Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Symbol of the Government of Canada

ARCHIVED - Canadian Food Inspection Agency - Supplementary Tables

Warning This page has been archived.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.





2009-10
Departmental Performance Report



Canadian Food Inspection Agency






Supplementary Information (Tables)






Table of Contents




3.2.1 Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue


Respendable Revenue
($ Millions)
Program
Activity
Actual
2007-08
Actual
2008-09
2009-10
Main
Estimates
Planned
Revenue
Total
Authorities
Actual
Food Safety and Nutrition Risks 32.6 29.9 32.1 32.1 32.1 32.1
Zoonotic Risks 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Animal Health Risks and Production Systems 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.4
Plant Health Risks and Production Systems 3.8 3.8 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.9
Biodiversity Protection 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
Integrated Regulatory Frameworks 0.0 0.0 3.9 3.9 3.9 0.1
Domestic and International Market Access 19.4 18.3 12.6 12.6 11.6 15.3
Internal Services 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2
Total Respendable Revenue 58.4 54.6 54.4 54.4 53.5 53.5

 


Non-Respendable Revenue
($ Millions)
Program
Activity
Actual
2007-08
Actual
2008-09
2009-10
Main
Estimates
Planned
Revenue
Total
Authorities
Actual
Food Safety and Nutrition Risks 0.5 0.8 N/A 1.1 N/A 1.4
Zoonotic Risks 0.0 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0
Animal Health Risks and Production Systems 0.0 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0
Plant Health Risks and Production Systems 0.0 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0
Biodiversity Protection 0.0 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0
Integrated Regulatory Frameworks 0.0 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0
Domestic and International Market Access 0.0 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0
Internal Services 0.0 0.0 N/A 0.0 N/A 0.0
Total Non-respendable Revenue 0.5 0.8 N/A 1.1 N/A 1.4




Table A: User Fee


3.2.2 2009-10 User Fee Reporting - User Fees Act
($ thousands)
Program Activity Fee Type1 Fee-setting Authority Date Last Modified 2009-10 Planning Years
Forecast
Revenue
Actual
Revenue
Full
Cost
2
Performance
Standard
Performance
Results
Fiscal
Year
Forecast
Revenue
Estimated
Full Cost
3
Food Safety and Nutrition Risk R CFIA Act 1998 30,001 31,203 229,137     2010-11 31,243 285,685
2011-12 31,240 277,661
2012-13 31,241 274,309
Zoonotic Risks R CFIA Act 1998 0 31 92,106     2010-11 0 87,963
2011-12 0 85,493
2012-13 0 84,461
Animal Health Risks and Production Systems R CFIA Act 1998 2,153 2,397 88,507     2010-11 2,400 84,527
2011-12 2,400 82,152
2012-13 2,400 81,161
Plant Health Risks and Production Systems R CFIA Act 1998 3,796 3,862 99,229     2010-11 3,867 94,767
2011-12 3,867 92,105
2012-13 3,867 90,993
Biodiversity Protection R CFIA Act 1998 350 448 10,544     2010-11 449 10,070
2011-12 449 9,787
2012-13 449 9,668
Integrated Regulatory Framework R CFIA Act 1998 0 80 11,768     2010-11 0 11,239
2011-12 0 10,923
2012-13 0 10,791
Domestic and International Market Access R CFIA Act 1998 17,266 15,350 35,832     2010-11 13,186 34,221
2011-12 14,192 33,259
2012-13 15,195 32,858
Internal Services R CFIA Act 1998 0 78 155,925     2010-11 0 148,910
2011-12 0 144,730
2012-13 0 142,981
Internal Services O Access to Information Act 1992 8 11 1,053     2010-11 11 1,005
2011-12 11 977
2012-13 11 965
Sub-Total   CFIA Act   53,566 53,449 793,047   2010-11 51,114 757,382
2011-12 52,147 736,110
2012-13 53,150 727,222
Sub-Total   Access to Information Act   8 11 1,053   2010-11 11 1,005
2011-12 11 977
2012-13 11 965
Total       53,574 53,460 794,100   2010-11 51,155 758,387
2011-12 52,158 737,087
2012-13 53,161 728,187

1. R=Regulating. O=Other products and services.

2. The full cost of the user fees' activites includes all direct and indirect expenditures. The full cost also includes services provided without charge by other government departments.

3. The figures are taken from the reference levels established by the Annual Reference Level Updated (ARLU) and the estimated amounts of services provided without charge by other government departments.

"A moratorium on increasing or adding new user fees was imposed when the Agency was created, due to industry concerns that the Agency would increase user fees to balance its budget rather than look for efficiencies. Because new fees could not be created, and existing fees could not be increased, the Agency has not consulted with stakeholders regarding service standards, and has not systematically measured performance over the last 15 years. By 2008, user fees recovered less than 9% of the cost of providing services. The moratorium was lifted in August 2009, and work began on reviewing and modernizing user fees and service standards in priority areas. During user fee modernization, the Agency must adhere to the User Fees Act, which came into force in 2004. The Act requires that the proposed services, service standards, and user fees and other information be presented to stakeholders for comment and subsequently submitted to both Houses of Parliament for review. The process from initial consultations to implementing the new fees via the CFIA Act is expected to take at least 1.5 years, at which time the Agency would begin performance measurement and reporting on service standards (expected summer 2011 for initial priority areas)."

Table B: External Fee
2009-2010 CFIA’s Performance Report on External Fees
External Fee Service Standard Performance Results Stakeholder Consultation
Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act (ATIA) Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; response time may be extended pursuant to Section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days of receipt of request. Of the 340 requests completed under the ATIA last fiscal year, 118 (35%) were completed under 30 days; 39 (11%) were completed in 31 to 60 days; 57 (17%) were completed in 61 to 120 days; and 126 (37%) were completed 121 or over. The service standard is established by the ATIA and the Access to Information Regulations. Consultations with stakeholders were undertaken by the Department of Justice and the Treasury Board Secretariat for amendments done in 1986 and 1992.
Destination Inspection Service1 (fresh fruits and vegetables) http://www.inspection.gc.ca/ english/fssa/frefra/dis/dise.shtml Goal is to achieve inspector response to 80% of the inspection requests within eight hours and 100% of requests within 24 hours by 2011. National results: 77.64% within 8 hours and 87.24% within 24 hours. Service standards were established for Destination Inspection Service, in consultation with Industry.
Veterinary Biologics Program Service Standards (The service standards refer to VBS calendar days, unless specified otherwise)   The Veterinary Biologics Section made significant progress in eliminating backlogs, and is now meeting service standards for all key indicators, with very few exceptions. To address stakeholders' concerns about capacity and timeliness of the regulatory approval process for animal health products, the CFIA Veterinary Biologics Section has participated in the Canadian Animal Health Products Regulatory Advisory Committee (CAHPRAC) since 2008 in collaboration with Health Canada's Veterinary Drugs Directorate.
Dossier Review (new submission, change in product formulation or change in label claim)   Met  
Canadian Manufacturers
1. Review initial submission and prepare response 1) Response time 4 months maximum Average response time is 3 months Met To address stakeholder concerns, a phased review system is in place which allows for submission review and response while information and data are pending.
2. Review supplemental data and prepare response 2) Response time 6 weeks maximum Average response time is 4 weeks Met  
American Manufacturers
3. Review initial submission and prepare response 3) Response time 4 months maximum Average response time is 3 months Met To address stakeholder concerns about timely availability of US manufactured products, a concurrent review system was introduced to allow for submission review and response while US licensure is being finalized.
4. Review supplemental data and prepare response 4) Response time 6 weeks maximum Average response time is 4 weeks Met  
Manufacturers from other countries
5. Review initial submission and prepare response 5) Response time 6 months maximum Average response time is 4 months Met  
6. Review supplemental data and prepare response 6) Response time 6 weeks maximum Average response time is 4 weeks Met  
Laboratory Testing
7. Each master cell line 7) Response time 4 months maximum Average response time is 3 months Met  
8. Each master seed culture 8) Response time 4 months maximum Average response time is 3 months Met  
9. Each pre-licensing serial tested, to a maximum of three 9) Response time is maximum 4 months Average response time is 3 months Met  
Facility Inspections/Audits
10. Canadian manufacturers 10) Annual Average is annual. Met  
11. Canadian importers 11) Minimum every 3 years Average is every three years Met  
12. American manufacturers 12) Minimum every 3 years Average is every three years Met For facilities which are inspected annually and licensed by the US Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA-APHIS), VBS may inspect when the product is first licensed in Canada. Subsequent inspections will be arranged as necessary. VBS may request copies of inspection reports from USDA-APHIS.
13. Other non-Canadian manufacturers 13) Minimum every 4 years Average is every four years Met For facilities which are inspected regularly for Good Manufacturing Practices, VBS may inspect when the product is first licensed in Canada. Subsequent inspections will be arranged as necessary.
14. Issuance of Permits, Licenses and Export Certificates 14) Response time maximum 2 weeks Average response time is 2 weeks. Met  
Serial Release
15. If not tested 15) Response time maximum 5 days Average response time is 2–3 days. Met  
16. If tested 16) Response time maximum 35 days Average response time is 2 weeks.

