DTF uses a consistent approach to assess EIIF initiatives and advise the government.
But gaps in DTF’s processes, guidance and advice mean that the government does not always have all the evidence it needs to understand the benefits and risks of proposed EIIF initiatives.
Covered in this section:
Departments report on their initiatives' performance, which DTF tracks. This provides the government with useful information on service user outcomes and emerging risks.
But DTF and departments do not consistently measure changes in demand for the services where savings are expected, and they do not calculate actual savings.
This means the government cannot know if the savings underpinning budget reductions are being achieved.
Covered in this section:
We made 7 recommendations to address our findings. The relevant agencies have accepted the recommendations in full or in principle.
Our audit followed 2 lines of enquiry:
1. Does the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) provide and consistently apply Early Intervention Investment Framework (EIIF) guidance and processes to support evidence-based submissions and advice to the government?
2. Is departments’ reporting on EIIF initiatives comprehensive and evidence based?
To answer these questions, we examined:
Download a PDF copy of Appendix D: Council classifications.
Download a PDF copy of Appendix C: Audit scope and method.
Download a PDF copy of Appendix B: Abbreviations, acronyms and glossary.
Download a PDF copy of Appendix A: Submissions and comments.
The department does not have systems or processes in place to monitor and accurately report on EMCH performance and outcome measures. Councils are required to meet the measures, but the department does not ask them to report on progress.
EMCH program data is not accurate, timely or fit for purpose. The department is replacing the system and design work is ongoing.
The department has routinely reported inaccurately against its one public performance measure.
The department's EMCH funding model is based on the number of children aged 3 or under in each council, as well as each council’s socioeconomic status and rurality. But the model does not use past EMCH service delivery data. The department does not have a complete understanding of EMCH demand.
Despite being part of the funding model’s basis, we found that the challenges faced by families that are eligible for EMCH are not confined to socioeconomic disadvantage. It is also unclear whether all rural councils need additional funding for travel.
Covered in this section: