Scrutiny of annual reports no. 1 of 2000

March 2000

ISSN 1328-920

View the report as a single document - (PDF 170KB)

View the report as separate downloadable parts:


Membership of the Committee

Report on Annual Reports - Overview

Departments
Department of Health and Aged Care 1998-99 Department of Family and Community Services 1998-99
Statutory Authorities
Australia New Zealand Food Authority 1998-99 Australian Hearing Services (Australian Hearing) 1998-99 Australian Institute of Family Studies 1998-99 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 1998-99 Centrelink 1998-99 Health Insurance Commission 1998-99 National Health and Medical Research Council 1998 Operations of the Registered Benefits Organisations 1998-99 Private Health Insurance Administration Council 1998-99 Private Health Insurance Ombudsman 1998-99 Professional Services Review 1998-99 Social Security Appeals Tribunal 1998-99
Non-statutory Bodies
Pharmaceutical Benefits Pricing Authority 1998-99
Government Business Enterprises
Health Services Australia Ltd (HSA) 1998-99 Medibank Private Ltd 1998-99
Appendix 1
Guidelines for the preparation of Departmental Annual Reports Guidelines for the content, preparation and presentation of Annual Reports by Statutory Authorities Requirements for the Annual Reports of Non-Statutory Bodies Requirements for the Annual Reports of Government Companies

Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee Secretariat

Mr Elton Humphery
Secretary
The Senate
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Phone: 02 6277 3515
Fax:02 6277 5829
E-mail:community.affairs.sen@aph.gov.au
Internet: https://www.aph.gov.au/senate_ca

Membership of the committee

Members

Senator Sue Knowles, Chairman	LP, Western Australia
Senator Lyn Allison, Deputy Chair	AD, Victoria
Senator Kay Denman	ALP, Tasmania
Senator Chris Evans	ALP, Western Australia
Senator Brett Mason	LP, Queensland
Senator Tsebin Tchen	LP, Victoria

Report on annual reports - Overview

1.1 This report was prepared pursuant to Standing Order 25 (21) relating to the consideration of annual reports by Committees. The Committee notes that as most annual reports referred to it were tabled by 31 October 1999 and with the remainder reasonably soon thereafter, it proposes to submit only one report on annual reports to cover all the reports it is required to report upon for the year.

1.2 The Committee’s examination of annual reports has shown that the reports generally address the reporting requirements in a satisfactory manner and overall maintain a high standard of presentation. The reports usually provide a detailed account of programs and activities of the relevant agencies and, as in previous years, continue to focus on measuring performance against outcomes and goals. The format and layout of the reports continues to be of a high standard and information is presented in a concise and generally ‘reader friendly’ manner. While no major deficiencies have been identified in any reports, the Committee has, however, made specific comments on several reports where reporting on certain aspects relating to an agency’s performance could be improved.

1.3 The Committee notes that many annual reports comment on the findings of external review bodies into their activities and programs, and encourages all departments and authorities to fully respond to issues raised in these reviews in their annual reports as an important part of the accountability process.

1.4 The Committee welcomes the use by agencies of web sites, which are increasingly referred to in annual reports, as an important development in disseminating information about programs and services to the wider community.

1.5 Finally, the Committee is pleased to note that several of the suggestions it made in its last report on annual reports towards improving the format of annual reports, or suggestions that additional information be provided in these reports, have been incorporated in the annual reports examined by the Committee.

DEPARTMENTS

Department of Health and Aged Care 1998-99[1]

Timeliness

1.6 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 21 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

Quality

1.7 The annual report provides a well presented and comprehensive overview of the Department’s programs and activities. A review of activities, achievements and underachievements is provided for each program as well as detailed analysis against performance indicators. The appendices provide a range of statistical and other information relating to the Department, including information on staffing, consultancies and advertising.

Reporting requirements

1.8 All reporting requirements are met.

Performance reporting

1.9 The Department notes that as the current annual report is prepared to report against performance measures outlined in the 1998-99 Portfolio Budget Statements, it uses the program-based structure that existed during the 1998-99 financial year. The report stated that the Department’s 1999-2000 annual report will report against the new accrual-based outcomes and outputs framework (p.iv).

1.10 Detailed information on each program is contained in the performance reporting section of the report. The Department states that this year’s annual report ‘builds on the Department’s performance and reporting regime with the introduction of output measures foreshadowing the introduction of the new accural-based Outcomes and Outputs Framework from 1 July 1999’ (p.8). The Department added that this approach ensures that the portfolio’s performance can be assessed against clearly defined benchmarks which are announced ahead of time - an approach that ‘serves to promote clarity and transparency in the very important process of public sector accountability’ (p.8).

