Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Symbol of the Government of Canada

ARCHIVED - Canadian Food Inspection Agency - Report


Warning This page has been archived.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.

Section II – Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome

2.1 How the Agency Plans and Reports Outcomes

In accordance with the Treasury Board Secretariat’s (TBS) Management, Resources and Results Structure (MRRS) Policy, the CFIA planning and reporting framework is based on strategic outcomes, a PAA, and an associated governance framework. The PAA is aligned with the GoC outcomes and takes into consideration the impact of several factors – including the global and national environment, GoC priorities, CFIA strategic risks, its human and financial resource capacity, and outcomes of its past performance and related lessons learned.

This report highlights key accomplishments and gives an account of the progress made in advancing the plans and priorities identified in the CFIA’s 2010–11 RPP. Under each strategic outcome and program activity, performance as it relates to special initiatives, risk mitigation strategies, and ongoing activities is reported upon, and special focus is given to how this affects Canadians.

Section 2.2 of this report describes performance information, including highlights, challenges, lessons learned, and expected results for each strategic outcome, measured against targets through the use of compliance and other relevant performance indicators.

2.1.1 Assessment of Compliance and Performance Targets

Given the complexity and inherent variability of the agriculture, agri-food, forestry and fishery production, processing, and distribution sectors, the approach to assessing compliance varies across commodity groups. The CFIA uses a variety of tools to monitor and promote compliance, including inspections, audits, product sampling and testing. The CFIA uses risk-based approaches that target the areas of highest risk. For example, the CFIA focuses its efforts on systems, processes and facilities that directly affect the safety of food. The resulting compliance rates indicate the extent to which regulated parties have adhered to requirements specified in federal acts and regulations. When a broader environmental context is taken into account, year-to-year compliance trends give more information about an area’s true performance than does the absolute compliance rate for any one year. For detailed information on compliance assessment, see Section 4.3.

Qualitative and quantitative performance targets provide a basis for measuring the performance of regulated parties and of the CFIA in relation to how they achieve the results expected of them. The targets in this report are for critical program areas and are based either on historical averages of actual performance or on the expected results of effective programming (e.g. rate of industry compliance with regulatory standards). The CFIA has assessed the extent to which performance has met or exceeded established targets and provided analysis when performance fell below the established targets. Targets for programs that monitor activities are set differently than those for programs that focus on specific areas of non-compliance. In terms of compliance rates, the CFIA considers performance within +/- 1% as met. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

2.1.2 Fair and Reliable Performance Reporting

In 2008–09, as part of a long-term process to improve overall performance measurement and reporting, the CFIA initiated the Performance Management Reporting Solution (PMRS) project, an Agency-wide management tool that will allow for better reporting and enhance performance monitoring, reporting, and informed decision-making at all levels. When fully operational, the PMRS will facilitate the production of corporate documents such as the Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP), the Departmental Performance Report (DPR), the Management Accountability Framework (MAF), and the Program Activity Architecture (PAA) and its associated Performance Measurement Framework (PMF). In 2010–11, the Animal Health and Meat Hygiene programs were rolled out, bringing the total number of programs that have been rolled out since the inception of the project to six. These six programs represent 42% of the CFIA’s expenditures, excluding internal services. Also in 2010–11, a scorecard for the CFIA’s new 2011-12 PMF was developed and successfully tested.

2.1.2.1 Data Quality

For 2010–11, the CFIA assigned a data quality rating to every performance result indicator in the CFIA’s DPR. The ratings provide a reasonable assessment of the reliability and limitations of the CFIA’s performance information. For each indicator, the CFIA applied a consistent methodology to evaluate the data and processes used to derive performance results.

Information on performance result methodologies and data is used to substantiate that the information reported in the CFIA’s DPR is valid, reliable, fair, and supported by appropriate evidence. This information is also the basis for determining the data quality ratings for each indicator. Ratings are based on an assessment of the systems and processes used to manage data and the systems and processes used to derive performance results from the data.

A data quality rating of Higher Confidence, Moderate Confidence or Lower Confidence, as categorized below, is determined for each indicator and included in the performance tables in Section 2.2.

Table 2-1 Data Quality Ratings


Data Quality Rating
Higher Confidence Results rating where (1) the data used to derive performance results is stored and managed using reliable systems and methods; and (2) performance results are derived using reliable systems and methods.
Moderate Confidence Results rating where (1) the data used to derive performance results is stored and managed in most cases using reliable systems and methods; and (2) performance results are derived in most cases using reliable systems and methods.
Lower Confidence Results rating where there are gaps in the reliability of data sources and/or performance results: data and performance results are supported or derived from systems and methods that do not support data robustness and reliability.

