Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
www.tbs-sct.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
Breadcrumb Trail
ARCHIVED - Canadian Grain Commission - Report
This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
Section II – Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome
As a regulatory agency, the Canadian Grain Commission is mandated to, in the interests of grain producers, establish and maintain standards of quality for Canadian grain and regulate grain handling in Canada to ensure a dependable commodity for domestic and export markets. The Canadian Grain Commission has one strategic outcome that reflects the daily delivery of Canadian Grain Commission program activities and the long-term benefit to Canadians stemming from the Canadian Grain Commission’s mandate and vision. All Canadian Grain Commission program activities contribute to the achievement of this sole strategic outcome. To measure its success in delivering upon its strategic outcome, the Canadian Grain Commission has identified two performance indicators with associated targets.
| Performance Indicator |
Target | Performance Status |
|---|---|---|
| Number of instances where buyers are dissatisfied with Canadian Grain Commission standards, methods or procedures used to ensure a dependable commodity for domestic and export markets | Zero instances |
Mostly met expectations however the target of zero was not met
|
| Level of producer satisfaction with Canadian Grain Commission producer protection services | Zero unresolved or unaddressed complaints |
Met target
|
During 2009-10, the Western Grain Standards Committee and the Eastern Grain Standards Committee met several times to recommend specifications for grades of grain, and select and recommend standard samples to the Canadian Grain Commission. Their recommendations were forwarded to the Canadian Grain Commission for consideration. Four sub-committees composed of marketers, grain handlers and producers continued to advise the Western Grain Standards Committee on commodity-related concerns related to wheat, barley and other cereal grains, oilseeds, and pulses. Wide representation on the Standards Committees continues to ensure that the views of all principals are considered before changes are made to the Canadian grading system. Committee membership and 2009-10 Western and Eastern Grain Standards Committee recommendations related to the grading system are available at the following link: http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/gscommittee-comiteng/gscm-mcng-eng.htm.
Liaising with other federal government departments (e.g. CFIA, AAFC, Health Canada, and DFAIT), the Canadian grain industry, and international agencies concerning grain safety matters and trade implications was critically important upon the detection of trace amounts of genetically modified material in some Canadian flaxseed export shipments to Europe. Subsequently, sampling and testing protocols for Canadian flaxseed shipments to the European Union and Japan were developed to describe the system of sampling, testing, and documentation pertaining to the presence of CDC Triffid in shipments of Canadian flaxseed. The Canadian Grain Commission’s Grain Research Laboratory verified and adopted an accurate and reliable analytical test that can detect and quantify the presence of CDC Triffid in a flax sample. This test was a key component of building credibility with customers, helping the flax industry gain acceptance for the testing protocols, and ensuring flax shipments to various customer countries was resumed. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/gmflax-lingm/stpfm-mpeevl-eng.htm
During 2009-10, Canadian Grain Commission scientists and technical experts continued to play an important market support role by liaising with buyers, marketers, industry and producers and providing technical advice and information on grain quality, grain safety, and end-uses. In addition, customer feedback continued to be important in continuously improving Canada’s GQAS and Canadian Grain Commission programs and activities. Canadian Grain Commission personnel went on ten international market support missions to investigate, train, or convey the quality of Canadian grain to customers. Additionally, there were 26 international delegations that visited the Canadian Grain Commission to learn about the Canadian Grain Commission and Canada’s GQAS. Domestic and overseas buyers have stated that they are satisfied with the overall quality of Canadian grain and Canada’s GQAS. The Canadian Grain Commission remains committed to modernizing the Canada Grain Act and the Canada Grain Regulations to ensure that Canadian Grain Commission legislation, programs and services continue to meet the evolving needs of Canadian producers and the grain industry and that the Canadian Grain Commission can effectively and successfully deliver upon its strategic outcome and program activities.
How the Canadian Grain Commission tracks and reports
The following sections identify the expected results for each program activity and 2009-10 performance measured against targets as established in the Canadian Grain Commission's Performance Measurement Framework. The Canadian Grain Commission is committed to providing fair and reliable performance information. Performance data is collected and managed using different methods and procedures. In 2009-10, as part of its long-term process to improve the overall performance measurement and reporting process, the Canadian Grain Commission initiated a quarterly monitoring and tracking tool. The objective is to facilitate continuous evaluation of progress against plans that are identified in the Report on Plans and Priorities. The monitoring and tracking tool also provides an opportunity to address challenges and capture lessons learned. The Canadian Grain Commission is in the process of evaluating and refining the tool to facilitate improved evaluation of progress against plans.
Performance assessment and analysis
Canadian Grain Commission performance assessment and analysis includes both quantitative and qualitative information to give context to the Canadian Grain Commission’s performance story. It is important to note that the majority of Canadian Grain Commission services and activities are mandated by the Canada Grain Act. In addition, inspection and weighing services are largely dependent on Canadian export volumes which are in turn dependent on factors such as crop production, crop quality, price, production choices, and weather. Given this variability, a quantitative comparison of services provided between years and/or to other organizations is not a reliable indicator of performance. The performance analysis discussion identifies the key activities and major accomplishments that contributed to and/or impacted upon program activity performance. Independent verifiable performance information is included where available.
Strategic Outcome #1 - Canada’s grain is safe, reliable and marketable and Canadian grain producers are protected
Program Activity: Quality Assurance Program
| 2009-10 Financial Resources ($ thousands) |
2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 23,438 | 48,222 | 41,356 | 229 | 356 | 127 |
The difference between planned spending and total authorities is that planned spending reflects only the Canadian Grain Commission’s approved authorities as per the Main Estimates while total authorities include additional funding approved subsequent to the publication of the RPP.