1.11 The report provides information on the Department’s achievements, as well as a discussion of areas of ‘underachievement’ indicating where goals have not been met. Information on underachievements by program are also discussed in more detail in Part 2 of the report, under ‘Program Performance Reports’. Some areas of underachievement noted in the report include the higher than expected growth rates in the costs of diagnostic imaging; the failure to develop regional plans in several States in relation to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Framework Agreements; the failure to realise expected gains in productivity as a result of the introduction of a new desktop computer system and significant problems in implementation; and continuing difficulties with the States in relation to signing revised Home and Community Care (HACC) agreements (p.10). The Committee notes that problems with finalising the HACC agreements were also commented upon in the Department’s last two annual reports.

1.12 With regard to external scrutiny, while the report refers to specific audits undertaken by the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) during 1998-99, there is virtually no discussion of these reports (pp.20-21, 256). The Committee believes that issues raised by the Audit Office or other external review bodies should be discussed in future reports, including measures taken to address any significant problems raised in these reports.

Staffing

1.13 The report comments on the operation of the Department’s Certified Agreement and Performance Development Scheme. The report notes that during the year the Department took a number of initiatives aimed at improving performance levels including extension of the manager development strategy and the review of general training and development programs. The report conceded, however, that further work is required to improve the Department’s performance and make it a ‘better place to work’ (p.35).

1.14 With regard to equity and access, the report notes that ‘particular progress has been made in recruiting more Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff. The gender balance within the Department more than meets Australian Public Service targets, and the Department accepts that it provides an important avenue for able women to advance in the Public Service ’ (p.19, see also pp.307-9).

1.15 The report notes, however, that in relation to EEO targets, the target figure for people from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds is below the target set (p.303). The Department notes that strategies have been developed to ensure a more even distribution of EEO groups across the Department’s occupational and salary levels (p.303, see also pp.307-9).

Consultancies

1.16 The report indicates that the Department engaged 277 consultants during 1998-99, a decrease from 1997-98 when 381 consultants were engaged (p.326). A detailed breakdown of individual consultancies across programs, including the justification for particular consultancies is provided in the report (pp.328-38). The Committee notes that there has been a decrease in expenditure on consultancies in 1998-99 - where expenditure totalled $21 588 005 - when compared with the previous year’s expenditure of $23 911 488 (p.326).

Department of Family and Community Services 1998-99[2]

Timeliness

1.17 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 21 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

Quality

1.18 The annual report provides a comprehensive review of the Department’s activities. The report includes detailed outcomes and outputs performance reports. In addition, it includes a portfolio and corporate overview which includes information on the portfolio structure, the department’s program structure and an explanation of the basis for program performance reporting in the annual report.

1.19 However, the Committee believes that the report should provide more explicit discussion indicating where outcomes have not been met, or where improvements in performance are needed. The Committee is pleased to record that several of its comments and suggestions made in its last report have been satisfactorily addressed by the Department in the current annual report.

Reporting requirements

1.20 All reporting requirements have been met.

Performance reporting

1.21 The Department notes that the current annual report reports against the new accrual-based outcomes and outputs framework which replaces the program structure under the accrual budgeting arrangements for the 1999-2000 budget year (p.3). The report notes that this outcome structure represents a ‘significant step’ forward in the approach to social policy, defining three major outcomes that the portfolio seeks to deliver, namely, ‘stronger families’, ‘stronger communities’ and ‘economic and social participation’ (pp.3-4). This reporting reflects the considerable administrative rearrangement that occurred with the creation of the new Department in October 1998.

1.22 While the report discusses its performance in relation to delivering on its outcomes in some detail, more discussion should be included in future reports on areas where outcomes have not been achieved. The Committee notes that in this regard the Secretary’s review in the report discusses delivery of outcomes in terms only of ‘achievements’ (pp.5-6). A more explicit acknowledgment of ‘underachievements’ would add more balance to the report.

1.23 The report comments on a key element of the Department’s role, that is, as a purchaser of services. The report notes that the Business Partnership Agreement with Centrelink ($1.4 billion) for the delivery of programs worth $42 billion is a key business strategy and is ‘critical to the effective delivery of government policies and programs’ (p.7). The revised 1998-99 Agreement, signed on 1 July 1999, relates the services that Centrelink provides to the outcomes that FaCS must deliver for government. While the report provides a general discussion of the partnerships agreements and service delivery (see pp.7-8,217-21) there should be more discussion in future reports on a critical evaluation of these arrangements and any problems arising from the management of these agreements.

1.24 The Committee notes that the report refers to the ANAO report (Report No.30: The Use and Operation of Performance Information in the Service Level Agreements) in which several recommendations were made in relation to the Agreements between the Department and Centrelink (p.272). The Department notes that the 1998-99 Agreement with Centrelink addressed the ANAO recommendations by strengthening monitoring arrangements and setting a timetable for delivery of services (p.272).

1.25 The Committee is pleased to note that the report acknowledges the comments the Committee made in its last report on features of the Department’s annual report (p.277). The Committee also acknowledges that the Department has directly responded to a concern that there should be more discussion on the Department’s strategies to ensure protection of client information - a concise discussion of this issue is included in the current report (see pp.280-81).

External scrutiny

1.26 The report provides information on a number of reviews - both internal and external - into its operations conducted during 1998-99 (pp.265-84).

1.27 The report provides a concise summary of ANAO reports conducted in 1998-99, including a useful discussion of action taken by the Department to address issues raised in these Audit reports (pp.271-74).

1.28 The Committee notes that in 1998-99 the Commonwealth Ombudsman received 2309 complaints about FaCS compared to 69 complaints in 1997-98. Most complaints (2261 complaints in 1998-99) relate to the Child Support Agency (CSA). The report states that the increase in the number of complaints has come about because of the expanded nature of the Department, which now includes the CSA, CRS Australia and two program areas of the former Department of Health and Family Services. (p.274). The report notes that there were 137 fewer complaints in 1998-99 for the CSA compared with the previous year, indicating that the Child Support Charter and complaints service are helping CSA to resolve matters before reaching the Ombudsman (p.274). The Commonwealth Ombudsman’s report also indicated that the decline in complaint numbers ‘is indicative of the improvements the CSA has made in its administrative processes’.[3]

Consultancies

1.29 The report provides details on consultancies, including information on the amounts paid and the justification for individual consultancies (pp.291-315). Information on the amount spent on consultancies by the Department and its agencies is also provided (p.293).

1.30 During the 1998-99 financial year, 196 consultancy services were engaged (where the amount paid was $2000 or greater) with an overall expenditure of $10 423 061 for the portfolio as a whole (excluding Centrelink). Of these, the Department engaged 141 consultancies for a total amount of $8 087 270 (p.293). The report notes that the number and value of consultancies for FaCS is a significant increase on last year’s figures (an increase from $5.8 million to $8.1 million). The Department cited several reasons for this, including the fact that the previous year’s outcome was for the then, smaller, Department of Social Security; the need for FaCS to establish its corporate and business identities as a matter of priority; and the need to implement key government reforms including accrual accounting, competitive tendering and improved accountability processes (p.293).

STATUTORY AUTHORITIES

Australia New Zealand Food Authority 1998-99

1.31 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 19 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.32 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a comprehensive overview of the Authority’s functions and activities. The report also includes, as in previous years, more detailed information on strategies and activities the Authority has undertaken on a program basis during the year to meet its objectives. Information is also provided on ANZFA’s involvement in international projects, including projects in the Asia-Pacific region (pp.77-83).

1.33 The report notes that in relation to resourcing, the Authority found it necessary to draw down virtually all of the assets it held from the previous year, which meant that, while ANZFA was able to meet all of its cash requirements as and when they fell due, it has insufficient assets to meet all accrued non-cash liabilities (p.xvii). The Authority stated that ‘this has been noted by the Auditor-General in the independent audit report dated 20 September 1999’ (p.xvii, see also p.92). ANZFA stated that it is seeking additional funding through the Government budgetary process and has ‘initiated a review of its internal processes to ensure it is as efficient as possible’ (p.xvii).

1.34 The Committee has in previous reports requested that details of consultancies including the reasons for their engagement should be included in annual reports of the Authority. This information has not been included in the current report - the report noting that detailed information on consultancies is only available on request (p.117). The Committee believes that more comprehensive information on consultancies should be included in future annual reports.

Australian Hearing Services (Australian Hearing) 1998-99

1.35 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 23 November 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.36 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a useful review of the activities of Australian Hearing. The report provides information on the range of services to its client groups, noting that it provides ‘quality hearing services in a contestable environment and to meet essential community service obligations as required by Government’ (p.1).