2.1.3 Auditor General’s Assessment of Performance Information

Auditor General’s Assessment of Performance Information in the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s 2010–11 Performance Report - Page 1

[D]

Criteria for the Assessment of Fairness and Reliability

[D]

2.2 Performance by Strategic Outcome

2.2.1 Strategic Outcome 1: Public health risks associated with the food supply and transmission of animal diseases to humans are minimized and managed

Strategic Outcome 1

[D]

As a contributor to the GoC’s integrated approach to population health, the CFIA, in collaboration with federal partners and provincial, territorial and municipal governments, protects Canadians from preventable foodborne health risks and risks associated with animal diseases potentially transmissible to humans. In carrying out activities toward the achievement of this strategic outcome, the CFIA focused its efforts on the following five priorities:

  • Design and deliver risk-based inspection and surveillance services
  • Improve compliance through compliance management activities
  • Modernize the Agency’s regulatory components and tools
  • Increase transparency and strengthen strategic partnerships and communications with key partners and stakeholders
  • Develop a workforce and workplace such that the Agency is innovative, more effective, and well-managed

While work within Food Safety and Nutrition Risks and Zoonotic Risks is primarily aimed at addressing the Foodborne Hazards and Zoonotic Outbreaks/Incidents risk areas4, it also benefits the other key risk areas noted above.

Percentage of 2010–11 Actual Spending: Strategic Outcome 1

[D]

Program Activity 1: Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Program Activity Description:

Food safety nutrition risk management programming works with federal, provincial and municipal partners and organizations to improve the overall health of Canadians. A primary contribution to this effort is in minimizing and managing risks, and deliberate threats, to food and food production systems. Consumers are also provided with appropriate information on which to base safe and nutritious food choices. We achieve this by developing and delivering programs designed to verify that food safety and nutrition information is accurate. Programs and services are developed and delivered to protect Canadians from preventable food safety hazards, by managing food safety emergencies effectively, and supporting public awareness of, and the contribution to, food safety, in imported and domestic food.

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
299.4 307.6 301.5

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
2,975 3,063 88

Variance Analysis:

Actual Spending increased by $31.0M from the previous year ($270.5M). This increase is largely explained by new funding received to increase the frequency of food inspections in meat processing establishments ($9.6M) as well as by the receipt of incremental resources for Listeriosis ($7.9M), the Food Safety Action Plan ($9.9M), and Canada’s Economic Action Plan ($4.0M).

The following table identifies the CFIA’s expected results, performance indicators, and targets for the Food Safety and Nutrition Risks program activity. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 4.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2-2: Summary of Performance: Food Safety and Nutrition Risks


Expected
Results
Performance
Indicators
Targets Performance Status Data Quality Rating*
Risks associated with food, including nutrition, are managed with acceptable limits Extent to which inspected, federally registered establishments comply with federal food safety requirements ≥ 98 % compliance Meat 96% Not Met Moderate Confidence
Fish and Seafood 99% Met Higher Confidence
Processed Products 100% Met Moderate Confidence
Dairy 100% Met Moderate Confidence
Shell Egg 99% Met Moderate Confidence
Extent to which domestic and imported food products comply with federal chemical residue requirements ≥ 95% compliance Meat 97% Met Moderate Confidence
Fish and Seafood 95% Met Higher Confidence
Fresh Fruit and Vegetables 97% Met Moderate Confidence
Processed Products 99% Met Moderate Confidence
Honey** 70% Not Met Moderate Confidence
Shell Egg 94% Not Met Moderate Confidence
Dairy 98% Met Moderate Confidence
Time taken to issue public warnings for Class I recalls 100% of public warnings for Class I recalls are issued within 24 hours of a recall decision. 100% Met Higher Confidence
Extent to which nutrition information on non-registered food products inspected is accurate5 ≥80% of food products inspected declare nutrition information which is accurate. 76% Not Met Higher Confidence

* For more information on data ratings and limitations regarding the CFIA’s performance indicators, please see Section 2.1.2.1.

** The explanation for the low rating of honey is found under the Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity section

Additional Information:

Food Safety portal: www.foodsafety.gc.ca

Moving Forward on Food Safety Action on Listeria: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/transp/prog/proge.shtml

CFIA Consumer Centre: www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/concen/concene.shtml

Food Recalls and Allergy Alerts: www.inspection.gc.ca/english/corpaffr/recarapp/recaltoce.shtml

FCSAP: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/concen/concengov/govplane.shtml

Healthy Canadians: http://www.healthycanadians.gc.ca/index-eng.php

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Performance Summary, Trending and Compliance Methods

Extent to which inspected, federally registered establishments comply with federal food safety requirements:

Meat – 96% compliance – Not met

In 2010–11, the CFIA did not meet its target. The CFIA performed inspections of meat establishments using the new Compliance Verification System (CVS) and the new enforcement policy for meat. This compliance level is identical to that of the previous fiscal year of 2009-2010, the result of industry continuing to improve their understanding of the system and of the defined enforcement policy implemented in 2008-2009. The meat inspection program has unique elements, such as mandatory Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points, slaughter requirements, and export market requirements, and thus has a greater number of specific and defined inspection activities under the CVS. The CFIA continues to communicate and work with industry to increase understanding of these requirements and of the related CVS policies. The CFIA aims to increase the levels of compliance through ongoing communication and education and continue its vigilance through inspection and the enforcement of defined standards.

  • The compliance rate for this indicator remains similar to that of the last three years. (2008–09, 95%; 2009–10, 96%; 2010–11, 96%)

Fish and Seafood – 99% compliance – Met

The CFIA continues to meet its target for Fish and Seafood. An initial implementation phase for strengthened Schedule I and II operating requirements for establishments is in place, and industry is working to address these requirements.