The difference between total authorities and actual spending includes an overall increase in revenue credited to vote due to high grain volumes handled and lower actual expenditures for salaries due to staff departures and delays in hiring. There were no significant program changes during 2009-10.
2009-10 planned human resources (FTEs) as reported in the RPP were 229 based on approved authorities at that point in time, as per the Main Estimates. However, given all additional authorities secured by the Canadian Grain Commission, the full planned FTE complement for this program is 388. This represents an actual variance of -32. This difference is primarily attributed to delays in the staffing process.
Program Activity Description: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20102011/me-bpd/AAFC-AAC-eng.asp#bm04
| Expected Result |
Performance Indicator |
Target | Performance Status |
Performance Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consistent and reliable grain quality and grain safety assurance to meet the needs of domestic and international markets | Number of justified cargo complaints due to a breakdown in Canadian Grain Commission quality and/or safety assurance | Zero justifiable cargo complaints | Target mostly met (80 to 99 percent of the expected level of performance was achieved) |
|
Key Program Risk: Misalignment or inability to adapt
- The Quality Assurance Program must continue to align with and be able to respond to the changing requirements of domestic and international grain markets to ensure consistent and reliable grain quality and grain safety assurance.
Key Risk Mitigation Activities:
- Industry Services Quality Management System internal and external audits were completed. Identified non-conformances were actioned (see Lessons Learned below).
- Industry Services Management meetings focused on program development and delivery to meet grain industry needs based on recommendations and feedback received from the Western Grain Standards Committee, the Eastern Grain Standards Committee, producers, grain handlers, and domestic and overseas buyers and processors.
- Recruitment and retention activities to meet current and future human resource needs continued.
Additional information on the programs, services, and initiatives that contributed to the Quality Assurance Program is available at: http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/quality-qualite/iaqm-mrsq-eng.htm.
Performance Analysis
During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission mostly met the expected result and target associated with the Quality Assurance Program. Daily provision of grain inspection and grading services as mandated by the Canada Grain Act, as well as scientific and technical support programs and testing services, continue to be integral components to this program activity. During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission provided the following inspection and testing services as per ISO 9001:2008 Standards in support of the Quality Assurance Program:
- inspected 294,985 railcars upon receipt at licensed terminal and transfer elevators (compared to 239,832 in 2008-09),
- inspected 21,438 railcars loaded from licensed primary elevators prior to receipt at licensed terminal and transfer elevators (compared to 23,503 in 2008-09),
- inspected 29,555,831 tonnes of Canadian grain for export from licensed terminal and transfer elevators (compared to 24,481,535 tonnes in 2008-09), and
- certified 1,531 samples submitted for grading by producers (compared to 2,199 in 2008-09) and 14,642 samples submitted by grain companies (compared to 16,989 in 2008-09).
- There were 3,716 grade changes on official re-inspection representing a Canadian Grain Commission inspection accuracy rate of 98.8%. This compares to an accuracy rate of 98.7% in 2008-09 and 99.0% in 2007-08.
The Canadian Grain Commission certified the quality of 7,911 cargoes and investigated complaints from buyers regarding 24 of those cargoes. Upon thorough investigation of the loading process, including analysis of cargo samples and vessel loading documentation, the Canadian Grain Commission’s Chief Grain Inspector concluded that one complaint was substantiated. This compares to zero justifiable cargo complaints in fiscal year 2007-08 and 2008-09 when the Canadian Grain Commission certified the quality of 5,950 and 5,267 cargoes respectively.
The Canadian Grain Commission’s Quality Assurance Program must continually adapt and respond to challenges to remain relevant, meet the needs of domestic and international markets, and ensure that Canada’s reputation for consistent grain quality and grain safety is maintained. This is critical to the Canadian Grain Commission’s success in delivering upon its strategic outcome. Operational priority #2 is aimed at developing programs, initiatives, and new research methods and processes to maintain and strengthen the Quality Assurance Program and Canada’s GQAS to ensure a safe, dependable commodity. In addition to the results achieved under operational priority #2, the Canadian Grain Commission launched two voluntary programs, CGC HACCP and CIPRS + HACCP, for Canadian grain companies who wish to enhance their grain safety and identity-preserved quality management systems. The goal of these two programs is to help ensure the safety and dependability of Canadian grains internationally thereby contributing directly to the Canadian Grain Commission’s strategic outcome. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/media-medias/press-presse/2009/2009-05-20-eng.htm
During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission continued to provide grain safety assurances on pesticides, trace elements, mycotoxins, fungi, and moulds to meet buyer and consumer demands and ensure Canadian grain is meeting international grain safety and sanitation tolerances. Operational priority #2 in Section I provides details and results related to the Canadian Grain Commission’s efforts to respond to increasing demands for grain safety assurances from buyers and national food inspection authorities. Further information on Canadian Grain Commission strategies and research programs that support grain safety assurance is available at: http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/quality-qualite/gsa-asg/safety-salubrite-eng.htm
The Canadian Grain Commission continued to assess the use of objective tests and continued to evaluate new technologies to measure end-use quality with the goal of increasing efficiency, reducing costs, and enhancing testing capabilities. Plans to conduct a pilot program for Ochratoxin-A testing in Canadian Grain Commission regional laboratories were delayed due to renovation requirements in the laboratories as well as a delay in the arrival of essential equipment from overseas. Once both elements are in place the pilot will begin. The Canadian Grain Commission launched the second phase of an industry-based pilot to test the latest development in Rapid Viscosity Analysis (RVATM) technology. However, due to excessive equipment failure the project was subsequently halted. The Canadian Grain Commission has begun initial assessments using a different technology. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/media-medias/press-presse/2009/2009-09-14-eng.htm
