisory Services |
|
CMP |
Category Management Plan |
|
DEDJTR |
Ordered to be published
VICTORIAN GOVERNMENT PRINTER September 2018
PP No 441, Session 2014–18
Dear Presiding Officers
In a market-led proposal (MLP), the private sector makes an unsolicited approach to government for support to deliver infrastructure or services through direct negotiation rather than a competitive procurement process. The state has considered many MLPs since early 2015, with four successfully advancing through the entire process to contract award.
Ordered to be published
VICTORIAN GOVERNMENT PRINTER June 2018
PP No 398, Session 2014–18
Dear Presiding Officers
During the audit, we conducted detailed testing of a selection of agencies, and projects reported on the ICT Dashboard. Figure C1 shows the ICT project reporting requirements for PR under version 1.0 of the ICT Reporting Standard. We undertook detailed testing using version 1.0 of the ICT Reporting Standard.
Figure C1
ICT PR requirements, under version 1.0 of the ICT Reporting Standard
|
Reference |
|---|
To assess the accuracy and completeness of the ICT Dashboard we examined source data from projects reported by four of the agencies involved in this audit:
We tested the information published on the ICT Dashboard for 18 ICT projects, and asked these agencies to provide source data or documentation to verify their published data.
Figure B1 shows a summary of the results from our detailed audit testing.
Figure B1
Results of agency testing