I am trying to create a customized table of contents with the following form. I have been looking at a number of sources but still having a hard time getting it to work adequately. Right before the abstract there is a title page that should not be considered in the table of contents. There is an appendix at the end, that should not have a page number.

                                   Table of Contents

Abstract............................................ ii
Acknowledgement. ................................... iii
Tables.............................................. v
Figures............................................. vi
1.0 Introduction ................................... 1
1.1 Background.............................. 2
1.1 Objectives.............................. 3
2.0 Review.......................................... 4
2.1 xxxxxxxxxx.............................. 5
2.2 yyyyyyyyyy.............................. 6
3.0 Conclusion...................................... 7
4.0 References...................................... 8
CODE................................................ 9
APPENDIX

-
Which document class are you using? –  Gonzalo Medina Dec 11 '11 at 18:40
Should the chapter numbering 1.0, 2.0, 3.0,... also be maintained in the document or is it just for the ToC? –  Gonzalo Medina Dec 11 '11 at 18:47
What is the "title that should not be considered"? Sounds like a phrase from Harry Potter: "He who must not be named". :) –  Werner Dec 11 '11 at 19:08

Here's a possible solution using the tocloft package and the book document class:

\documentclass{book}
\usepackage{tocbibind}
\usepackage{tocloft}
\usepackage{lipsum}

\AtBeginDocument{%
\renewcommand\listtablename{Tables}
\renewcommand\listfigurename{Figures}
}

% Centered title for ToC, LoF, LoT
\renewcommand{\cfttoctitlefont}{\hfill\Huge\bfseries}
\renewcommand{\cftaftertoctitle}{\hfill}
\renewcommand{\cftloftitlefont}{\hfill\Huge\bfseries}
\renewcommand{\cftafterloftitle}{\hfill}
\renewcommand{\cftlottitlefont}{\hfill\Huge\bfseries}
\renewcommand{\cftafterlottitle}{\hfill}

\renewcommand\cftchapdotsep{\cftdotsep}

% Add space to account for new chapter numbering schema
\renewcommand\cftchapnumwidth{3em}
\renewcommand\cftsecindent{3em}

% Redefine representation for chapter (and section) counters
\renewcommand\thechapter{\arabic{chapter}.0}
\renewcommand\thesection{\arabic{chapter}.\arabic{section}}

\begin{document}

\frontmatter
\chapter{Abstract}
\lipsum[1]
\chapter{Acknowledgements}
\lipsum[1]
\clearpage
\tableofcontents
\clearpage
\listoftables
\clearpage
\listoffigures
\clearpage
\mainmatter
\chapter{Introduction}
\section{Background}
\section{Objectives}
\chapter{Review}
\section{Test Section}
\section{AnotherTest Section}

\backmatter
\chapter{CODE}

\chapter*{APPENDIX}

\end{document}


-
+1 for including the ToC in the ToC, as specified by the OP. :-) –  lockstep Dec 11 '11 at 19:12
@lockstep: it's such a senseless (and ugly) practice, but some institutions require it as part of their format for theses. –  Gonzalo Medina Dec 11 '11 at 19:15

Here' s an example using the book class. \frontmatter causes Roman, \mainmatter arabic page numbering. For the appendix, I switch off page numbering manually with \pagenumbering{gobble} and add an unnmumbered \part.

EDIT: Added changed numbering scheme (plus correction of ToC indents).

\documentclass{book}

\renewcommand{\thechapter}{\arabic{chapter}.0}
\renewcommand{\thesection}{\arabic{chapter}.\arabic{section}}

\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd{\l@chapter}{1.5em}{2.3em}{}{}
\patchcmd{\l@section}{{1.5em}{2.3em}}{{2.3em}{2.3em}}{}{}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

\frontmatter

\tableofcontents

\chapter{Acknowledgement}

\mainmatter

\chapter{bla}

\section{blubb}

\chapter{foo}

\cleardoublepage
\appendix
\pagenumbering{gobble}

\part*{Appendix}

\chapter{bar}

\end{document}


-
What's the difference between \pagenumbering{empty} and \pagenumbering{gobble}? Just curious. –  Mico Dec 11 '11 at 19:13
Well, \pagenumbering{empty} results in an error. You were thinking of \pagestyle{empty}, weren't you? ;-) –  lockstep Dec 11 '11 at 19:15
Yes, I was. :-) –  Mico Dec 11 '11 at 19:18