The Ineligible Varieties Working Group (formerly “Industry Committee on the Removal of KVD”) continued efforts to ensure effective communication and use of the new declaration based system and to openly discuss challenges and resolutions. The committee is composed of a producer representative from each prairie province, the Canadian Grain Commission, CWB, Western Grain Elevator Association, the Inland Terminal Association, and AAFC. The concept of expanding use of declarations beyond wheat was tabled for consideration. Several communication strategies were developed to ensure stakeholders were fully cognizant of their obligations and associated consequences of not complying with agreed upon protocols related to the removal of KVD. In support of varietal declarations, a joint public notice campaign “Know your Seed” was launched with AAFC. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/wheat-ble/ds-sd/dsm-msd-eng.htm
The Canadian Grain Commission remains committed to ensuring that adequate notice is given to producers when wheat varieties are deregistered. CFIA and the Canadian Grain Commission adopted a communications protocol, the National Wheat Variety De-registration Protocol, which provides timely information to grain producers and industry representatives on upcoming changes to the registration status of wheat varieties. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/media-medias/press-presse/2009/2009-10-15-eng.htm. The Canadian Grain Commission continued monitoring programs for the presence and source of non-registered and de-registered wheat varieties to support the Canadian Grain Commission certification processes and maintain end-use processing quality.Lessons Learned
All Canadian Grain Commission inspection services are delivered as per ISO 9001:2008 Standards. During 2009-10, there were a total of 76 inspection related Improvement Requests (IRs). Seven of the IRs were a result of non-conformances identified during internal and external audits. Non-conformances occur when Quality Management System (QMS) procedures or work instructions are not followed. IRs are also created when there are inconsistencies in documentation, if there are changes to Canadian Grain Commission inspection programs, or changes required to work processes. The Canadian Grain Commission has reviewed the summary reports that were completed during the audits. The IRs have been submitted to the procedure owner with an appropriate corrective action identified and a timeframe attached to ensure completion. IRs allow the Canadian Grain Commission to adjust service procedures as necessary and identify or adjust training requirements to maintain and/or enhance the effective and consistent delivery of inspection services and programs.
The single justified cargo complaint during 2009-10 was a result of a customer’s concern related to a Canadian Grain Commission reported falling number value. The falling number test is used to evaluate the amount of sprout damage in Canadian wheat. A high falling number is one indication that the wheat is sound and satisfactory for most baking processes. While the overall quality certification of the cargo was not questioned, there was a discrepancy between the Canadian Grain Commission reported falling number value and the customer determined falling number value. Analysis by the customer at their facility indicated a significantly lower falling number value than was reported on Canadian Grain Commission documentation. Additional Canadian Grain Commission analysis was conducted on a representative portion of the official load sample. This analysis confirmed the client's concerns and the discrepancy. A review of procedures and expectations was conducted to mitigate the risks of a similar situation occurring in the future.Benefits for Canadians
The Canadian Grain Commission’s Quality Assurance Program provides quality control for the Canadian grain industry and assures consistent and reliable grain quality and grain safety to meet the needs of international and domestic markets. By defining grading standards and ensuring these standards are applied consistently, Canadian Grain Commission grades allow domestic and international buyers to identify end-use performance and therefore value without the need for end-use tests or direct examination of individual lots of grain. This improves the efficiency of grain handling and helps to ensure that Canadian grain producers receive payment that reflects the value of their grain. The Canadian Grain Commission’s Quality Assurance Program, including its grain safety assurance programs, supports not only the delivery of the Canadian Grain Commission mandate and strategic outcome, but positions Canada with a sustainable competitive advantage in global grain markets.
Program Activity: Quantity Assurance Program
| 2009-10 Financial Resources ($ thousands) |
2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 9,373 | 14,121 | 12,432 | 96 | 116 | 20 |
The difference between planned spending and total authorities is that planned spending reflects only the Canadian Grain Commission’s approved authorities as per the Main Estimates. Total authorities include additional funding approved subsequent to the publication of the RPP.
The difference between total authorities and actual spending includes an overall increase in revenue credited to vote due to high grain volumes handled and lower actual expenditures for salaries due to staff departures and delays in hiring. There were no significant program changes during 2009-10.
2009-10 planned human resources (FTEs) as reported in the RPP were 96 based on approved authorities at that point in time, as per the Main Estimates. However, given all additional authorities secured by the Canadian Grain Commission, the full planned FTE complement for this program is 129. This represents an actual variance of -13. This difference is primarily attributed to delays in the staffing process.Program Activity Description: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20102011/me-bpd/AAFC-AAC-eng.asp#bm04.
| Expected Result |
Performance Indicator |
Target | Performance Status |
Performance Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consistent and reliable quantity assurance of Canadian grain shipments | Number of justified cargo complaints due to a breakdown in Canadian Grain Commission assessment of quantity | Zero justifiable cargo complaints | Met all (100% of the expected level of performance was achieved) | There were zero justified cargo complaints due to a breakdown in Canadian Grain Commission assessment of quantity during 2009-10. |
Key Program Risk: Misalignment or inability to adapt
The Quantity Assurance Program must align with and be able to respond to the changing requirements of the grain industry to effectively ensure consistent and reliable quantity assurance of Canadian grain shipments.