  • Performance is similar to 2009–10. This is the second year in which performance was measured for this indicator since the methodology was changed in 2009–10. (2009–10, 99%; 2010–11, 99%)

Processed Products – 100% compliance – Met

Since the introduction of the Processed Products Establishment Inspection Manual (PPEIM) in 2008, industries have continued to improve their facilities. In addition, training on new procedures and directions regarding inspection has led to a more effective response to cases of non-compliance.

  • Performance remains similar to 2009–10. (2008–09, 96%; 2009–10, 99%; 2010–11, 100%)

Dairy – 100% compliance – Met

Of the 162 in-depth dairy inspections performed, 15 establishments failed Category I health and safety infractions upon initial inspection. After the first follow-up, all facilities were in compliance with Category I items. The CFIA has continued to foster relationships with industry by working to promote a comprehensive understanding of food safety and inspection requirements.

  • The performance target for the Dairy indicator has been met for the past 3 years. (2008–09, 100%; 2009–10, 100%; 2010–11, 100%)

Shell Egg – 99% compliance – Met

The Shell Egg performance target has been exceeded. The CFIA, through its field work
with egg specialists and inspection staff, has continued to foster relationships with industry by working to promote a comprehensive understanding of food safety and inspection requirements.

  • The performance target for the Shell Egg indicator has been met for the past 3 years. (2008–09, 100%; 2009–10, 99%; 2010–11, 99%)

Compliance Approaches and Methods

A monitoring approach6 is used to assess compliance for all commodities under this indicator. Compliance results are determined at either the initial inspection or audit or in the first follow-up visit.

Extent to which domestic and imported food products comply with federal chemical residue requirements:

Overall, the CFIA met or exceeded its targets for all areas with the exception of Honey and Shell Egg.

Meat – 97% compliance – Met

  • For the past three years, the performance target for the Meat sub-indicator has been met. (2008–09, 97%; 2009–10, 96%; 2010–11, 97%)

Fish and Seafood – 95% compliance – Met

  • For the past three years the performance target for the Fish and Seafood sub-indicator has been met. This is the second year that the Fish and Seafood indicator was measured since the methodology was changed in 2009–10. (2008–09, 96%; 2009–10, 95%; 2010–11, 95%).

Fresh Fruit and Vegetables – 97% compliance – Met

  • For the past three years, the performance target for the Fresh Fruit and Vegetables sub-indicator has been met. (2008–09, 97%; 2009–10, 97%; 2010–11, 97%)

Processed Products – 99% compliance – Met

  • For the past three years, the performance target for the Processed Products sub-indicator has been met. (2008–09, 99%; 2009–10, 99%; 2010–11, 99%)

Honey – 70% compliance – Not met

  • Performance is partly due to the use of bee calming agents which, although not harmful to humans, are found in honey when tested. As the agents are not currently regulated as part of the Food and Drug Regulations, the maximum allowable residue limits (MRLs) have been set aggressively; this lowers compliance rates. HC continues to work to establish the allowable limit for the residue levels, which may in turn affect levels of compliance. The CFIA is also working to modernize and increase its testing capabilities and has put a new contract into place with its 3rd party laboratories. This has lowered detection limits and increased test sensitivity, but has also resulted in the increased detection of non-compliant honey products. The compliance rate for the Honey sub-indicator has increased to 70% (2008–09, 76%; 2009–10, 61%; 2010–11, 70%).

Shell Egg – 94% compliance – Not met

  • In 2010–11, the compliance rate of Shell Egg decreased slightly to 94%. The new contract with the CFIA’s 3rd party laboratories lowered detection limits and increased test sensitivity. This has resulted in the increased detection of non-compliant Shell Egg products. (2008–09, 97%; 2009–10, 97%; 2010–11, 94%).

Dairy – 98% compliance – Met

  • Dairy compliance increased slightly in 2010–11 when compared to 2009–10. (2008–09, 98%; 2009–10, 96%; 2010–11, 98%).

Compliance Approaches and Methods

  • Meat, Fresh Fruit and Vegetables, Processed Products, Honey, Shell Egg and Dairy
    These sub-indicators are monitored for compliance during the initial testing phase of food and product samples.
  • Fish and Seafood
    A monitoring, targeted7 and investigative8 approach is used to assess compliance in the fish and seafood sector. Compliance results are assessed during the initial testing phase of food and product samples.
Time taken to issue public warnings for Class I recalls (100% compliance – Met):

In 2010–11, the CFIA effectively managed the issuance of 131 public warnings for Class I recalls regarding risks associated with food. All the warnings were issued within the 24 hour deadline following the declaration of a warning.