Met.

Due to test scheduling and set up requirements, the average response time has consistently approached the maximum response time of 35 days.

 
17. Label Review and Approval 17) Response time maximum 4 weeks Average response time is 2 weeks.

Met

 
18. Advertising Review and Approval 18) Response time maximum 4 weeks Average response time is 2 weeks.

Met

To address stakeholder concerns, VBS is no longer reviewing and approving advertising.
19. Protocol Review for Efficacy/Safety Studies 19) Response time maximum 45 days Average response time is 30 days.

Met

 
20. Production Outline Revisions 20) Response time maximum 4 weeks Average response time is 2 weeks.

Met

 
21. Suspected Adverse Reactions 21) Response time maximum 4 weeks Average response time is 2 weeks.

Met

 
Application for Feed Registration and Ingredient Approval
i) Timeliness: For 90 percent or more of the applications received
  (a) Feed Section screens applications within ten days of receiving it.

N/A

 
  (b) For products requiring a review of efficacy data, a preliminary review is conducted within 10 days of the screening date, and the results of the review are communicated to the applicant.

N/A

 
  (c) Animal Feed Division conducts efficacy, livestock, human and environmental safety reviews and responds to applicant within 90 days.

28.6% of applications were completed within 90 days.

To address stakeholders concerns about capacity and timeliness of the regulatory approval process, the CFIA is working through the Canadian Animal Health Products Regulatory Advisory Committee (CAHPRAC).
  (d) The laboratory does a desk review of proposed method of analysis within 4 weeks of receiving it. If laboratory testing is required, it will be done within 12 weeks of receiving a suitable method and test samples depending on availability of specialized equipment.

N/A

 
(ii) Quality
  (a) The Feeds Regulations are consistently interpreted and applied in registration/approval decisions.

Met

 
  (b) Information is openly exchanged between clients and evaluation specialists.

Met

 
  (c) Analytical methods are evaluated for specificity, selectivity, reliability and accuracy, using internationally standardized method validation procedures.

Met

 

1 The reporting period is April 1, 2009 to Feb. 28, 2010



3.2.3 Status Report on Projects operating with specific Treasury Board Approval2


($ Millions)
Project Original Estimated Total Cost Revised Estimated Total Cost Actual Total Cost 2009-2010
Main
Estimates
Planned
Spending
Total Authorities Actual Expected date of close-out
Laboratory Renovation and Consolidation in Burnaby, BC 6.9 6.9 5.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.4 2009-10
Skyline Complex 9.6 9.6 8.3 0.1 0.7 0.8 0.8 2010-11
Canada's Economic Action Plan 24.0 24.0 8.0 0 0 9.8 8.0 2010-11
Food Safety Action Plan 32.7 32.7 7.7 8.6 8.6 9.9 5.4 2012-13

2Figures are inclusive of Employee Benefit Plans (EBP)

3Very first Treasury Board Expenditure Authority decision for total project cost.

4Most recent Treasury Board Expenditure Authority decision for total project cost.

5Include the current year.

6Fiscal year.



3.2.4 Details on Transfer Payments Programs ($ Millions)


Name of Transfer Payment Program: Statutory Compensation Payments

Start date: N/A

End date: N/A

Description of Transfer Payment Program: Compensation payments in accordance with requirements established by regulations under the Plant Protection Act, and authorized pursuant to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act.

Strategic Outcome: To compensate Canadians, in accordance with the appropriate regulations, for plants ordered destroyed for the purpose of disease control.

Results Achieved: 115 Canadians were compensated for plants ordered destroyed.

Program Activity: Plant Health Risks and Production Systems
($ Millions)
  7) Actual Spending 2007-08 8) Actual Spending 2008-09 9) Planned Spending 2009-10 10) Total Authorities 2009-10 11) Actual Spending 2009-10 12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
14) Total Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0
14) Total Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 0
14) Total Other Types of Transfer Payments 8.1 11.9 0.8 3.0 3.0 2.2
15) Total Plant Health Risks and Production Systems 8.1 11.9 0.8 3.0 3.0 2.2

16) Comments on Variances: Actual compensation payments made to Canadians were $2.2 million higher than the $0.8 million that was earmarked in Planned Spending. This increase is largely attributed to Sudden Oak Death ($1.9M).



Name of Transfer Payment Program: Statutory Compensation Payments

Start date: N/A

End date: N/A

Description of Transfer Payment Program: Compensation payments in accordance with requirements established by regulations under the Health of Animals Act and authorized pursuant to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act.

Strategic Outcome: To compensate Canadians, in accordance with the appropriate regulations, for animals ordered destroyed for the purpose of disease control.

Results Achieved: 174 Canadians were compensated for animals ordered destroyed.

Program Activity: Animal Health Risks and Production Systems
($ Millions)
  7) Actual Spending 2007-08 8) Actual Spending 2008-09 9) Planned Spending 2009-10 10) Total Authorities 2009-10 11) Actual Spending 2009-10 12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
14) Total Grants 0 0 0 0 0 0
14) Total Contributions 0 0 0 0 0 0
14) Total Other Types of Transfer Payments 2.5 8.6 0.7 4.3 4.3 3.6
15) Total Animal Health Risks and Production Systems 2.5 8.6 0.7 4.3 4.3 3.6

16) Comments on Variances: Actual compensation payments made to Canadians were $3.6 million higher than the $0.7 million that was earmarked in Planned Spending. This increase is largely attributed to Chronic Wasting Disease ($2.6M) and Anaplasmosis ($1.0M).




3.2.6 Horizontal Initiatives

3.2.6.1: CFIA-led initiative

Table A: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy


Name of Horizontal Initiative: Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Program

Name of Lead Department(s): Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA); Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) (2003-04 to 2007-08)

Lead Departments Program Activity: Zoonotic Risks (CFIA only)

Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2003-04 (enhanced programming)

End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: Ongoing

Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date): $3,601.1M (2003-04 to 2013-14) plus $26.6M ongoing

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement): The BSE program protects human and animal health by conducting research and risk assessments regarding BSE and other transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) and minimizing the risk of exposure to infected materials; maintains consumer confidence through assessing the effectiveness of the risk mitigation measures and having measures in place to control any potential outbreaks; and supports market access for cattle, beef and related products through promoting and explaining Canada's BSE program to domestic and international stakeholders.
Health Canada conducts research and risk assessments regarding human exposure to BSE and other TSEs, and the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) carries out surveillance and research in this area as well. PHAC is specifically responsible for national laboratory-based surveillance and characterization of all human prion diseases, including those attributable to both infectious and non-infectious causes, and mitigation of their public health impacts wherever possible. In addition, PHAC conducts targeted research to improve the speed, accuracy and scope of application of laboratory tests used in diagnosis of human prion diseases; and to better understand their biological basis and range of variation. The CFIA verifies that potentially infected materials (e.g. specified risk materials, or SRM) are being removed from the animal feed chain and the human food chain, monitors products entering and leaving Canada for adherence to Canadian standards or the standards of the importing country, monitors for the prevalence of BSE in the cattle population (through surveillance), verifies that measures to control potential outbreaks are in place, and explains Canada's BSE control measures to domestic and international stakeholders (e.g. through the veterinarians abroad program) in order to maintain confidence in Canada's BSE program. AAFC has been involved in supporting, stabilizing and repositioning Canada's beef and cattle industry, including through the provision of compensation payments to stakeholders impacted by the BSE crisis which started in 2003. In 2003-04, funding was received over five years for measures to secure the future of the Canadian beef industry and additional funding was received in 2004-05 over five years to reposition the Canadian beef and cattle industry to operate on a profitable and sustainable basis. In 2005-06, funding was received over four years for additional measures to address critical pressures facing the ruminant industry. In 2007-08, funding was received on an ongoing basis for the enhanced animal feed ban. In 2008-09, funding was received to extend sunsetting funding while a review of the complete BSE program could be conducted and a comprehensive BSE risk management strategy developed. In 2009-10, funding was received over five years to continue to the core BSE activities other than the feed ban (e.g. SRM removal from the human food chain, BSE surveillance and cattle identification).

Shared Outcome(s):
Contributing to the protection of human and animal health, which supports domestic and international market access for Canadian cattle, beef and beef products.

Governance Structure(s): The CFIA is the federal lead for the delivery of the BSE Program. In 2008, a summative evaluation of the CFIA's BSE program was conducted, which noted that the governance of the program should be strengthened to enhance coordination and communication regarding BSE-related activities, both internally and with other partner organizations. The CFIA accepted this recommendation and agreed to develop options for an improved governance model to facilitate horizontal dialogue that is consistent with governance models for related horizontal initiatives.

A) CFIA
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks SRM Removal from the Human Food Chain $91.5M (2003-04 to 2013-14) $9.5M $8.4M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10) Safe food. Continue the enforcement and verification of SRM removal by CFIA inspection staff
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Federally inspected boning establishments and slaughter establishments continue to be verified on-site and record reviews are performed by CFIA inspection staff to ensure that:

  • Operators are following their written HACCP System related to the removal and control of Specified Risk Material (SRM)
  • Effectiveness of Operator's written HACCP system to meet regulatory requirements related to the removal and control of SRM in boning establishments.

In the 2009-10 fiscal year, a compliance rate of over 99% has been achieved in over 5538 tasks delivered on the enforcement and verification of SRM removal.

Provincially inspected slaughter establishments continue to be verified on-site and record reviews are performed by CFIA inspection staff to ensure that the removal, segregation and disposal of SRM, are carried out to determine the adequacy of Provincial oversight regarding plant controls.

These reviews have been and will continue to be a crucial part in our ongoing efforts to strive for continuous improvements to the consistency and overall quality of our inspection verifications and related activities in non-registered provincial establishments.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks Import Controls $2.8M (2004-05 to 2013-14) $0.3M $0.6M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Safe animal

  1. Monitoring prevalence of BSE in Canada and assessing the effectiveness of the BSE control measures including the Feed Ban and imports controls
  2. Analyzing options to redesign the BSE surveillance program and consulting with stakeholders to explore further targeting of surveillance.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

The Canadian BSE surveillance program continues to be delivered in accordance with national and international / OIE guidelines.

  • CFIA collected 34618 samples during the 2009-10 and triggered, in compliance with the national reimbursement program eligibility criteria, an approximately equivalent number of payments to eligible partners of the program including cattle producers, private veterinarians and dead stock collection operators.
  • TSE Laboratories network completed the testing of 34618 received samples with a detection of one BSE case

The CFIA explored in a joint working group with Alberta government avenues to refine the program by having a more targeted surveillance focussed on sampling high risk category of animals

  • Results of the Alberta BSE surveillance pilot continue to be periodically reviewed.
  • Further analysis to be undertaken regarding the integration of certain factors into the remaining national program.

The CFIA conducted national training for clarification of sampling technique and maintenance of chain of evidence for samples.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks BSE Surveillance $159.9M (2003-04 to 2013-14) $15.4M $18.2M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Products imported into Canada meet Canadian standards. The CFIA reviews and updates current import policies and conditions for BSE as required in order to reflect changes to international standards and evolving science.

  1. Update relevant import policies and procedural directives (by priority, minimum 25% per year) to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and CFIA domestic disease control; support market access by maintaining and improving Canada's animal health status and production of safe food, feed, fertilizer from imported animal origin ingredients
  2. CFIA acceptance of OIE BSE disease categorization for trading countries: negligible risk, controlled risk or undetermined risk
  3. Co-partnered risk evaluation on the manufacture process of gelatine from cattle hides sourced from controlled and undetermined risk for BSE countries
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)
  1. Revised BSE import policy (umbrella import policy) officially signed off by Health Canada partners, and Chief Veterinary Officer of CFIA. Submitted this to WTO for comments (2009) and implementation (2010)
  2. Highly processed products directive revised and submitted to WTO. Implemented October 2009
  3. Updated 25 percent of the procedural imports directives for precision and clarity; further updates continuing this year (2010-2011) more specifically combined the 5 different rendered and inedible products directives into one document by commodity type.
  4. All of Terrestrial Animal Health Division, import section activities go towards supporting domestic disease control (EFB, 1997 FB) programs, aligning with international obligations, and advancing scientific knowledge, as well as supporting market access by maintaining Canada's domestic reputation for animal health.

 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks Cattle Identification $29.2M (2003-04 to 2013-14) $2.8M $2.1M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Safe animals. Continue work on cattle identification enforcement activities, including verification at auctions and federally and provincially inspected abattoirs that cattle are identified with an official ear tag.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Federal abattoirs operators are routinely verified in order to meet the regulatory requirements for animal identification for cattle are received bearing an approved tag.

In the 2009-10 fiscal year, a compliance rate of over 99% has been achieved in over 1265 tasks delivered at federally inspected abattoirs on cattle identification enforcement activities.

The CFIA inspection staff continues to monitor and enforce the Canadian Livestock Identification program at auctions, dead stock collectors, farms and livestock operations, feedlots, provincial abattoirs, renderers and tag distributors, where:

9758 visits were performed and 1% of visits were reported as in violation (97% of cattle tagged)

The CFIA's animal identification program has performed extensive work on:

  • training material developed for the implementation of compliance verification system (CVS) in the animal identification program;
  • livestock traceability data sharing agreement has been signed between CFIA and Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development
  • enhanced cattle traceability system implementation plan developed

 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks Export Certification $53.2M (2003-04 to 2013-14) $5.7M $3.7M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Products exported from Canada meet requirements imposed by foreign countries. Continue the provision of export-related certification services to a wide range of affected industries.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

The CFIA remains committed to promote an international regulatory framework to protect Canadian exporters from discriminatory and unnecessary barriers. The CFIA also leads or participates in a number of international and bilateral agreements. Consistent with its international regulatory cooperation framework, the CFIA maintains close relations with key foreign regulatory counterparts.

The CFIA, through on-going discussions with Singapore, has negotiated a partial lift of the ban on importation of Canadian beef and now Canadian boneless beef derived from animals aged less than thirty month can be exported to Singapore. Significant progress has been achieved with Hong Kong with regards to Canadian beef trade and most of restrictions have now been lifted. On-going communication and negotiation of export conditions allows for on-going trade and the potential of new markets for Canadian exporters.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks Enhanced Feed Ban $241M (2004-05 to 2013-14) plus $26.6M ongoing $26.6M $16.1M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Safe feed, fertilizer, animals and food. Continue the enforcement of enhanced feed ban restrictions.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

The CFIA began enforcing an initial set of feed ban regulations in 1997. At that time, these new regulatory requirements were integrated into existing inspection programs for feed and feed ingredient manufactured, distributed and used by inedible rendering plants, commercial feed mills and on farms.

In response to the detection of a native-born case of BSE in Canada in 2003, the CFIA received additional funding in 2005-06 and subsequent fiscal years to support implementation and enforcement of an enhanced feed ban regulatory framework that took effect in 2007. The impact of implementing the enhancements principally involved:

  1. Increasing inspection capacity and frequency throughout the feed supply and use chain i.e. at inedible rendering plants, commercial feed mills, feed retail outlets, and farms; and
  2. Implementing and administering a system of control permits and compliance inspection activities at abattoirs, dead stock collectors, landfills and other processing and disposal sites regarding the collection, transport, treatment and disposition of cattle Specified Risk Material (SRM) tissues. As part of the enhanced regulations, SRM must be segregated, identified and appropriately managed until final disposal. CFIA workload increased to include inspection oversight of SRM equipment and facilities, tracking movement at several points in the chain to final disposal or alternative use not historically subject to CFIA inspection.
  3. Removing the fertilizer and supplement chains as possible SRM outlets unless specifically authorized by a permit issued under the Health of Animals Regulations. The permits are issued on a case-by-case basis and include requirements for processing the material (e.g. composting) as well as conditions for its final disposal to mitigate against any potential risks to human, animal health and the environment.

During 2009-10, the CFIA continued to verify compliance with the 2007 regulatory enhancements at rendering plants, commercial feed manufacturers, feed retail outlets, on-farm feed manufacturers and ruminant feeders as well as at meat slaughter and processing establishments, cattle dead stock collectors, transporters and receivers of SRM downers and dead stock and commercial composting and fertilizer manufacturing facilities.

Some of the major achievements are: (Feed inspection - stats to be provided at later date)

  • # of facilities inspected (total and by sector)
  • # of inspections (total and by facility type)
  • # of compliance verification tasks assessed (total and by sector)

(SRM control)

  • Renewed and issued a total of 1804 permits for the control of SRM in Canada
  • Contracted services with engineers and worked with them to evaluate 4 new sites for disposal of SRM in Canada.
  • Developed an ash testing protocol for incinerators permitted to receive and destroy SRM.

 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks Technical Market Access Support $44.1M (2004-05 to 2013-14) $5.0M $1.2M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Confidence in Canada's animal production and food system, facilitating access to domestic and international markets. Continue the establishment and maintenance of strong relationships with trading partners, and the provision of global leadership and influence regarding international policies and standards development.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

The CFIA continues to play an active and participatory role at the international level. In addition, the CFIA is contributing and influencing international science based disease control standards for BSE, which are critical components of the foundation for safe trade and the maintenance of international market confidence. On a bilateral basis this involves the invitation to trading partners for incoming technical missions to confirm first hand the integrity and implementation of Canada's inspection controls. At the multilateral level, the CFIA is maintaining the official designation as a BSE Controlled Risk country through the evaluation process of the 167 member country World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). The CFIA continues to contribute to the discussions at OIE, not only with respect to at the General Session and in revisions to the various Codes, but also with respect to having an OIE BSE reference laboratory as well as CFIA employees on a number of the OIE commissions.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for CFIA for 2009-10
CFIA Zoonotic Risks Establishment Review $2.3M (2004-05 to 2006-07) - -
Oversupply of Aged Cattle - - -
$2.3M (2004-05 to 2006-07) - - -
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Not Applicable

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Not Applicable

 
Total Allocation for CFIA (from Start to End Date) Total Planned Spending for CFIA for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for CFIA for 2009-10
$633.5M (2003-04 to 2013-14) plus $26.6M ongoing $65.3M $50.3M

AAFC
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
AAFC Food Safety and Biosecurity Systems (FSBRMS) Facilitating the Disposal of Specified Risk Material (SRM) Initiative $79.9M (2006-07 to 2009-10) $17.5M $13.9M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Mitigate impact of full Specified Risk Materials removal on industry competitiveness; Enhance infrastructure in place for feed ban regulations.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Federal Spending under SRM Federal-Provincial Contribution Agreements terminated March 31, 2010. Provincial spending has been extended for 5 provinces past March 31, 2010 to ensure completion of eligible SRM projects is achieved. Over 300 SRM related projects have been undertaken across Canada with funding to support industry competitiveness and enhance infrastructure (such as composting sites and incinerators) to comply with feed ban regulations. Investments have been made in research to seek long-term value-added uses for SRM.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for CFIA for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for CFIA for 2009-10
AAFC Food Safety and Biosecurity Systems (FSBRMS) Establishment $276.0M (2003-04) - -
Implementation $36.0M (2003-04) - -
Tracking and Tracing Systems $7.8M (2003-04 to 2004-05) - -
Transitional Industry Support Program $934.6M (2003-04) - -
Accelerating implementation of traceability in livestock and meat sources $16.1M (2004-05 to 2006-07) - -
Farm Income Payment Program $999.9M (2004-05 to 2005-06) - -
Cull Animal Program $202.4M (2003-04 to 2005-06) - -
Loan Loss $38.4M (2004-05 to 2008-09) - -
Feeder/Fed Cattle Set-Aside Program $296.3M (2004-05 to 2005-06) - -
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Not Applicable

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Not Applicable

 
Total Allocation for AAFC (from Start to End Date) Total Planned Spending for AAFC for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for AAFC for 2009-10
$2,887.3M (2003-04 to 2009-10)3 $17.5M $13.9M

3Due to rounding figures may not add to the totals shown.

c) PHAC
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
PHAC

Infectious Disease Prevention and Control

Internal Services

Surveillance and Research for Human TSEs $7.9M (2004-05 to 2013-14) $0.8M $0.8M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Risks of human TSEs in Canada remain clearly defined and well controlled

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)
  • Continued comprehensive national laboratory-based surveillance for all human prion diseases in Canada.
  • Resolved various potential public health issues related to individual cases of human prion disease, including suspected domestic case of variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
  • Renewed mandate and support for external neuropathology reference laboratory.
  • Completed internal validation study on accuracy of cerebrospinal fluid protein markers for diagnosis of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease.
  • Completed external validation study on use of Western immunoblot for detection and typing of pathological human prion proteins in brain tissue.
  • Co-authored publication (led by CFIA) on molecular, biochemical and genetic characteristics of BSE in Canada.
  • Continued work on development of diagnostic markers for BSE in bovine urine.
  • Established linkages with national forum on Chronic Wasting Disease.

 
Total Allocation for PHAC (from Start to End Date) Total Planned Spending for PHAC for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for PHAC for 2009-10
$7.9M (2004-05 to 2013-14) $0.8M $0.8M

c) Health Canada
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
Health Canada

Food and Nutrition

Health Products

Risk Assessment and Targeted Research $62.1M (2004-05 to 2013-14) $6.2M $5.9M
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Health Canada program objectives for BSE and other TSEs are to:

  • i) Protect consumers from exposure to BSE and TSEs;
  • ii) Maintain and improve the safety, quality and availability of safe food and health products by minimizing the risks posed by BSE and TSEs;
  • iii) Continue to reduce the risk of BSE and TSEs to consumers by maintaining and improving scientific capacity, and by diverting tissues of high potential infectivity away from use in food and health products;
  • iv) Partnerships - Engage with the United States and the international community to encourage and facilitate the adoption of equivalent public health protection measures; and
  • v) Review of master files and product licence applications which contain ingredients where the ingredients are sourced from animals and which may be susceptible to TSE.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)
  • i) Protect consumers
    • Development of SOPs for review of medicinal ingredients and non medicinal ingredients which are at risk of containing prions;
    • Ongoing summative evaluations of BSE1 and 11.
  • ii) Maintain and improve safety
    • Working group developing guidelines and policies for minimizing the risk of TSE in health products.
    • Development of internal guidance to minimize the risk of TSE in NHPs.
  • iii) Maintaining and improving scientific capacity
    • Review of master files and product licence applications which contain ingredients where the ingredients are sourced from animals which are susceptible to TSE.
  • iv) Partnerships / Networking
    • Ongoing work through MOA (Memorandum of Agreement) / LOU (Letter Of Understanding) / Contract : TSE Secretariat and USDA (United States Department of Agriculture);
    • Completed research project "Transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) studies in non-human primates and the implications for human health", under signed MOA between the TSE Secretariat, Food Directorate and CEA (Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique) France.
    • Completed research project "Detailed analysis of abnormal prion protein (PrPRes ) and infectivity detection in materials from cattle incubating classical or atypical bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in order to achieve a more substantiated specified risk material (SRM) definition.", under signed MOA between the Food Directorate, TSE Secretariat and Friedrich-Loeffler-Institute, Germany.
    • Completed three research projects under LOU between TSE Secretariat and Canadian Food Inspection Agency: "Infectivity studies of blood from elk and deer with clinical CWD"; "Experimental CWD and BSE in domestic cats: comparative oral transmission studies"; and "Data collection to populate the Canadian Animal Surveillance Network (CAHSN) data system with Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) surveillance information".
    • Completed research project "Oral Transmission and Tissue Infectivity Study for All Types of Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Diagnosed in Canadian Cattle", under LOU between the Food Directorate, TSE Secretariat, and Canadian Food Inspection Agency; and
    • Research project; Assays for infectious prions and PrP-Sc in the milk of scrapie-infected goats.
  • v) Review
    • Continued to review master files and product licence applications which contain ingredients where the ingredients are sourced from animals and which may be susceptible to TSE. As part of the risk assessment, every review requires an assessment for animal sourced ingredients. During this time period, approximately 99 new and generic drug submissions were reviewed along with 531 Notifiable Change Applications. A percentage of these reviews were contracted out for review
  • Other (accountability):
    • Completed development of a joint CFIA-HC-PHAC logic model for BSE III, lead by the Branch and Department to meet the BSE III Treasury Board submission requirements.
    • Ongoing performance evaluation and logic model updating of BSE III started and lead at the Branch and Department level.
    • The BSE evaluation was originally planned to be conducted in 2009-10, but was delayed until 2010-2011 because of the one-year extension of funding. No money was spent.