Key Risk Mitigation Activities:
- Industry Services QMS (ISO) internal and external audits were completed. Identified non-conformances were actioned (see Lessons Learned below).
- Industry Services Management meetings focused on program development and delivery to meet industry needs.
- Recruitment and retention activities to meet current and future human resource needs continued.
Additional information on the programs and services that contribute to the Quantity Assurance Program is available at: http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/quantity-quantite/iaqnm-mrsqn-eng.htm.
Performance Analysis
During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission continued to deliver all weighing services as per ISO 9001:2008 Standards to ensure consistent and reliable quantity assurance of Canadian grain shipments. For example, to meet the legislative mandate of the Canada Grain Act and the requirements of the grain industry from producers to customers, the Canadian Grain Commission:
- officially weighed and certified 312,927 railcar unloads upon receipt at licensed terminal and transfer elevators (compared to 263,031 railcar unloads in 2008-09), and
- monitored and certified 29,555,831 tonnes of grain prior to export from licensed terminal and transfer elevators (compared to 24,481,535 tonnes in 2008-09).
The Canadian Grain Commission logged and investigated seven weight-related export cargo complaints at the customer’s request. Upon thorough review and analysis of the information documented at the time of loading, the Canadian Grain Commission’s Chief of Weighing concluded that the original statement of quantity for all the shipments was correct. Consequently, the Canadian Grain Commission successfully met the Quantity Assurance Program expected result and target as there were zero justified cargo complaints due to a breakdown in Canadian Grain Commission assessment of quantity. This compares to zero justifiable cargo complaints during 2007-08 and 2008-09.
The Canadian Grain Commission continued efforts to provide ongoing technical support and advice to the Canadian grain industry. These activities contributed to the Canadian Grain Commission’s strategic outcome of ensuring that Canada’s grain shipments are reliable and that Canadian grain producers are protected. For example:
- Canadian Grain Commission Weighing Systems Inspectors conducted 506 weighing system device inspections to verify the accuracy and reliability of licensed terminal and transfer elevator weighing equipment. In 156 instances (30 percent), the device under inspection required an adjustment or servicing. Of these 156 inspections, 79 (51 percent) devices were found to be operating with measurement errors of 0.10 percent or greater.
- Canadian Grain Commission staff conducted 8 official weigh-overs of all stocks in store at licensed terminal and transfer elevators to verify the overage or shortage of grain, grain products, or screenings in an elevator pursuant to the tolerances stipulated in the Canada Grain Regulations.
Although the Canadian Grain Commission does not provide binding arbitration for weight shortages, the Canadian Grain Commission’s DRS neutral third-party railcar investigation process provides key information to support shippers’ entitlement to adjustment for excessive grain shortages at unload. During 2009-10,
- the Canadian Grain Commission conducted 515 weight-related investigations on railcars,
- 1,179 railcars required their weights officially apportioned due to the mixing of grain from two or more railcars in a common grain reception area as the cars were unloaded,
- 48 cars required their origin weight to be verified and assigned as the official unload weight due to incidents around un-recovered spills, and
- 5,059 exception reports were completed for railcars that arrived at unloading facilities with low or empty compartments.
Lessons Learned
Canadian Grain Commission weighing policies and procedures are monitored and evaluated on an ongoing basis through a series of reporting policies and national discussion and review forums. This allows the Canadian Grain Commission to adjust service procedures as necessary and identify or adjust training requirements to maintain and/or enhance the effective and consistent delivery of weighing services and programs. During 2009-10, there were five weighing/registration related non-conformances identified through internal and external audits. Non-conformances occur when Quality Management System (QMS) procedures or work instructions are not followed. The Canadian Grain Commission has reviewed the summary reports that were completed during the audits. In order to take appropriate actions, an Improvement Request (IR) form was submitted to the procedure owner, and an appropriate corrective action was identified. A timeframe was attached to ensure completion. IRs are also created when there are inconsistencies in documentation, if there are changes to Canadian Grain Commission weighing programs, or changes required to work processes. This resulted in an additional 19 IR forms being submitted during 2009-10.
Benefits for Canadians
The Quantity Assurance Program is integral to the functioning of Canada’s grain industry and the Canadian Grain Commission’s strategic outcome of ensuring Canada’s grain is reliable and Canadian grain producers are protected. Daily provision of grain weighing services as mandated by the Canada Grain Act forms a major part of the Quantity Assurance Program. This includes overseeing the weighing of grain as it is received by licensed terminal elevators and as it is loaded for export. The Canadian Grain Commission continued to collect, interpret and distribute railcar data and information and generated reliable grain quantity data to meet specific industry and buyer needs. This data is used by the grain industry, railways, Canada Ports Clearance, and the Canadian Grain Commission in managing grain inventories and for statistical publications. An important component of the Quantity Assurance Program is the Canadian Grain Commission's Dispute Resolution Settlement (DRS). The DRS is a neutral third-party investigative process that Canadian grain companies, producer car shippers, and railway companies can access to resolve weighing disputes and maintain consistent grain handling practices.
Program Activity: Grain Quality Research Program
| 2009-10 Financial Resources ($ thousands) |
2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 3,365 | 9,463 | 10,057 | 26 | 69 | 43 |
The difference between planned spending and total authorities is that planned spending reflects only the Canadian Grain Commission’s approved authorities as per the Main Estimates. Total authorities include additional funding approved subsequent to the publication of the RPP.