  • The performance target of 24 hours has been met for the past 3 years.
Extent to which nutrition information on non-registered food products inspected is accurate (76% compliance – Not met):

Nutrition information accuracy – 76% compliance – Not met

  • For non-registered food products, the slight decrease in performance regarding samples with accurate nutritional information is due to the risk-based approach used for sampling. Sampling targets nutrition risk areas and high-risk food sectors and operators. Compliance results vary from year to year and are dependent on the areas identified by the risk based approach. The compliance results for the last 2 years are provided for information only. They cannot be compared to one another since different high risk food sectors and operators are inspected every year. (2008–09, 85%; 2009–10, 80%; 2010–11, 76%)
Strategic Performance Analysis

In addition to the performance results summarized in Table 2-2, the CFIA also achieved the following results under the Food Safety and Nutrition Risks program activity:

In responding to the recommendations in the Report of the Independent Investigator into the 2008 Listeriosis Outbreak, the CFIA has implemented changes to food safety programs and directives that are designed to improve and strengthen existing processes and procedures. The CFIA was the lead in addressing 25 of a total of 57 recommendations. Action has been taken on all 25 recommendations. Five recommendations (9, 10, 31, 33, and 34) involve medium- to long-term action, and are either nearing completion or being advanced through Budget 2011 investments.

The following are examples of progress that the CFIA has made with respect to the 25 recommendations for which it is the lead Agency:

  • The CFIA, HC, and PHAC have established internal governance mechanisms to streamline information sharing and provide a more cohesive and forward-looking approach to food safety.
  • Hired 170 meat inspectors over a period of two years across Canada.
  • Developed and implemented a National Training Program for meat processing inspectors.
  • Increased the use of laptops and cell phones and provided faster connectivity to better equip inspectors with modern technology. This will facilitate communication, faster reporting, and better coordination of inspection activities.
  • Revised the Compliance Verification System (CVS) by introducing Listeria sampling tasks, a monthly walk-through of every establishment, a risk-based strategy placing more emphasis on RTE establishments, and the implementation of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system design tasks to ensure that establishments are meeting Food Safety Enhancement Program (FSEP) criteria.
  • Developed the Food Investigation and Response Manual (FIRM) to provide guidance to CFIA staff on the delivery of food safety investigations and responses, including recall processes. The FIRM includes a template to share information with provinces and territories during post-recall verification as well as a revised Checklist for Gathering Implementation Information and Verifying the FIRM’s Recall Plan.
  • Developed and validated improved detection methods for Listeria monocytogenes and other food hazards to reduce testing time and enable a more rapid response during food safety investigations. For example, an enhanced method for detecting Listeria (results in 5-7 days instead of the current 10 days) has been developed.
  • Formed a federal interdepartmental committee to establish an integrated laboratory network with members from the CFIA, HC , the PHAC, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), Environment Canada, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO).
  • Developed a plan to perform trend analysis at both national and processing establishment levels and to design risk-based sampling for Listeria in RTE products.
  • Launched the Consumer Association Roundtable, which gives consumers a voice in the food safety continuum and an opportunity to provide input on a variety of topics related to CFIA priorities, policies, programs, and services.

The Government of Canada’s FCSAP aims to support active prevention in order to better identify food safety risks, target oversight and thus enhance inspection of high-risk food sectors, and provide a rapid response to problems when they occur. As part of this plan, the CFIA achieved the following in 2010–11:

  • With respect to a better understanding of food safety risks the CFIA:
    • conducted targeted surveys on microbiological and chemical hazards for which approximately 25,000 samples were collected, resulting in about 59,000 different microbiological and chemical tests performed.
    • completed analysis of the results of 19 targeted surveys on microbiological and chemical hazards.
    • developed new platforms for testing and detecting pathogens such as Listeria, Shigella and Campylobacter.
    • enhanced engagement with international regulatory counterparts to advance food safety information exchange and inform risk management approaches.
  • With respect to facilitating industry’s implementation of effective risk mitigation:
    • for the Imported and Manufactured Food Sector, the CFIA published the Guide to Food Safety (GFS) to provide guidance to the food industry on the design, development, and implementation of effective preventative food safety control systems.
    • for the Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (FFV) Sector, the CFIA implemented changes to food safety monitoring programs. Its focus was on inspection activities concerning high-risk areas of the industry, such as packers and re-packers of fresh leafy vegetables, herbs and green onions. The CFIA developed and continues to deliver the following training products to inspection staff: Fresh Produce Training, including the Guide to Labelling Requirements of Fresh Fruits and Vegetables; Microbiological Sampling Training; and, Food Safety Investigation Manual Training.
  • With respect to establishing appropriate regulatory measures:
    • held a public consultation to receive feedback on proposed requirements to enhance the safety of imported foods. The feedback, received both through online submissions and face-to-face sessions held in five cities across the country, was constructive and will be used to inform proposed regulations.
  • With respect to enhanced inspection, import control, and recall capacity:
    • made improvements to the Automated Import Reference System database for the tracking of imported products entering Canada by increasing the number of Harmonized System Codes available for classifying traded products.
    • completed Phase I of the IM/IT enhancements by implementing foundational elements which will support applications for enhancing importer identification and imported product tracking.
    • implemented the FFV Establishment Inspection Pilot Project.
    • for the Imported and Manufactured Food Sector, the CFIA focused its inspection activities on high-risk areas while continuing to integrate food safety and labelling inspections.
    • expanded microbiology laboratory capacity in support of risk management interventions (including recalls) through the implementation of a 7-day work week.
    • enhanced awareness of the recall process, particularly with respect to all Class II and III undeclared-allergen recalls, directly sent to subscribers through email notifications.
  • With respect to providing targeted risk information to consumers:
    • the Canada’s 10 Least Wanted Foodborne Pathogens publication series was completed. This provides a package of information which includes a brochure, activity sheet, and children’s trading cards to better inform consumers on the nature of the microoganisms that can cause foodborne illness.
    • a consumer-friendly booklet, Common Food Allergies – A Consumer’s Guide to Managing the Risks, was published; it contains key information on the most common food allergens.