Health Canada
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
Health Canada   Compliance and Enforcement $1.0M (2003-04 to 2007-08) - -
Health Canada   Product Assessment $6.2M (2003-04 to 2007-08) - -
Health Canada   Tracking and Tracing $3.1M (2003-04 to 2007-08) - -
16. Expected Result (2009-10)

Not Applicable

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Not Applicable


 
Total Allocation for Health Canada (from Start to End Date) Total Planned Spending for Health Canada for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for Health Canada for 2009-10
$72.4M (2003-04 to 2013-14) $6.2M $5.9M

 
Total Allocation for all Federal Partners Total Planned Spending for all Federal Partners for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for all Federal Partners for 2009-10
$3,601.1M (2003-04 to 2013-14) plus $26.6M ongoing $89.8M $70.9M

18. Comments on Variances:

CFIA: Although funding is approved for specific programs, the Agency has authority to reallocate resources throughout the year. In some program areas, such reallocation will result in a variance between planned and actual spending. While efforts are made to meet the intended program objectives, reallocation occurs to deal with higher priorities. Note that in 2010-11, the Agency will also be seeking approval of a revised Program Activity Architecture which is expected to result in a clearer alignment in 2011-12.

AAFC: Actual spending data denoted above for the Facilitating the Disposal of SRM Initiative includes payments for 2009/10 expenditures made to date and expected payments for 2009/10 expenditures that have not yet been made. This is a demand driven program; administrative costs are relatively constant. The variance between planned and actual spending is attributed to projects that were not completed prior to program expiry.

19. Results achieved by non-federal partners (if applicable): N/A

20. Contact information:

Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Colleen Barnes
Executive Director
Domestic Policy Directorate
(613) 773-5901

Agriculture and Agri-food Canada
John Ross
Director
Animal Industry Division
(613) 773-0220

Public Health Agency of Canada
Dr. Michael B. Coulthart
Director
Prion Diseases Program
(204) 789-6026

Health Canada
Geoff Middleton
Manager Accountability
Policy, Planning, International Affairs Directorate (PPIAD)
(613) 954-2039

Table B: National Aquatic Animal Health Program


Name of Horizontal Initiative: National Aquatic Animal Health Program (NAAHP)

Name of Lead Department(s): Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO)

Lead Departments Program Activity: CFIA: Animal Health Risk and Production Systems DFO: Science for Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture

Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: April 1, 2005

End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: Ongoing

Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date): $59.05M (2005-06 to 2009-10) plus $10.33M ongoing

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement): The NAAHP will protect Canada's aquatic resource productivity by minimizing the risk of introducing infectious diseases of concern to Canada; by removing non-tariff trade barriers imposed by trade partners because Canada does not meet international trade standards for regulatory disease control measures; and by allowing Canada to apply control measures on imports that pose a risk of disease introduction into Canada. The NAAHP is built on the CFIA's animal health management and legislative framework and on DFO's laboratory infrastructure and aquatic animal health research expertise. The CFIA provides overall program direction under the authority of the Health of Animals Act and the field operations capability for aquaculture surveillance, emergency response measures, export certification and import controls. DFO performs the surveillance and monitoring activities for wild resources, and delivers and oversees the diagnostic and research support responsibilities. Ongoing funding was obtained through an approved Treasury Board submission.

Shared Outcome(s): Sustainable Aquatic Resource Productivity and Internationally Competitive Aquatic Animal Resource Based Industries.

Governance Structure(s): The CFIA is the federal lead for delivery of the NAAHP. Respective federal roles and responsibilities are outlined in a Memorandum of Understanding co-signed with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). A steering committee was established, consisting of Director General-level officials from both organizations, who are responsible for strategic direction, monitoring and analysis of the program implementation of the NAAHP. The CFIA Director of the Aquatic Animal Health Division and the DFO Director of Aquatic Animal Health Science Branch are also members of the steering committee. Stakeholder input on development of the NAAHP is managed through an Aquatic Animal Health Committee (AAHC), which includes provincial and territorial authorities for aquaculture and wild fisheries resource management, veterinary association representatives, Aboriginal groups and wild and farmed industry stakeholders. Progress with program development and implementation of the NAAHP is reported to the Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers CFIA Committee (CFIA-CCFAM), and to the Agriculture Federal/Provincial/Territorial Regulatory ADM committees.

A) CFIA
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA Animal Health Risks and Production Systems National Aquatic Animal Health Program $32.13M (2005-06 to 2009-10) plus $6.35M ongoing $6.35M $4.35M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Regulatory amendments based on full consultation (FPT, Aboriginal Groups, & WTO); Initiation of discussion on FPT MOUs on Emergency Response & delineation of Domestic Disease Control zones;

Priority policies and procedures required to enforce revised regulations; NAAHP integration into priority IMIT systems (SIMS, AIRS, ICTS, IPS, CEMRS) & linkage to DFO LIMS; and

Training modules for key NAAHP implementation activities.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

In December 2009, changes were proposed in Canada Gazette, Part 1 to the Health of Animals Regulations to require import permitting for aquatic animals and their products that represent a disease risk. The 75-day comment period closed March 7, 2010. Reportable Disease Regulations are expected to coincide with Health of Animals regulatory amendments;

Commenced discussions with FPT on Emergency Response and completed the planning of a Simulation Exercise to be delivered in 2010/2011;

Completed priority policies and procedures required to enforce revised regulations. They include Hazard specific plans and Functional plans, Initial Site Inspection Standard Operating Procedures, Import permit policy framework, Export policy framework and Surveillance framework;

Initiated project and planning requirements for NAAHP integration into IMIT systems and linkage to DFO LIMS for implementation by the end of next fiscal year; and

Completed Five (5) National Training Initiatives Submissions pertaining to overview of the NAAHP, Disease Control and Contingency Planning, Import/Export and Surveillance activities for implementation in 2010/2011.


b) DFO
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Science for Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture National Aquatic Animal Health Laboratory System (NAAHLS) $26.92M plus $3.98M ongoing $3.98M $4.59M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)
  1. Diagnostic tests validated to OIE requirements
  2. Operational Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS)
  3. Amendment of the Fish Health Protection Regulations (FHPR)
  4. Capacity for diagnostic testing
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Name of Program: National Aquatic Animal Health Laboratory System (NAAHLS)

  1. Continued to develop and validate diagnostic tests required to support NAAHP program activities. Laboratory standards and tracking systems meet international requirements for audit/challenge of export certificates and/or import controls – International Standards. Priority disease list established collaboratively with CFIA. DFO will complete the validation of all 35 priority diseases by 2013-2014.
  2. Continued development of the LIMS in accordance with the International Standards Organization (ISO) 17025 (17025 is the main standard used by testing and calibration laboratories).
  3. Worked collaboratively with CFIA on a transition framework moving regulatory authority from the FHPR to the amended HAR. This will be a two phase process. Phase One: remove from the authorities for FHPR, International Import /Export to avoid regulatory duplication and overlap with the authorities under amended Health of Animals Regulations (HAR).Phase two: The CFIA led Facility Recognition Program will replace the FHPR. When Phase two is complete the FHPR will be rescinded.
  4. In collaboration with CFIA, continued to establish a network of third party testing laboratories in support of NAAHP program activities.

 
Total Allocation for all Federal Partners Total Planned Spending for all Federal Partners for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for all Federal Partners for 2009-10
$59.05M (2005-06 to 2009-10) plus $10.33M ongoing $10.33M $8.94M

18. Comments on Variances:

CFIA: $1.2M was reallocated to other priorities without affecting NAAHP deliverables for 2009-10, and $0.8M lapsed due to project deliverables that were delayed to 2010-11.

DFO: In 2009-10, DFO internally reallocated additional funding to this initiative in order to deliver on priorities identified in this submission.