There is a slight difference between total authorities and actual spending. Part of the difference may be attributed to an increase in resource requirements necessary to respond to the discovery of trace amounts of genetically modified material in some Canadian flaxseed shipments to Europe. There were no significant program changes during 2009-10.
2009-10 planned human resources (FTEs) as reported in the RPP were 26 based on approved authorities at that point in time, as per the Main Estimates. However, given all additional authorities secured by the Canadian Grain Commission, the full planned FTE complement for this program is 72. This represents an actual variance of -3.Program Activity Description: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20102011/me-bpd/AAFC-AAC-eng.asp#bm04.
| Expected Result |
Performance Indicator |
Target | Performance Status |
Performance Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Research and development on grain quality and grain safety to support and improve Canada’s GQAS | Assessment of grain quality and grain safety research undertaken, sponsored, and/or promoted by the Canadian Grain Commission | "Excellent" on a scale of excellent, good, fair or poor | Mostly met the expected level of performance. Grain quality and grain safety research undertaken, sponsored and/or promoted by the Canadian Grain Commission was assessed as “good” during 2009-10. |
The majority of project milestones/outcomes were delivered on time and on budget. |
Key Program Risk: Misalignment or inability to adapt
The Canadian Grain Commission’s science and technology capacity must keep pace with the needs of domestic and international markets in order to ensure Canada’s grain is safe, reliable and marketable.
2009-10 Key Risk Mitigation Activities:
- Continued to identify research priorities to strengthen the existing GQAS based on feedback received by Canadian Grain Commission personnel from overseas and/or domestic buyers, processors, producers, grain handlers, and the Western and Eastern Grain Standards Committees.
- To remain abreast of new developments, GRL personnel continued liaison activities with Canadian and international scientific, academic, analytical, and grain industry organizations.
- Continued people planning initiatives to ensure that the Canadian Grain Commission is able to attract, develop and retain sufficiently qualified human resources in the GRL and continued succession planning strategies.
Additional information on the Grain Quality Research Program is available at: http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/research-recherche/iarm-mrsr-eng.htm.
Performance Analysis
During 2009-10, the GRL successfully undertook, sponsored and promoted research related to grains as mandated by the Canada Grain Act. The GRL completed several research projects within cost and timelines and successfully met the milestones of numerous ongoing research projects. The GRL’s performance results were rated as “good” due to cost and timeline variances associated with some projects. These projects have been reassessed and while some have been finalized others are still ongoing. Variances are considered normal within a research environment.
The GRL continued to assess the use of objective tests to measure grain quality and grain safety to increase efficiency, reduce costs and enhance the testing capabilities of the Canadian Grain Commission. Developing new and improved methods for evaluating and measuring end-use quality and safety factors for all grains is a major focus of the Grain Quality Research Program and contributes to the long term success of the Canadian Grain Commission’s strategic outcome. For example, during 2009-10 efforts continued on the development of a hyperspectral imaging method for detecting Fusarium damaged kernels in wheat. Preliminary investigations show a high degree of correlation between spectral measurements and inspector scores for single kernels of the CWRS wheat class. Samples of eastern and western wheat classes are being collected to extend the scope of the imaging method to other major Canadian wheat classes. Results from the RVA study did not meet stakeholder needs, but work continued on developing a method to identify sprouted kernels and determine the activity of the alpha-amylase enzyme present. A greater than 88 percent accuracy was attained for detecting sound kernels and greater than 95 percent for severely sprouted kernels. Work is continuing to improve algorithms for detection of slightly sprouted kernels.
Research that supports emerging issues in the GQAS continued with the goal of meeting changing producer, industry, and customer demands for specific end-use quality, variety identification, and safety factors. For example, the Canadian Milling and Baking Industry indicated that traditional tests to discern differences in wheat flour quality, in particular, gluten strength are not meeting their commercial needs. To this end, a series of projects have been initiated to develop new methods to rapidly assess wheat quality for commercial use. The GRL also continued research efforts on wheat and barley DNA and protein fingerprinting. The aim is to develop tests for identifying and quantifying varieties of grains in shipments in order to develop the capacity for identifying multiple variety composition and enable segregation of variety specific shipments. A major accomplishment this year was the verification and adoption of an accurate and reliable analytical test that can detect and quantify the presence of CDC Triffid in a flax sample. This test was a key component of building credibility with customers, helping the flax industry gain acceptance for the testing protocols, and ensuring flax shipments to various customer countries was resumed. This work had a direct impact on flax producers and is an example of how the Canadian Grain Commission’s scientific expertise adds value to the Canadian grain industry.
The GRL continued efforts to develop specifications and measurement protocols to support new standards, develop objective testing protocols and specifications to support the Canadian grading system, and facilitate the end-use diversification of Canadian grains with new end-use traits. For example, extensive research was carried out using a new technique to assess the quality of Canadian wheat for Asian noodle quality. New fundamental rheological techniques were also used to assess Canadian wheat quality for Asian products. Several scientific papers were accepted and published. In addition, the GRL conducted research as recommended by the Western Grain Standards Committee (WGSC) and the Eastern Grain Standards Committees (EGSC) in support of grade specifications and the grading system and provided information to the Committees to facilitate recommendations. Updates on grading studies and projects related to chlorophyll assessment using near infrared reflectance spectroscopy, relationship between fusarium-damaged kernels and the levels of the deoxynivalenol (DON), assessing sprout damage using rapid visco analysis technology, detection of sprout damage, mildew damage in Eastern wheat and its effect on end-use products, and Ontario canola brown seed were provided to the WGSC and EGSC in November 2009. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/gscommittee-comiteng/gscm-mcng-eng.htm.