The CFIA is committed to continually strengthening its programs to maintain Canadians’ high level of confidence in their country’s food safety system. In 2010–11, the CFIA proceeded to emphasize the need for an enhanced food safety system that integrated the interests of government, consumers, and industry. To that end, the CFIA:

  • Focused its CVS efforts in 2010–11 on assuring proper implementation and continuous improvement in the four main program areas (Meat Inspection, Animal Feed, Animal Transportation and Animal Identification). As part of its overall commitment to modernize and improve food safety, the CFIA will consider the utility and functionality of CVS as part of a broader development of inspection tools and processes for integrated data collection and reporting.
  • Expanded its online information on compliance and enforcement activities. This includes data on food imports refused entry into Canada; notices on compliance with plant and animal health regulatory requirements; information pertaining to federally registered food establishment whose licenses have been suspended, cancelled or reinstated; and notices of violations, which includes issuing warnings and penalties and identifying repeat offenders of animal transport regulations.
  • Expanded email notifications for allergy recalls to include Class II and III recalls, in addition to the existing practice of emailing Class I recalls and posting all classes of recalls on the CFIA website.
  • Designed and implemented a revised Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) sampling plan for RTE products and other high-risk commodities, thus reflecting new HC categorizations for product risk, and improved operator controls to prevent the presence of Lm in high-risk products produced in federally registered establishments. The updated guidance, which allows for an overall view of the national situation and more intense sampling in facilities that are considered to be of higher risk than others, is now in place.
  • Developed and delivered training regarding food products other than meat to over 570 inspection staff in anticipation of the implementation of the revised HC Listeria Policy for RTE Foods.
  • Engaged CGAs such as the EU and the USFDA, who oversee the export of RTE meat products to Canada, to discuss the establishment and maintenance of program equivalence and comparability.
  • Completed, in cooperation with HC, a pilot project to assess the food supply’s potential vulnerabilities to an intentional contamination. The CFIA piloted vulnerability assessment methodologies and assessed each method for reliability and appropriateness for food.
  • Continued to update sampling plans, policies, and procedures based on an assessment of risk, including the previous fiscal year’s results and emerging threats, to keep pace with the constantly evolving environment. Data from inspection activities was used to further design and develop program oversight. The CFIA also used establishment and product inspection, good manufacturing practices (GMPs), border lookouts, and improved databases (ICTS) for better control over products on the Canadian market, whether domestic or imported.
  • Funded research that included novel platforms (e.g. mass spectrometry, aptamer platforms, time-of-flight technology) to test for and detect pathogens such as Listeria, Shigella and Campylobacter.
  • Completed revisions to the On-Farm and Post-Farm Food Safety Recognition Program protocols. These voluntary food safety recognition programs will continue the effort of promoting industry-led food safety programs to further enhance food safety practices (based on Canadian and international standards) throughout the food continuum.
  • Implemented changes to food safety monitoring programs that focus inspection activities on high-risk sectors of the industry, such as packers and re-packers of fresh leafy vegetables, herbs and green onions. The safety of these high risk food products requires active oversight of industry practices and timely intervention to address deviations from GMPs in order to prevent potentially contaminated fresh products from reaching consumers. The integration of fresh produce safety requirements and the improvement of the CFIA’s oversight and monitoring may help reduce the risk of foodborne outbreaks.
  • Developed training to ensure that establishment inspection, GMPs and GHPs (good hygiene practices), and related follow-up activities are carried out according to the newly developed food safety inspection program.
  • In July 2010, federal/provincial/territorial agriculture ministers agreed to advance three food safety priorities. These include:
    • developing an outcome-based national meat hygiene standard;
    • developing a program to reduce pathogens in meat and poultry; and
    • enhancing and integrating the surveillance of foodborne illness.
  • Worked with federal/provincial/territorial partners to develop criteria and selected 17 establishments to be part of the pilot project, aimed at adjusting federal procedural requirements for small- and medium-sized enterprises seeking to trade inter-provincially. On-site visits of the pilot establishments were carried out in an attempt to conduct a preliminary analysis and identify possible modifications to the Manual of Procedures / Food Safety Enhancement Program Manual.
  • Met with United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food Safety and Inspection System (FSIS) counterparts in January 2011 to discuss Listeria controls for imported RTE meat products, particularly the need to improve the alignment of differences between respective countries’ meat inspection system requirements and procedures. The CFIA recognizes the need to focus on achieving similar and comparable outcomes in controlling and reducing the risk of Lm illnesses associated with RTE meat products. Results of the CFIA’s random sampling of imported US meat products for the period to date continue to support the view that, while different, the US system continues to provide an acceptable level of protection against this risk for Canadian consumers.
  • Held a national stakeholder information session in February 2011, which concerned the pathogen reduction in meat and poultry products file. A national baseline survey on Salmonella and Campylobacter in broiler chicken and meat products was designed. The survey is expected to be launched in 2011-12.
  • Established the Assistant-Deputy-Minister-Level Committee on Enhanced Surveillance (ADM-CESC) across the Government of Canada to support the surveillance of foodborne illnesses. As a member of the ADM-CESC, the CFIA has been working to identify best practices and opportunities for sharing knowledge.
  • Developed and implemented changes to the design and delivery of sampling plans to strengthen the monitoring and control measures of the food safety system, which involved focusing inspection activities on the high-risk sector of the industry; also developed training to ensure that establishment inspections and related follow-up activities are carried out according to the newly developed food safety inspection program.