19. Results achieved by non-federal partners (if applicable): Not Applicable

20. Contact information:

Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Annie R. Champagne
Director
Aquatic Animal Health Division
(613) 221-3779

Department of Fisheries and Oceans
Stephen Stephen
NAAHP Science
(613) 990-0292

Table C: Listeria


Name of Horizontal Initiative: Government Response and Action Plan to the 2008 Listeriosis Outbreak.

Name of Lead Department(s): Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA); Health Canada (HC) and Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC)

Lead Departments Program Activity: CFIA: Food Safety and Nutrition Risks; HC: Food and Nutrition and PHAC: Surveillance and Population Health Assessment

Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2009-10

End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2011-12

Total Federal Funding Allocation (start to end date): $75.0M (2009-10 to 2011-12)

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement): The objective of this horizontal initiative is to respond to each of the 57 recommendations made in the report by the government appointed Independent Investigator, Sheila Weatherill, who reviewed the circumstances leading to the 2008 Listeriosis outbreak in Canada. To respond to each recommendation, the Government focussed on an action plan based on three thematic areas: address immediate food safety risks, enhance surveillance and early detection, and improve Government response to food-borne illness outbreaks in Canada.

To implement the action plan, the three federal organizations – CFIA, HC, PHAC – received a total spending authority of $75 million over three years (CFIA: $46.8 million, PHAC: $17.7 million, and HC: $10.5 million). Each federal organization has identified the resource requirements, strategic outcomes, objectives and implementation plan for each thematic area. Implementation of this horizontal initiative will further enhance Canada's food safety system.

Shared Outcome(s): Address Immediate Food Safety Risks by updating food safety programs and directions to industry, building 24/7 capacity for health risk assessments, increasing the number of Ready to Eat (RTE) meat inspection staff, and improving electronic access for inspection staff.

Enhance Surveillance and Early Detection by upgrading (web-based) national public heath surveillance system, improving detection methods for Listeria and other foodborne hazards, enhancing laboratory testing capacity, and improving laboratory diagnostic tools.

Improve Government Response to Foodborne Illness Outbreaks in Canada by strengthening federal leadership capacity for outbreak response, revising the national Foodborne Illness Outbreak Response Protocol (FIORP), improving risk communication during foodborne emergencies, targeting communications to vulnerable populations, and improving public access to integrated Government of Canada food safety information.

Governance Structure(s): The responsibilities for the implementation of each of the 57 recommendations made by the Independent Investigator are based on the mandates of the CFIA, HC, PHAC. In addition, the Deputy Minister of AAFC chairs a special committee of deputy heads from CFIA, Health Canada and PHAC which provides recommendations to improve the ways the organizations work together to deliver their food safety mandates The CFIA, PHAC, HC, and AAFC work horizontally through a governance structure to implement and to monitor the implementation of all the recommendations.

The governance framework includes an ADM level Committee on Food Safety (ADM-CFS) that is supported by a DG level committee. The ADM-CFS receives support and direction from the AAFC, CFIA, PHAC, and HC deputy heads. Furthermore, each department monitors the implementation of the recommendations through a department specific governance structure that includes inter-branch director level, executive director level, vice-president level, and senior management committees.

A) CFIA
Address Immediate Food Safety Risks
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Internal Services

Hiring of Inspection staff in Ready to Eat Meat Facilities $21.3M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $1.9M $1.2M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Hire additional inspection staff in ready to eat (RTE) meat facilities to deliver new inspection activities.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

The Government has made funds available to hire 170 new full-time inspectors, over three years, dedicated to food safety. Budget 2010 committed an additional $13 million to CFIA to increase inspection capacity for meat and poultry processing facilities. As of June 15, 2010, the CFIA has hired 59 inspectors. The hiring of inspectors will continue on a priority basis.



10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Internal Services

Scientific and technical training programs $11.6M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $3.0M $0.9M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10) Enhance scientific and technical knowledge among RTE meat inspection staff in all federally registered meat establishments.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

CFIA has developed and approved a new National Training Plan for meat processing inspectors. The Plan specifies 29 weeks of blended training (self-study, e-learning, coaching, instructor-led) for meat processing inspectors, and focuses on developing a new course curriculum and the continuous training of new and existing inspectors. The first round of inspector training using the new curriculum began in April 2010, and will be completed in the fall. Training plans for meat processing inspectors will continue to be reviewed and evaluated on an annual basis, in keeping with available resources. Moreover, a national assessment of training needs related to the delivery of the CVS has been completed.



10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Internal Services

Enhanced connectivity of Inspectors $3.0M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $1.0M $0.6M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10) Enhance connectivity (e.g. high speed access, cell phones) for CFIA inspectors.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Where possible, the CFIA has increased the use of existing technologies such as laptops, cell phones and faster network connectivity. To make it easier for inspectors, particularly those in remote locations, to access the information they require to do their jobs, new wireless technologies have been evaluated. A pilot project was completed on April 1, 2010 to assess whether this wireless technology could enable inspectors to securely access the CFIA computer network and applications. The CFIA is reviewing the results of the pilot project to determine the impact of proceeding with this new technology and the associated costs.



10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Internal Services

Enhanced Food Safety Program Risk Management $4.6M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $1.0M $0.8M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10) Enhance food safety program risk management through modernization of food safety standards, programs, policies and operational procedures.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

The CFIA works to review and update its programs, regulations and directives on an on-going basis. Work is also being conducted in relation to the CFIA's food safety programs delivered in the non-federally registered food sector, under the Government's Food and Consumer Safety Action Plan. Business processes are being streamlined so that manuals, including directives, are updated regularly and changes are implemented efficiently. These business processes are expected to start being phased in by March 2011.



Enhance Surveillance and Early Detection
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Internal Services

Improve test detection methods for Listeria and other food-borne hazards $1.2M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.2M $0.7M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Improve test detection methods for Listeria and other food-borne hazards to provide greater availability and choice of testing methods for the detection of Listeria, and faster turn around time for reporting results.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

CFIA has developed the capacity, through its Pulse-Field Gel Electrophoresis Center, to routinely test and then report virtually immediately to the provincial and federal PulseNet Canada members when its laboratories isolate foodborne bacterial pathogens. In addition, Health Canada is working in collaboration with CFIA to improve and validate detection methods for Listeria and other hazards in food to reduce testing time and enable more rapid response during food safety investigations.



Enhance Surveillance and Early Detection
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Internal Services

Additional Listeria testing $4.1M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $1.3M $0.9M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Conduct additional Listeria testing to contribute to improved decision making.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Due to the increased volume of samples tested through CFIA's Listeria monitoring program, the Agency now provides food microbiology laboratory services seven days per week. In the past year, CFIA has increased the number of Listeria samples analyzed by its laboratories by approximately sixty percent.



Improve Government Response To Foodborne Illness Outbreaks
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
CFIA

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Internal Services

Government of Canada food safety portal $1.0M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.2M $0.3M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Develop and maintain a Government of Canada food safety portal to improve public access to integrated Government of Canada food safety information.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

On February 25, 2010, the CFIA launched a Government of Canada online food safety portal website that offers a one-stop approach to food safety and foodborne illness information (www.foodsafety.gc.ca) and has links to HC, PHAC and CFIA websites. To raise awareness of the food safety portal, CFIA sent out a social media news release which enables a wide range of social media book marking and tagging options to be applied to the conventional news release. To promote the food safety portal, and to raise awareness of safe food handling practices and recall procedures, CFIA has prepared an exhibits strategy which will see the Agency participate in six food-related events between May 2010 and March 2011.


 
Total Allocation for CFIA (from Start to End Date) Total Planned Spending for CFIA for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for CFIA for 2009-10
$46.8M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $8.6M $5.4M

b) PHAC
Enhance Surveillance and Early Detection
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
PHAC

Strengthen Public Health Capacity

Knowledge-based information systems $4.5M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $1.5M $0.3M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

National public health tools and platforms.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

PHAC is working on a pan-Canadian surveillance system. It is initiating plans for a pilot implementation of the Panorama system, funded by Canada Health Infoway, in order to test the feasibility of using the system for managing multi-jurisdictional outbreaks of foodborne illnesses. Pilot testing will include an investigation of the feasibility of integration with existing alerting systems such as the Canadian Integrated Outbreak Surveillance Centre (CIOSC).