The GRL participates in several external proficiency tests on an annual basis to receive unbiased evaluations with respect to accuracy and precision. For example, the American Association of Cereal Chemists check sample service is used by numerous laboratories around the world to evaluate techniques and ensure quality control. The GRL used this service and several others to test equipment and monitor the use of proper methods among laboratory personnel. During 2009-10, the GRL participated in 15 different external proficiency test programs with satisfactory test scores. The GRL also took part in an Inter-laboratory Comparison for OTA in Oats with Health Canada. Notification was received that GRL results agree and are comparable with the other laboratories participating in this study.
The Canadian Grain Commission’s 2009-10 annual Harvest Sample program was completed under budget, but with a slight delay. The delay was a result of extending the deadline for producers to send in samples due to the cool, wet harvest in 2009. For the first time, the Harvest Sample program was extended to Eastern producers. In total, the Canadian Grain Commission received and analyzed 10,370 producer samples to determine the year’s crop quality. The Canadian Grain Commission shared the results of the survey with marketers, buyers and processors around the world. The results provide millers, bakers, maltsters and brewers, and food manufacturers information on how the year's crop will perform in processing. Quality reports were published on eastern and western wheat, malting barley, canola, flax seed, peas, chick peas, lentils, mustard, pea beans, and soybeans. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/quality-qualite/geuq-quf-eng.htm
The GRL conducted quality evaluation of new breeders’ lines to determine the lines that meet the quality guidelines and needs of the class for wheat, barley, and canola. This third party unbiased information is a key component of the CFIA registration process for new varieties. During 2009-10, approximately 168 wheat and 118 malt barley breeders’ lines were assessed and reported in a timely basis. In addition, the Canadian Grain Commission assessed 2,200 canola breeders’ samples by NIR oil, protein and glucosinolate content, and complete fatty acid composition by gas chromatography. GRL personnel interpret quality data in light of their intimate knowledge of changes in world processing technology and market needs to ensure that new varieties do not present a threat to the GQAS. GRL personnel also recommend changes in quality targets to breeders, as appropriate, on the basis of their discussions with grain processors and buyers in North America and overseas. This work assists farmers in being able to grow varieties that buyers are interested in.Lessons Learned
The Canadian Grain Commission will continue the process of ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation for certain methods in its laboratory testing environment. Focus is on accrediting methods in the Grain Safety Program of the GRL which includes mycotoxins, pesticide residues, trace elements, and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) determination of GMO content. During 2009-10, development of methods as well as procedures and work instructions were drafted. Draft documentation test trials are in process. ISO/IEC 17025 accreditation will give customers increased confidence in the GRL processes and testing methods that support Canada’s GQAS.
The GRL developed a strategic plan to ensure research undertaken and sponsored by the GRL is focused and targeted. The GRL is also investigating the feasibility of producing an annual report to highlight GRL research activities. This report would significantly augment the performance information provided in the DPR. The biggest challenge facing the GRL is increased resources required to respond to testing and monitoring requirements under the Quality Assurance Program. The increased demand has potential to limit resources available for fundamental and/or long term research.
Benefits for Canadians
The Canadian Grain Commission’s Grain Research Laboratory (GRL) conducts research in support of the GQAS to address emerging issues and permit the effective marketing of Canadian grain in the interests of producers and the Canadian grain industry. Research undertaken and sponsored under this program activity leads to the development of recognized methods for grain quality and grain safety evaluation and objective testing protocols and specifications to support the Canadian grading system. GRL research also facilitates the end-use diversification of Canadian grains. This program activity supports the continued adaptation of Canada’s GQAS to assure grain quality and grain safety to meet the end-use needs and processing expectations of domestic and international buyers of Canadian grain. The Canadian Grain Commission’s Grain Quality Research Program contributes to the Government of Canada’s objective of a diverse and technologically advanced economy and is integral to the successful delivery of the Canadian Grain Commission’s strategic outcome of ensuring Canadian grain is safe, reliable and marketable.
Program Activity: Producer Protection Program
| 2009-10 Financial Resources ($ thousands) |
2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 938 | 5,002 | 3,851 | 8 | 32 | 24 |
The difference between planned spending and total authorities is that planned spending reflects only the Canadian Grain Commission’s approved authorities as per the Main Estimates while total authorities include additional funding approved subsequent to the publication of the RPP.
The difference between total authorities and actual spending includes an overall increase in revenue credited to vote due to high grain volumes handled and lower actual expenditures for salaries due to staff departures and delays in hiring. There were no significant program changes during 2009-10.
2009-10 planned human resources (FTEs) as reported in the RPP were 8 based on approved authorities at that point in time, as per the Main Estimates. However, given all additional authorities secured by the Canadian Grain Commission, the full planned FTE complement for this program is 36. This represents an actual variance of -4.
Program Activity Description: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20102011/me-bpd/AAFC-AAC-eng.asp#bm04.
| Expected Result |
Performance Indicator |
Target | Performance Status |
Performance Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Producer satisfaction with the grain handling system | Canadian Grain Commission response to producer complaints | Zero unresolved or unaddressed complaints | Met All (100% of the expected level of performance was achieved) | There were zero unaddressed complaints with respect to the producer protection programs administered by the Canadian Grain Commission. While the majority of complaints were resolved, there are some ongoing investigations. |
Key Program Risk: Misalignment or inability to adapt
The producer protection framework must align with and be able to adapt to the evolving needs of producers and the grain industry to ensure that producers are compensated fairly for the quality and quantity of grain delivered and shipped.