1.37 Regarding operational performance, the Committee notes that over the last 12 months, some 167 000 people used the services offered by Australian Hearing, compared with 166 800 in the previous year (p.3). The report noted that new client outcomes surveys are being undertaken to measure hearing aid benefit and overall client satisfaction. The report also notes that client accessibility to services has improved with a national network of service centres in 324 sites (up from 295 sites in the previous year), including some in very remote areas (p.3).

1.38 The Committee believes that reporting on consultancies and advertising could be improved by the inclusion of more detailed information in the report, given the sizeable expenditures on these items (p.47).

Australian Institute of Family Studies 1998-99

1.39 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 20 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.40 The reporting requirements are met. The report provides a comprehensive overview of the Institute’s activities and programs. The report also provides a detailed summary of the research undertaken by the Institute in terms of performance outcomes (see pp.28-41). The report notes the success of the Institute’s web site in disseminating information about the Institute’s activities with over 27 000 visits made to the web site in 1998-99, an increase of 100 per cent over the previous year (p.3).

1.41 In regard to external scrutiny, the report states that suggestions made by the Audit Office to improve some processes associated with the financial statements will be addressed by the Institute (p.5). Details of the ANAO suggestions and the way in which the Institute is addressing these issues should have been included in the report.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 1998-99

1.42 The report was tabled in the Senate on 20 October 1999 and in the House of Representatives on 25 November 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.43 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a concise account of the Institute’s functions and activities in the health and welfare field. This report notes the development of the Institute’s Corporate Plan to guide its work program activities from 1999 to 2002. Key directions identified in the Plan are an increasing focus on adding value to the Institute’s analysis (for example, the publication of thematic reports) and working to expand the Institute's business relationships (p.iv).

1.44 The report provides useful summary information assessing the Institute’s activities against program targets (see pp.31-32, 42-43). The Committee is pleased to note that this information is provided in the body of the report and not, as in the last report, as an appendix. The inclusion of more information on performance reporting addresses a deficiency identified in the Committee’s past reports that the Institute had not provided sufficient analysis of its activities.

Centrelink 1998-99

1.45 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 20 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.46 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a useful overview of the activities of Centrelink. Performance reporting has improved in the current report with more information provided on areas where goals have not been met - in addition to concentrating on ‘achievements’. The Committee is pleased to note that more information on the ‘Balanced Scorecard’, the key instrument for measuring Centrelink’s performance, is provided in the report (pp.18-19) - thus addressing a deficiency noted by the Committee in its last report.

1.47 The report notes that Centrelink has developed and implemented performance indicators which measure performance against targets in several key areas. The report states that Centrelink has equalled or exceeded targets for the year in three of five key result areas. The areas of customer services, cost reduction and innovation exceeded targets; client partnerships showed improvement towards achieving targets; while people management fell short of its targets (pp.10-19). The report concedes that its performance in relation to people management ‘is not an acceptable outcome and the Board of Management have put in place a number of initiatives during the past twelve months to address this area of under performance’ (p.10). These initiatives are described in the report (see pp.60-67).

1.48 In regard to customer service, the report provides more details of its approach in this area than in the last report, and cites several initiatives to improve access to services and information undertaken over the year (pp.40-56). The Committee noted in its last report that Centrelink should address issues relating to customer service delivery in more detail in future reports and is pleased to note that more information on customer satisfaction surveys is included in this report. The report indicates that customer satisfaction with the overall quality of Centrelink’s services remained stable over the year at 65 per cent (p.37). Satisfaction with service provided by call centres was lower at 60 percent - ‘providing the greatest opportunity for improvement’ (p.37, see also p.203).

1.49 In relation to consultancy services, the report indicates that Centrelink paid $7 011 157 for consultancies in 1998-99 (where the amount paid was $2000 or greater), compared with $9 571 653 in 1997-98 (p.164). A detailed breakdown of individual consultancies is provided in the report (pp.165-181).

1.50 Regarding external scrutiny, while reviews by the ANAO are noted in the report the findings and any action taken by Centrelink in response to these reports are only referred to in very general terms (p.148). More information on Centrelink’s response to these reports should be included in future reports.