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
PHAC

Infectious Disease Prevention and Control

Science and Innovation $2.9M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.3M $0.2M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Strengthened laboratory diagnostic tools and networking tools.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

Next-generation laboratory methods are being implemented within PulseNet Canada, which is coordinated by PHAC and represents a network between provincial public health laboratories and federal laboratories (including those of PHAC, CFIA and HC). The goal of the network is to share the information relating to genetic fingerprinting tests to allow for real-time identification, communication and response to clusters of foodborne illness. New experimental approaches to characterize bacterial pathogens have been developed within Canada and the PulseNet International member laboratories. These approaches have been evaluated and are now implemented for selected pathogens. In particular, responses to outbreaks related to pathogens E. coli, Salmonella and Listeria have benefited by utilizing these new technologies.


Improve Government Response To Foodborne Illness Outbreaks
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
PHAC

Infectious Disease Prevention and Control

Foodborne, Waterborne and Zoonotic Diseases $2.8M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.3M $0.5M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Modernize and exercise the FIORP.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

A revised draft of the Foodborne Illness Outbreak Response Protocol (FIORP) was developed by HC, CFIA and PHAC and was shared with the provinces and territories (P/Ts) in February 2010. The revised protocol includes clarified roles and responsibilities of food safety partners, as well as guidelines for information sharing during foodborne illness investigations. P/T health and agriculture ADMs are finalizing their input on the revised FIORP, with a view to endorsing the document in the spring of 2010.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
PHAC

Infectious Disease Prevention and Control

Emergency Preparedness and Response

Foodborne, Waterborne and Zoonotic Diseases

Emergency Response

$2.7M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.2M $0.1M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Develop an operational framework that provides procedures and guidance to the Health Portfolio for the coordination and management of foodborne illness emergencies.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

PHAC, in consultation with HC and CFIA, is developing an Incident Command Structure (ICS) to improve coordination and capacity among food safety partners during foodborne illness outbreaks, and is refining and implementing this emergency response mechanism to better prepare and respond to potential foodborne illness outbreaks. Integration with CFIA's Emergency Management System is underway and will be assessed in 2010.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
PHAC

Strengthen Public Health Capacity

Building Public Health Human Resource Capacity

$3.3M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.3M $0.3M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Pilot test a surge capacity model of qualified public health experts.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

PHAC has established a secretariat office to coordinate its surge capacity under the FIORP. The purpose of this office is to ensure that PHAC is positioned to assign qualified individuals needed to effectively manage and respond to multi-jurisdictional outbreaks. The Agency has completed a skills survey of its staff that identifies qualified individuals who could be assigned in these circumstances.


 
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
PHAC

Infectious Disease Prevention and Control

Foodborne, Waterborne and Zoonotic Diseases

$1.5M $0.2M $0.1M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)

Develop and implement a multi-faceted risk communications plan.

17. Results Achieved (2009-10)

PHAC is developing a comprehensive risk communications strategy that will guide how the Agency communicates to Canadians during a national foodborne illness outbreak. The strategy includes plans for communicating with the public and at-risk populations using a variety of traditional and innovative formats, including social media networks, the newly launched food safety portal, and audio-video webcasts by the Chief Public Health Officer of Canada. PHAC also collaborates with Health Canada to ensure that the Agency's information for Canadians during a national outbreak flows consistently from Health Canada's pre-outbreak food safety advice.


 
Total Allocation for PHAC (from Start to End Date) Total Planned Spending for CFIA for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for CFIA for 2009-10
$17.7M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $2.8M $1.5M

c) Health Canada
Address Immediate Food Safety Risks
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
HC

Food and Nutrition

Build Health Risk Assessment Capacity

$4.9M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.6M $0.6M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)
  • Improved detection method for Listeria developed and validated to decrease the time required for the isolation of L. monocytogenes.
  • Proof of Concept for the lab-on-a-chip platform for the detection of foodborne pathogens, targeting Listeria monocytogenes (results in 48hr instead of current 10 days) for the first application.
  • Establishment of criteria and processes to identify priority microbial methods for validation, by Health Canada and the CFIA.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)
  • Method developed for detection of L. monocytogenes in 3-5 days instead of 10 days. Method Validation Initiated.
  • Collaboration initiated with the National Research Council of Canada to demonstrate the proof of concept (POC) for the lab-on-a-chip platform.

Enhance Surveillance and Early Detection
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
HC

Food and Nutrition

Improve test detection methods for Listeria and other foodborne hazards

$3.6M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.6M $0.4M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10)
  • Begin to set criteria to prioritize and fast track approvals of food safety interventions with proven health benefits.
  • Strengthen health risk assessment capacity to provide 24/7 coverage and enhance surge capacity preparedness.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10)
  • Drafting of guidelines initiated to set criteria to prioritize and fast track approvals of food safety interventions with proven health benefits.
  • Additional FTE's hired to conduct Health Risk Assessments (HRAs) for responding to CFIA.
  • Established 24/7 emergency contact for CFIA to conduct after hours HRAs and enhanced response capacity to address CFIA requests.
  • All HRAs on Food chemical and microbiological safety incidents, conducted at the request of the CFIA were delivered within service standards or shorter.

Improve Government Response To Foodborne Illness Outbreaks
10. Federal Partners 11. Federal Partner Program Activity (PA) 12. Names of Programs for Federal Partners 13. Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) 14. Planned Spending for 2009-10 15. Actual Spending for 2009-10
HC

Internal Services

Social Marketing Strategy

$2.0M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $0.9M $0.8M
16. Expected Result for (2009-10) Launch targeted food safety risk communications products to begin raising awareness among vulnerable populations.
17. Results Achieved (2009-10) Launched first stage of a marketing campaign targeting those populations that are at greater risk of complications from foodborne illness (older adults, pregnant women and those with weakened immune systems), which included production of web and radio ads, media planning and trafficking, production of booklets, posters, videos, and Web development.

 
Total Allocation for HC (From Start to End Date) Total Planned Spending for HC for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for HC for 2009-10
$10.5M (2009-10 to 2011-12) $2.1M $1.8M

Initiative Total:
Total Allocation for all Federal Partners Total Planned Spending for all Federal Partners for 2009-10 Total Actual Spending for all Federal Partners for 2009-10
$75.0M $13.5M $8.7M

18. Comments on Variances:

CFIA: Although significant progress was made during the first year on staffing, the CFIA encountered some delays. In addition, there were also delays in the development and delivery of the training. Some of the unspent funds were redistributed to other Agency priorities.

PHAC: The variance between planned spending and actual expenditures is due to delays in securing a service provider for the surveillance system in addition to delays in staffing activities.

Health Canada: Listeriosis funding was received very late in the fiscal year. A new staffing protocol at Health Products and Food Branch of Health Canada (HPFB) made it difficult to hire FTEs to increase both HRA capacity and to further develop Methods.

19. Results achieved by non-federal partners (if applicable): Not Applicable

20. Contact information:

Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Theresa Iuliano
Senior Director
Policy and Strategies Directorate
Policy and Programs Branch
(613) 773-5867

Public Health Agency of Canada
Mark Raizenne
Director General
Centre for Food-Borne, Environmental and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases
(613) 948-6883
Mark.Raizenne@phac-aspc.gc.ca

Health Canada
Samuel Godefroy
Director General
Food Directorate
Health Products and Food Branch
(613) 957-1821



3.2.9 Green Procurement

A) Meeting Policy Requirements

Meeting Policy Requirements

Has the department incorporated environmental performance considerations in its procurement decision-making processes?

Yes.

Summary of initiatives to incorporate environmental performance considerations in procurement decision-making processes:

The CFIA is committed to having 100 per cent of the material managers and procurement personnel take the online course on Green Procurement (C215) provided by the Canada School of Public Service (CSPS).

The CFIA provides procurement sessions throughout the year to program managers, and in these sessions, managers are informed and encouraged to consider Green procurement in their requests.

The CFIA's Contracting Policy now requires competitive requests for proposals to include, where applicable, environmental criteria.

The CFIA is a member of the GoC Green Procurement Forum.

Results achieved:

All existing material managers and procurement personnel have completed the online Green Procurement course and the new material managers and new procurement personnel will complete their online course over the next fiscal year.

There is a greater awareness among CFIA personnel to consider Green initiatives when they are making purchasing decisions and in their day to day work.

Contributions to facilitate government-wide implementation of green procurement:

Not applicable.

B) Green Procurement Targets

1. Has the department established green procurement targets?

Yes.