2009-10 Key Risk Mitigation Activities:
- Continued to investigate all producer concerns/complaints and consulted with and evaluated feedback from producers on the programs and services offered under this program activity.
- Continued to monitor licensees using the licensing risk assessment framework to determine audit priorities. Developed a risk-based audit plan that is reviewed and updated quarterly.
- Continued communication efforts to ensure producers are aware of their rights under the Canada Grain Act and to increase awareness of Canadian Grain Commission producer protection activities and services.
Additional information on the producer protection program is available at: http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/protection-protection/iappm-mrspp-eng.htm.
Performance Analysis
Producer support programs include mediating and/or arbitrating producer complaints concerning transactions with licensed grain companies, re-inspection of samples on producer request, and investigation of quality and dockage complaints. During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission responded to numerous inquiries and complaints from producers. The main topics included contract disputes between producers and licensees, grading disputes, non-payment/slow payment to producers, inquiries related to shrinkage and tariff deductions, and complaints regarding proper issuance of documents. Grain producers submitted 211 samples to the Canadian Grain Commission for quality determination under “subject to inspector’s grade and dockage”. The Canadian Grain Commission responded to all producer complaints related to compensation received for the quality and/or quantity of grain delivered within the licensed grain handling system and all producer concerns regarding fair payment. The Canadian Grain Commission was successful in meeting the program activity target of zero unaddressed complaints with respect to the producer protection programs administered by the Canadian Grain Commission. While the majority of complaints were resolved, there are some ongoing investigations. The Canadian Grain Commission developed a complaints protocol that will be implemented in early 2010-11. This protocol will formally outline a process to be followed when responding to producer complaints and investigating violations of the Canada Grain Act. Although it will not address every situation that may arise, it is meant to act as a guide to ensure the Canadian Grain Commission responds appropriately and consistently to all producer concerns.
Communication activities continued to play a key role in promoting the activities and services provided under the Producer Protection Program. For example, through its trade exhibition program, the Canadian Grain Commission met with producers in Red Deer, Lethbridge, Regina, Saskatoon, and Brandon to discuss issues such as the Canadian Grain Commission Licensing Program, variety declarations for wheat, services available to resolve grading disputes, the Harvest Sample program, and many others. In addition, the Canadian Grain Commission continued to collect and update grain quality data and grain handling information and make it available to producers and other interested parties to facilitate producer sales and marketing decisions. http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/statistics-statistiques/sim-rsm-eng.htm
Over the past several years, the Canadian Grain Commission has received numerous producer inquiries related to moisture shrinkage, as prescribed by Canadian Grain Commission Order, and comprehensive shrinkage, as prescribed in the Canada Grain Regulations. Consequently, the Canadian Grain Commission conducted an internal review on both topics. These reviews resulted in a proposal to adjust the formula for calculating moisture shrinkage by eliminating the 1.1 percent moisture rebound factor as well as a proposal to extend the shrinkage allowance of zero to licensed transfer and process elevators. During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission consulted extensively with licensees, the grain handling industry, producer organizations, and producers on the proposed changes. Responses during the consultation process from producers and producer organizations were generally supportive of the proposals and responses from industry organizations were mixed. After consideration of all comments received, a decision was made to proceed with both proposed changes to improve transparency to producers and improve the consistency of the Canada Grain Regulations. Plans are to implement the proposed changes in 2010-11.
Since 2005, as a result of the Canadian Grain Commission’s Licensing Compliance Initiative, the Canadian Grain Commission has issued approximately 75 additional grain elevator or grain dealer licences and significantly enhanced its compliance and enforcement efforts. A primary focus of the Licensing Compliance Initiative has been companies that were neither licensed nor exempted from licensing. During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission initiated the process of reviewing the classification of each licensee, to ensure consistent application of the Canada Grain Act and the Canada Grain Regulations so that producers understand their rights and protections, licensees understand their responsibilities, and similar companies experience similar regulatory requirements. A Notice of Intent was sent to all licensees and the Canadian Grain Commission is in the process of reviewing licensee classifications. Re-classification will be handled on a case-by-case basis through regular program administration and licence renewals.
As of March 30, 2010 the Canadian Grain Commission had issued licences for 317 primary elevators, 46 process elevators, 15 terminal elevators, 12 transfer elevators, and 94 grain dealers. There are currently 48 known unlicensed companies that require licensing under the Canada Grain Act. Of these, all have initiated the licensing process. During 2009-10, 52 licensees were audited by the Canadian Grain Commission to ensure appropriate security coverage. Financial statements from all licensees were reviewed. The Canadian Grain Commission continued to use and refine the risk assessment process to regularly review and assign a financial risk rating and an overall risk rating (high, medium, low) for all licensees in order to determine audit priorities and other courses of action. In addition, the Canadian Grain Commission developed and implemented a risk-based Audit Plan that is updated quarterly to ensure that high risk audits are focused on and to facilitate planning. Canadian Grain Commission staff responded to all known instances of licensing non-compliance.
