All departments have processes for investigating and reporting fraud and corruption incidents when they have been alerted to them by individuals.

Most departments test their procurement data to look for procurement and financial errors. However, only 2 departments use data analytics tests that specifically focus on proactively detecting fraud and corruption risks.

All departments have controls to prevent, detect and investigate fraud and corruption during the procurement process. Examples of these controls include running fraud and corruption training for new employees and having internal processes to report procurement and integrity matters to senior management.

However, departments are at different stages in making sure their controls work as they intended them to. In particular, not all departments make sure that:

This section summarises our key findings. The numbered sections detail our complete findings, including supporting evidence.

When reaching our conclusions, we consulted with the audited agencies and considered their views. The agencies’ full responses are in Appendix A. 

We made 5 recommendations to departments to address 2 issues. The relevant agencies have accepted our recommendations in full or in principle.

Download a PDF copy of Appendix D: Building dispute flowchart.

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.

DBDRV has resolved 7,484 domestic building disputes from April 2017 to October 2023. It resolved them more cost-effectively than if they had gone to VCAT.

Until recently, DBDRV could not demonstrate from its reporting that it is meeting all its intended outcomes.

DBDRV says that it aims to offer a free, fair and fast service. DBDRV's service is free for consumers and procedurally fair. However, DBDRV is not meeting its benchmark for the time it takes to allocate a case to an officer.