1.51 The Committee notes that the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Annual Report 1998-99 stated that the office received 11 599 complaints about Centrelink, an increase of 10 per cent over the previous year.[4] The Ombudsman stated that the significant increase in Centrelink complaints was primarily due to legislative changes in eligibility criteria for young people, brought about by the introduction of Youth Allowance on 1 July 1998 (p.28).[5]

1.52 The Ombudsman’s report also raised several issues in relation to Centrelink’s operations, including the quality of letters and written communication - noting the ‘steady stream of complaints about the quality, tone and incomplete nature of Centrelink’s written communications’.[6] The Ombudsman stated, however, that Centelink has dedicated resources to review the format and content of its standard letters.[7]

1.53 Other issues raised by the Ombudsman included problems with claims for compensation; complexity in the administration of family allowance payments; and problems in the administration of Austudy financial supplement loans.[8] The Committee in its last report suggested that issues raised by the Ombudsman, ANAO or other review body relevant to Centrelink’s operations, should be discussed in detail in future reports, including measures to address any problems raised in these reports. The Committee believes that reporting on these matters could be improved in future Centrelink reports.

Health Insurance Commission 1998-99

1.54 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 19 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.55 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a comprehensive overview of the Commission’s activities and performance. The report also contains a wide range of statistical information on the programs managed by the Commission (see pp.178-241).

1.56 The report comments on the new Strategic Plan for the next three years and the development of a new service charter, the Charter of Care, which outlines the Commission’s obligations and standards of service, as well as benchmarks against which service performance will be measured (pp.vii-ix).

1.57 The Commission’s operations summary provides a set of useful key performance objectives against which the Commission’s performance can be assessed. Key objectives, such as accuracy and prompt processing of payments and staff satisfaction, either met or exceeded the targets set in 1998-99 (p.2).

1.58 The data in the report also indicate that the satisfaction of clients with the Commission’s administration of government programs remains high (p.2). The report notes, however, a downward trend in the last few years in community satisfaction with the service provided by the HIC and indicated that it ‘will be looking at strategies to address this’ (p.2). The report also notes the reversal in the upward trend in satisfaction among medical practitioners with the HIC’s service. Pharmacists’ satisfaction with the HIC’s service continues to increase, although respondents tended to be ‘quite satisfied’ rather than ‘very satisfied’ compared to previous years (p.3).

National Health and Medical Research Council 1998

1.59 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 22 June 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.60 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a concise account of the Council’s functions and operations. The report notes that the NHMRC in 1998 focussed on the development of a strategic research capability that targets emerging health problems as well as areas where research effort is underdeveloped (p.8). In addition, the report notes that the Council has strengthened its capacity to provide timely health advice and has continued to provide high quality ethical advice relating to health research and health care (p.8).

1.61 A separate volume, Grants 1999, details the health and medical research grants recommended for funding in 1999 by the NHMRC.

Operations of the Registered Benefits Organisations 1998-99

1.62 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 7 December 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.63 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a comprehensive overview of the financial operations of registered health benefit organisations, including statistical data on the operations of the health funds. The report notes that initiatives in the area of private health insurance have resulted in the first two consecutive quarters of growth in the industry since PHIAC was established in 1989 (pp.1,21).

Private Health Insurance Administration Council 1998-99

1.64 The report was and tabled in both houses of Parliament on 19 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.65 All reporting requirements are met. The report covers the first year of the newly constituted and independent PHIAC. The report notes that over the past year PHIAC has sought to increase the amount of information it provides to the industry from the data it collects from financial and reinsurance reporting, with the intention of encouraging individual funds to benchmark against industry trends and, in the longer term, develop best practice (p.3). The Committee looks forward to future reporting on this initiative by the Council in subsequent annual reports.

1.66 The Committee notes that in relation to consumer information PHIAC has updated the publication Insure? Not Sure? and that it is now available on PHIAC’s web site. The report also notes that PHIAC’s web site has been upgraded during the last year, and that the range of information available on the site will be increased during 1999-2000 (p.24). The Committee notes these initiatives as it has suggested in previous reports that more consumer information should be provided by PHIAC.

Private Health Insurance Ombudsman 1998-99

1.67 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 21 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.68 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a concise analysis of the activities of the Ombudsman over the reporting period. The report is well organised and ‘user-friendly’ and contains a useful index.

1.69 In regard to the Ombudsman’s performance, it was noted that the office received 1812 complaints in 1998-99, slightly lower than the 1966 complaints recorded in 1997-98. The office attributes much of this reduction to the decline in the number of complaints about the cost of premiums following the introduction of the 30 per cent Commonwealth Government rebate (p.10). The office finalised 1806 complaints during the year (an average of 150 per month), compared with an average of 164 complaints finalised per month in the previous year (p.10).

1.70 The report noted that various strategies are used to raise community awareness of the service provided by the Ombudsman, including a web site where consumers can access a range of information in addition to making inquiries and lodging complaints (p.23). In future annual reports it would be useful if details on the overall usage of the web site were provided.

1.71 The Committee is pleased to note that the report contains more detailed information on consultancies (p.27) than in previous reports, in response to the Committee’s request in its last report.

Professional Services Review 1998-99

1.72 The report was tabled in the Senate on 22 November 1999 and in the House of Representatives on 23 November 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.73 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a useful overview of the operations of the Professional Services Review (PSR). The report comments on the review of the PSR Scheme which was necessitated as a result of the adverse decision of the Federal Court handed down in May 1998 in the case of Adams v. Yung & Ors (the Yung case), which highlighted deficiencies in the PSR Scheme. The review committee’s findings were all accepted by the Government and given effect in the Health Insurance Amendment (Professional Services Review) Act 1999 which commenced operation on 1 August 1999 (pp.2, 34).

1.74 In relation to its operational activities the report noted that that it received a ‘dramatic downturn’ in the number of referrals from the HIC - 11 cases in 1998-99, compared with 48 cases in 1997-98. The report noted this reflected the difficulties arising as a result of the Yung case and the need to review all procedures (p.6). Only two referrals were finalised during the reporting period, compared with 29 finalised in 1997-98 (p.7). The report noted, however, that that with the changes implemented ‘it is clear that the Federal Court’s concern’s are capable of being addressed in future cases’ (p.7).

Social Security Appeals Tribunal 1998-99

1.75 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 21 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.76 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a concise account of the activities of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal (SSAT), with an emphasis on performance outcomes measured against the Tribunal’s objectives. The report comments that substantial additional activity occurred during 1998-99 for the Tribunal arising from the review of the SSAT by Dame Margaret Guilfoyle and also from proposals to establish an Administrative Review Tribunal (p.4).

1.77 Statistics in the report indicate that the Tribunal continues to receive relatively high levels of appeals with 10 130 applications for review in 1998-99, compared with 11 628 applications for the previous year. The most noticeable decrease in applications was in Austudy/Youth Allowance and Disability Support Pension cases (p.15). Finalised appeals totalled 10 722, compared with 12 343 in the previous year (p.3). The report notes an improvement in the timeliness of appeals processing, with the average time to process an appeal decreasing to 11 weeks, compared with 11.9 weeks in the previous year (p.4).

NON-STATUTORY BODIES

Pharmaceutical Benefits Pricing Authority 1998-99

1.78 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 20 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.79 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a comprehensive overview of the Authority’s functions and operations. The report provides information on pricing matters dealt with by the Authority together with a range of statistical data.

GOVERNMENT COMPANIES AND GOVERNMENT BUSINESS ENTERPRISES

Health Services Australia Ltd (HSA) 1998-99

1.80 The report was tabled in the Senate on 22 November 1999 and in the House of Representatives on 23 November 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.81 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a concise overview of HSA services and client service strategies. The report states that the company achieved a profit of $1.96 million after tax in 1998-99 (p.2). The report notes a continuing emphasis on ‘improving the quality of our service for Centrelink and our other established clients. Our internal indicators of service and timeliness of reports have all shown improvement’ (p.2).

Medibank Private Ltd. 1998-99

1.82 The report was tabled in both houses of Parliament on 21 October 1999, within the required 15 sitting days.

1.83 All reporting requirements are met. The report provides a useful description of the functions and operations of the company with an emphasis on performance reporting. In the strategic overview section of the report key goals, strategies and results are detailed as well as a section on ‘future strategies and activities’ (pp.11-13).

1.84 Regarding operational performance, the report comments that it increased its membership, for the fourth successive year and maintained its position as the largest private health insurer in Australia with a market share of 27 per cent (p.7). In addition, the report details various initiatives in the area of customer relations, including use of the web site, and various marketing strategies (pp.24,31).

Senator Sue Knowles

Chairman
March 2000

Appendix 1

GUIDELINES FOR THE PREPARATION OF DEPARTMENTAL

ANNUAL REPORTS

The guidelines for Departmental annual reports were tabled in the Senate on 30 June 1999.

GUIDELINES FOR THE CONTENT, PREPARATION AND PRESENTATION OF ANNUAL REPORTS BY STATUTORY AUTHORITIES