Performance highlights for ongoing activities under Food Safety and Nutrition Risks included:

  • Certifying 1.7 billion kilograms of meat for export.
  • Issuing 29,164 export certificates for Fish and Seafood.
  • Testing 24,798 samples of domestic and imported products for compliance with federal chemical residue requirements.
  • Initiating, designing, and delivering regulatory programs and associated training for inspection staff.
  • Drafting and updating regulations, programs, and policies. This includes updating the Compliance and Enforcement Operations Policy (CEOP), affirming the CFIA’s overall approach to assessing compliance, and applying enforcement action when warranted. The updated CEOP places greater emphasis on transparency and on recourse mechanisms available to industry. The policy is available on the CFIA website at: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/agen/transp/comp/pole.shtml
  • Continuing to work closely with federal, provincial, territorial and municipal authorities that share responsibility for food safety.
  • Performing a wide range of inspection activities across the spectrum of food commodities (meat, fresh fruit, eggs, dairy, etc.) including establishment and product inspections, investigations, and education and outreach with regulated parties.
  • Providing program support as well as food processing and production insight with respect to food-safety-related policy and procedure development.
  • Leading and contributing to the development, interpretation, and evaluation of food inspection and enforcement programs, operational procedures, tolerances and standards; analyzing and bridging quality gaps in program delivery.
  • Developing and delivering targeted consumer risk communications; consulting on and participating in food production and processing forums.
DID YOU KNOW?

Over 70% of the food products imported into Canada belong to the non-federally registered food sector. These products include bakery goods, ingredients, baby food, alcoholic beverages, and vegetable oils. Products that do not fall under the imported non-federally registered sector include whole and processed eggs, dairy, honey, fresh and processed fruits and vegetables, fish, and meat.

By the end of 2010–11, the CFIA had managed over 200 food recall incidents, reached 47,500 subscribers through the recall and allergy alert email notification service, and attracted over 1800 followers on Twitter.

Lessons Learned

In 2010–11, an internal audit of the CFIA’s Management of Imported Food Safety was completed with the goal of assuring senior management that the CFIA’s imported food activities are designed, organized, and delivered in order to achieve food safety objectives. The findings of this audit identified challenges related to coordination and to consistent planning efforts across commodity programs. Consequently, some of the key recommendations outlined by the audit included the need for a concerted agency approach to the planning, delivery, and reporting of programs and for a stronger governance structure to provide oversight and to clarify and realign accountability to business needs while simplifying decision-making. To address this matter, the Agency put in place (in 2010–11) a new governance framework based on its business line priorities (Food, Animal and Plant); this framework aligns with the Agency’s Program Activity Architecture and establishes even stronger relationships between program policy, design, and delivery functions to enable better business planning, performance monitoring, reporting, and resource management.

The Food, Plant and Animal business line committees provide a forum for horizontal management discussions throughout the organization. The plans and priorities identified for these business lines serve as the basis to establish approved annual work plans for compliance verification, enforcement, and operational delivery activities.

Another lesson learned relates to the FSAP initiative. The accelerated pace and broad scope of the FSAP presented challenges for the Agency in terms of respecting their commitments in monitoring and reporting. To respond to this matter, the CFIA put various measures into place to enhance project management thoroughness within the Agency. The FSAP adopted these measures: formal senior management approvals at each stage of a project; a streamlined project governance structure to ensure that issues are raised and addressed promptly; project management training; tools to clearly define work plans; and improved project reporting with a focus on key risks, scope of project, timelines, and expense updates. These measures have been very useful in managing the FSAP as well as many other projects within the Agency.

Program Activity 2: Zoonotic Risks

Program Activity Description:

Zoonotics risks programs work with federal and provincial partners and organizations to improve the overall health of Canadians. A primary contribution to this effort is in protecting Canadians from the spread of diseases transmissible, or potentially transmissible, from animal populations to humans. Zoonotic risks are managed and minimized through the development and delivery of programs and services focused on the animal health aspect and designed to help prevent and control the spread of zoonotic diseases, support public awareness, conduct inspections, and monitor and test.

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
67.8 68.4 62.1

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
561 515 (46)
Variance Analysis:

Actual Spending decreased by $21.2M over 2009–10 ($83.3M). The decrease is partially explained by the H1N1 Preparedness and Response which was funded for only one year (2009–10). The balance of the decrease is related to other corporate adjustments.

The following table identifies the CFIA’s expected results, performance indicators, and targets for the Zoonotic Risks program activity. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 4.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2-3: Summary of Performance: Zoonotic Risks


Expected
Results
Performance Indicators* Targets Performance Status Data Quality Rating*
Risks of the transmission of animal diseases to humans are managed within acceptable limits. Number of incidents of avian influenza that expand beyond the initial control zone No expansion of the disease beyond the initial control zone. No Expansion Met Moderate Confidence

* For more information on data ratings and limitations regarding CFIA’ performance indicators, please see Section 2.1.2.1.