The Canadian Grain Commission revoked one grain dealer licence in February 2009 after a licensee became unable to meet their payment obligations to producers. During 2009-10, a final audit found that the total value of eligible producer claims received by the Canadian Grain Commission was $453,688. The Canadian Grain Commission used the $300,000 security posted by the licensee to
compensate 17 producers that were eligible for compensation. This resulted in 66 percent compensation out of the $300,000 security. There were no licensees that failed to meet producer payment obligations during 2009-10.
http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca/media-medias/press-presse/2009/2009-06-10-eng.htm
The Canadian Grain Commission has sole responsibility for the allocation of producer cars for both Canadian Wheat Board (CWB) and non-CWB grains. During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission continued to work closely and cooperatively with the CWB, grain companies, and the railways in an effort to ensure that producer car orders are filled in a timely manner. The Canadian Grain Commission received and processed approximately 13,700 applications from producers for producer cars and responded to all complaints with respect to administration of the allocation of producer cars. Efforts continued to re-engineer the producer car software and producer car database to assist with data management and reduce the reliance on printed reports. Progress on this initiative was delayed due to resource constraints.
Lessons Learned
The Canadian Grain Commission continually strives to improve on the programs and activities under this program activity that directly contribute to the Canadian Grain Commission’s mandate of facilitating fair treatment of producers within the licensed grain handling system. The Canadian Grain Commission will continue to work closely with officials from Agriculture and Agri-Food and other departments and agencies, to advise the Minister with respect to amendments to the Canada Grain Act and Canada Grain Regulations to ensure the Canadian Grain Commission’s legislation, programs, and services continue to meet the evolving needs of producers and the grain industry. These efforts will continue in 2010-11.
Benefits for Canadians
The Canadian Grain Commission is mandated to serve producer interests by upholding the Canada Grain Act and as such has implemented a number of programs and safeguards to ensure the fair treatment of Canadian grain producers. These include the licensing and security program, allocation of producer cars for producers that wish to ship their own grain, and producer liaison measures including a grain grade appeal system. In addition, the Canadian Grain Commission collects and updates grain quality data and grain handling information to facilitate producer sales and marketing decisions. This program activity aligns with the Government of Canada outcome area of “A fair and secure marketplace” and also directly contributes to the Canadian Grain Commission’s goal of ensuring Canadian grain producers are properly compensated for the quality and quantity of grain delivered and shipped.
Program Activity: Internal Services
| 2009-10 Financial Resources ($ thousands) |
2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs) |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual Spending |
Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 9,453 | 13,659 | 12,586 | 62 | 88 | 26 |
The difference between planned spending and total authorities is that planned spending reflects only the Canadian Grain Commission’s approved authorities as per the Main Estimates. Total authorities include additional funding approved subsequent to the publication of the RPP.
The difference between total authorities and actual spending includes an overall increase in revenue credited to vote for high grain volumes handled and lower actual expenditures for salaries due to staff departures and delays in hiring.
2009-10 planned human resources (FTEs) as reported in the RPP were 62 based on approved authorities at that point in time, as per the Main Estimates. However, given all additional authorities secured by the Canadian Grain Commission, the full planned FTE complement for this program is 93. This represents an actual variance of -5.
Prior to the 2009-10 Estimates cycle, the resources for the Internal Services program activity were not displayed separately from other program activities and were distributed among the other program activities. This has affected the comparability of spending and FTE information by program activity between fiscal years.
Program Activity Description: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20102011/me-bpd/AAFC-AAC-eng.asp#bm04
Performance Analysis
Internal services are enabling activities that allow the Canadian Grain Commission to deliver the programs and services necessary to carry out its strategic outcome. The Canadian Grain Commission does not have established formal expected results, performance indicators and targets for this program activity. However, because internal services are enabling activities, success can be measured by the Canadian Grain Commission’s ability to meet the expected results of its strategic outcome and other program activities.
Although the Canadian Grain Commission is a small statutory agency with limited resources, it prides itself on the ability to implement government-wide initiatives. Sound agency management denotes not only cost efficiency, but signifies the Canadian Grain Commission’s commitment to government-wide initiatives such as the Management Accountability Framework, providing services in both official languages, the Paper Burden Reduction Initiative, and effective partnering with other government organizations to provide effective, efficient service to Canadians. The Canadian Grain Commission recently scored 100 percent and ranked first for compliance among more than 80 different Government of Canada departments and agencies for CLF 2.0 standards on website accessibility and usability. The Canadian Grain Commission website is now used as a high quality benchmark both inside and outside government for accessibility and usability.
A skilled and motivated workforce is critical to the Canadian Grain Commission in delivering its services to Canadians. During 2009-10, the Canadian Grain Commission continued efforts to refine its integrated people and business planning (IPBP) process that links people management to the Canadian Grain Commission’s vision, goals and objectives, strategic plan and budgetary resources. The main goal of integrated planning is to get the right number of people with the skills, experience and competencies, in the right jobs, at the right time, at the right cost as well as ensuring an effective work environment throughout the organization. The Canadian Grain Commission identified several strategic people outcomes, key challenges, and plans to mitigate the risks associated with human and knowledge capital in its 2009-10 Report on Plans and Priorities. Detailed results are available at the following link: http://www.grainscanada.gc.ca /cgc-ccg/cr-rm/hr-rh/hr-rh-eng.htm.
Benefits for Canadians
Internal Services are groups of related activities and resources that are administered to support the needs of programs and other corporate obligations of an organization. These groups are: Management and Oversight Services; Communications Services; Legal Services; Human Resources Management Services; Financial Management Services; Information Management Services; Information Technology Services; Real Property Services; Materiel Services; Acquisition Services; and Travel and Other Administrative Services. Internal Services include only those activities and resources that apply across an organization and not those provided specifically to a program.