2. Summary of green procurement targets:

2009-2010 Targets:

Target #1 - 100 per cent of the material managers and procurement personnel will have taken the online course on Green Procurement (C215) provided by the CSPS by March 31, 2010.

Target #2 - It is planned that the environmental criteria for inclusion in competitive requests for proposals initiated by the CFIA be developed and implemented by March 2009.

2010-2011 Target:

Target #1 - 100 per cent of the material managers and procurement personnel will have taken the online course on Green Procurement (C215) provided by the CSPS by March 31, 2011.

3. Results achieved:

Target #1 – 100% existing material managers and procurement personnel completed the online course of Green Procurement by March 31, 2010.

Target #2 - Green procurement criteria has and will continue to be included in the Agency's Request for Proposals wherever applicable.

2009-2010 Targets:
Target #1 – All new material managers and procurement personnel completed the online course of Green Procurement by March 31, 2011

4. Contributions to facilitate government-wide implementation of green procurement:

Not applicable.



3.2.8 Response to Parliamentary Committees and External Audits


Response to Parliamentary Committees

The Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food (SCAAF)

  • In May 2009, the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food (SCAAF) tabled a report on its study: "The Potato Cyst Nematode (PCN) in Quebec and Alberta" with a focus on the assistance offered to producers in these quarantined areas. SCAAF made four recommendations to the Agriculture portfolio which agreed to address each finding. Recommendation #2 sought a timely completion of the negotiations to establish "Guidelines on Surveillance and Phytosanitary Actions for PCN" between Canada, the United States and other countries. In June 2009, the revised Guidelines were signed between the CFIA and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). In response to Recommendation #4, the CFIA reaffirmed its commitment to address the findings of the December 2008 OAG audit report "Managing Risks to Canada's Plant Resources".

GOC Response to SCAAF Report at Parliamentary can be found at: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=4096914&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=2

Referenced in Section II of the DPR under PA 2.2.2 Plant Health Risk and Production Systems – Strategic Performance Analysis

The Standing Committee on Public Accounts (PACP)

  • In June 2009, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (PACP) tabled a report which described its assessment of the CFIA's Management Action Plan (MAP). This MAP describes how the CFIA will address the recommendations made in the December 2008 OAG audit report "Managing Risks to Canada's Plant Resources". In its report, the PACP provided six recommendations for the CFIA to consider, including the requirement for the Agency to provide a detailed and technical action plan to the PACP by December 31, 2009.
  • The CFIA agrees with all the PACP recommendations. Due to the high degree of similarity around the findings of the OAG audit, the PACP study and a 2008 internal evaluation report on the Agency's invasive alien species program, CFIA's response to all of these report recommendations was integrated into one single Detailed and Technical Action Plan (DTAP). The DTAP identifies a framework of specific initiatives and strategies to be undertaken by the CFIA over the next five years that in the aggregate will achieve the performance improvement required to address the issues identified by the OAG, PACP and the internal evaluation.

CFIA's detailed action plan can be found at: http://www2.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=4140080&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=2

Referenced in Section II of the DPR under PA 2.2.2 Plant Health Risk and Production Systems – Strategic Performance Analysis

Response to the Auditor General (including to the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development)

Not Applicable

External Audits (Note: These refer to other external audits conducted by the Public Service Commission of Canada or the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages)

External Audits
The Office of the Comptroller General Horizontal Internal Audits:

  1. Horizontal Internal Audits of Corporate Risk Profiles in Large Departments and Agencies (LDAs)

    The report examined how corporate risk management processes are governed, what systems and practices are used to develop them, how they are incorporated into business planning, and how LDAs report on corporate risk management performance.

    http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/orp/2010/crp-pro-eng.asp
  2. Horizontal Internal Audit of High Risk Expenditures in Large Departments and Agencies (LDAs)

    The report examined the risk management over expenditure controls and the practices in place in a sample of LDAs in order to determine whether expenditure management was being carried out in a cost-effective and efficient manner while maintaining the required level of control.

    http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/orp/2009/hia-vih-eng.asp



3.2.7: Internal Audits and Evaluations

Table A: Audits

1. Name of Internal Audit 2. Audit Type 3. Status 4. Completion Date
Audit of the Management of Third Party Arrangements Corporate - Third Party Arrangements Completed Aug 19, 2009
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/agen/eval/thient/thiente.shtml
Audit of the MOU between CFIA and CBSA Performance - Compliance with MOU Completed May 17, 2010
To be posted
Audit of IM/IT Governance Corporate - IM/IT Controls Completed May 10, 2010
To be posted
Audit of the Financial Management Control Framework Corporate - Financial Management Controls Completed June 10, 2010
To be posted
Audit of Acquisition Cards Corporate - Financial Management Controls Completed June 10, 2010
To be posted
Audit of Terrestrial Animal Health Performance - Animal Health Program Completed June 10, 2010
To be posted
Audit of Revenue Management Corporate - Financial Management Controls Completed June 10, 2010
To be posted
Audit of the Management of Imported Food Safety Performance - Food Safety Program Activity Completed June 30, 2010
To be posted
Audit of Enforcement and Investigation Services Performance - Enforcement and Investigation Controls In Progress September, 2010
To be posted
Audit of Food Safety Inspection - Meat (CVS) Performance - Food Safety - Meat Program In Progress September, 2010
To be posted
Audit of Plant Health & Biosecurity Performance - Plant Health and Biosecurtiy Program In Progress September, 2010
To be posted
Capital Planning and Asset Management Corporate - Financial Management Controls Deferred N/A
Audit of Export Certification of Food Food Safety Controls Deferred N/A

The following information provides additional guidance on completing the Internal Audits table: Name of Internal Audit: Indicate the name of the internal audit and link to the approved internal audit report. Note: approved reports are those that have been approved by the Departmental Audit Committee.

  1. Internal Audit Type: Indicate the type of program/service or initiative being audited (examples include: Transfer Payment, Financial Management controls, Human Resources, etc.).
  2. Status: Indicate the status of the internal audit project (i.e. planned, ongoing, in-progress, completed, etc.).
  3. Completion Date: Indicate the actual or estimated completion date of the internal audit.

B: Evaluations


1. Name of Evaluation 2. Program Activity 3. Evaluation Type 4. Status 5. Completion Date
Evaluation of On-Farm Food Safety Recognition Program Food Safety and Nutrition Risks and Domestic and International Market Access Summative/Impact Completed December 2009
Evaluation of CFIA's Imported Food Activities Food Safety and Nutrition Risks Formative/Implementation In-Progress September 2011
Evaluation of Food Labelling Activities Food Safety and Nutrition Risks and Domestic and International Market Access Summative/Impact Cancelled n/a
Evaluation of the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Programming: Enhanced Feed Ban Animal Health Risks and Production Systems Formative/Implementation In-Progress June 2011
Evaluation of the Food Sampling and Testing Program Food Safety and Nutrition Risks Formative/Implementation Completed September 2009
Evaluation of the Food Recall and Emergency Response System Food Safety and Nutrition Risks Formative/Implementation Completed June 2009
Evaluation of the National Aquatic Animal Health Program Animal Health Risks and Production Systems Formative/Implementation Ongoing June 2010
Evaluation of the Avian and Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Initiative Zoonotic Risks Formative/Implementation Completed March 2010
Evaluation of the CFIA's Contribution to the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games Emergency Management Summative/Impact In-Progress September 2010
Evaluation of Administrative Monetary Penalties Enforcement and Investigation Summative/Impact In-Progress December 2010
Evaluation of the Food Vulnerability Assessment Food Safety and Nutrition Risks Summative/Impact In-Progress December 2010
Evaluation of Stakeholder Consultation Activities All Formative/Implementation Planned March 2011
Evaluation of the Building Public Confidence in Pesticides and Improving Access to Pest Management Products (Interdepartmental; lead by Pest Management Risk Agency) Food Safety and Nutrition Risks Summative/Impact In-Progress September 2010
Evaluation of Health Canada's Food Safety Nutrition Quality Program (Interdepartmental; lead by Health Canada) Food Safety and Nutrition Risks Summative/Impact In-Progress December 2010
Evaluation of the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games (Interdepartmental; lead by Canadian Heritage) Emergency Management Summative/Impact In-Progress December 2010
Evaluation of the Plum Pox Virus (Interdepartmental; lead by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada) Plant Health Risks and Production Systems Summative/Impact In-Progress March 2011