Additional Information:

Avian Influenza programming: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/disemala/avflu/avflue.shtml

Animal diseases: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/disemala/disemalae.shtml

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Performance Summary, Trending and Compliance Methods

Number of incidents of avian influenza that expand beyond the initial control zone (No expansion – Met):

The only incident of avian influenza that entered Canada in 2010–11 was Low Pathogenic Notifiable Avian Influenza (LPNAI) in November 2010. An initial control zone of 5 km was established as part of the CFIA’s emergency response, and there was no spread of the disease beyond this control zone.

  • In the past three years, there have been no incidents of avian influenza expanding beyond the initial control zone.
Strategic Performance Analysis

In addition to the performance results summarized in Table 2-3, the CFIA also achieved the following results under the Zoonotic Risks program activity:

The CFIA is committed to working collaboratively with partners and stakeholders to better anticipate, prevent, detect, and manage animal health risks and associated emergencies. These collaborations are designed to minimize the opportunity for the introduction of an animal health threat, minimize the time required to identify and respond to the threat, maximize the participation of stakeholders in effectively managing the threat, and minimizing the time required to recover from the event. In 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Continued to lead animal health stakeholders through the Fore-CAN: Foresight for Canadian Animal Health project. The CFIA and its project partners applied foresight methods in analyzing the requirements of Canada’s animal health emergency system for 2025 and beyond. This involved studying trends and future challenges to animal health and applying new insights in order to better anticipate, prevent, and prepare for animal disease and zoonotic threats in the area of animal health.
  • Worked with federal and provincial animal and public health officials to identify the appropriate roles, responsibilities, and actions associated with exposure to diseases such as rabies, anthrax, tuberculosis and Notifiable Avian Influenza.
  • Engaged with industry and government stakeholders to conduct foreign animal disease emergency management exercises and thus increase preparedness by clarifying roles and responsibilities at the front line of potential disease incursions.
  • Completed its third year of the Canadian Notifiable Avian Influenza Surveillance System (CanNAISS), a highly successful multi-industry and government initiative, which provides stakeholders with real-time, national surveillance in support of animal health and international trade.
  • Continued to disseminate and support diagnostic capabilities concerning reportable diseases in non-CFIA laboratories to allow clinical observation of a potential disease threat and laboratory characterization of the disease to occur in the shortest possible interval.
  • Continued to work with the poultry industry, academia, provinces, and federal government partners to complete and disseminate the avian producer guidance document, which provides examples of biosecurity measures and best practices to achieve the outcomes of the National Avian On-Farm Biosecurity Standard.
  • Engaged in consultative activities with industry, academia, provinces and federal government partners in developing farm-level biosecurity standards and producer guidance documents for the beef, dairy, bee, mink, sheep and goat industry sectors to provide nationally consistent tools that assist commodity sectors in proactively managing risks.
  • Strengthened relationships with industry by sharing information and coordinating communication efforts related to biosecurity practices. The CFIA also participated in fairs and exhibitions to raise public and producer awareness of the simple steps they can take to minimize risks associated with animal diseases.
  • Supported research to advance and improve the CFIA’s diagnostic capability for the detection, identification and typing of important zoonoses, (e.g. rabies, bovine tuberculosis and Salmonella enteritidis).

The CFIA continued to monitor the level of BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy) and the effectiveness of measures taken to control it in the domestic cattle population. Specifically, the CFIA:

  • Tested 35,656 samples in 2010 with one confirmed positive for BSE. With this detection, the CFIA traced 360 animals to determine their disposition in order to inform domestic and international markets and provide reassurance that levels of BSE in Canada remain low and under control. No part of this confirmed BSE animal entered the human food supply or any animal feed systems.

Performance highlights for ongoing activities under Zoonotic Risks included:

  • Drafting and updating programs and policies pertaining to Avian Influenza.
  • Initiating, designing, and delivering training programs and exercises concerning Avian Influenza; this includes introducing procedures for animal disease response and investigation and developing the “Introduction to Disease Control Epidemiology” course.
  • Developing, with the PHAC, a working group for collaborative integrated risk assessments that take into account zoonotic risks that may be associated with the importation of live animals or animal products.
  • Working closely with other organizations such as PHAC or HC when a particular importation presents human health risks that fall beyond the mandate of the CFIA. In addition, three collaborative risk assessments were completed for Pandemic H1N1, H5N1 in Egypt, and the Monkeypox Virus.
  • Working with industry and with federal/provincial/territorial partners to develop national farm-level biosecurity standards, including biosecurity planning guides for the animal sector, that mitigate zoonoses and other diseases of livestock and poultry.
DID YOU KNOW?

The CFIA is committed to sharing timely information to help minimize the risks associated with animal diseases. In an effort to better reach producers and the next generation of farmers, the CFIA launched the animal health Twitter account, participated in more than 30 conferences and agricultural exhibitions, placed targeted advertisements online, and developed strategic partnerships with national and provincial 4-H organizations.

Lessons Learned

The communication and collaboration amongst the multiple partners in a 2010 Low Pathogenic Notifiable Avian Influenza outbreak in a Canadian turkey flock led not only to a successful and rapid resolution of the situation, but also to the illustration of the potential that multi-partner collaborations in disease control can exert in real time.

Having learned from challenges in previous AI outbreaks, the Agency focused on improving communication and coordination of efforts between the various levels of government and industry partners to improve the clarity of process and to define roles. The CFIA enhanced collaboration with provincial partners, including provincial laboratories, regional Operations staff and the National Centre for Foreign Animal Disease (NCFAD). Improved relationships with stakeholders allowed the CFIA to work with partners to clearly define roles and processes in the event of future outbreaks.

As a result, during the 2010 outbreak, all parties worked swiftly and efficiently due to the connections already established, including relationships with the Canadian Animal Health Surveillance Network and the Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre. These kinds of results are only possible through collaborative working arrangements amongst multiple partners and served as an affirmation of the measures put in place to address previous challenges.

2.2.2 Strategic Outcome 2: A safe and sustainable plant and animal resource base

Strategic Outcome 2

[D]

The CFIA’s programming is aimed at protecting Canada’s crops, forests, livestock, aquatic species, and wildlife from regulated pests and diseases; preventing the introduction of contaminants into human food or the environment through animal and plant production systems; and assessing the environmental sustainability and impact on biodiversity of new products derived through enabling technologies such as biotechnology. Through the work done in these areas, Canadians are able to remain confident in the quality of plants and plant products and in Canadian product access to export markets. In carrying out activities aimed at the achievement of this strategic outcome, the CFIA focused its efforts on the following five priorities:

  • Design and deliver risk-based inspection and surveillance services
  • Improve compliance through compliance management activities
  • Modernize the Agency’s regulatory components and tools
  • Increase transparency and strengthen strategic partnerships and communications with key partners and stakeholders
  • Develop a workforce and workplace such that the Agency is innovative, more effective, and well-managed

Percentage of 2010–11 Actual Spending: Strategic Outcome 2

[D]

While work under such program activities as Animal Health Risks and Production Systems, Plant Health Risks and Production Systems, and Biodiversity Protection is primarily aimed at addressing the Animal and Plant Pest and Disease risk areas, it also benefits the other key risk areas noted above.

Program Activity 3: Animal Health Risks and Production Systems

Program Activity Description:

Protection of the animal resource base is integral to the Canadian food supply and critical to the well-being of all Canadians. The animal heath risks and production systems programming plays an important role in minimizing and managing risk by protecting Canada’s animals (including livestock and aquatics) from regulated disease, including deliberate threats to the resource base. Programs and services are developed and delivered to protect Canadian animal resources, feeds, and animal products, as well as to manage animal disease emergencies effectively. Public confidence in animals, production systems, animal products and their by-products is significantly enhanced by Canada’s reputation for effectively mitigating the risk of serious diseases.

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
87.1 91.7 77.1

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
792 700 (92)

Variance Analysis:

The following table identifies the CFIA’s expected results, performance indicators, and targets for the Animal Health Risks and Production Systems program activity. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 4.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2-4: Summary of Performance: Animal Health Risks and Production Systems


Expected
Results
Performance
Indicators*
Targets Performance Status Data Quality Rating*
Risks to the animal resource base are managed within acceptable limits Extent to which the CFIA’s data indicates that foreign regulated animal diseases have entered Canada via specified regulated pathways No evidence, as confirmed by the CFIA’s data, that foreign regulated animal diseases have entered into Canada through specified regulated pathways. No Evidence Met Moderate Confidence
Extent to which the CFIA’s data indicates the spread of foreign regulated animal diseases that entered into Canada this fiscal year No evidence, as confirmed by the CFIA’s data of spread of foreign regulated animal diseases beyond the initial control zone. No Evidence Met Moderate Confidence
Extent to which inspected renderers and feed mills inspected are without any major deviations with respect to the Feeds Regulations
and the Health
of Animals Regulations (enhanced feed ban)9
≥ 95% compliance rate Renderers 98% Met Higher Confidence
Feed Mills 80% Not Met Higher Confidence

* For more information on data ratings and limitations regarding the CFIA's performance indicators, please see Section 2.1.2.1.

Additional Information:

Animal Health Programs: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/animae.shtml

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Performance Summary, Trending and Compliance Methods

Extent to which the CFIA’s data indicates that foreign regulated animal diseases have entered Canada via specified regulated pathways (No evidence – Met):

The only foreign regulated animal disease that entered Canada in 2010–11 was Low Pathogenic Notifiable Avian Influenza (LPNAI) in November 2010. The CFIA contained the outbreak by Februrary 2011, and the CFIA’s data did not indicate that this outbreak entered Canada via any specified regulated pathways. Unregulated pathways include situations outside of the CFIA’s direct control, such as wild birds that may introduce the avian influenza virus to domestic poultry via direct or indirect contact. To address this and similar risks, the CFIA encourages poultry producers to heighten their poultry biosecurity measures and provides producers with biosecurity guidelines and standards.

  • For the past three years, the CFIA has met its performance target for this indicator.
Extent to which the CFIA’s data indicates the spread of foreign regulated animal diseases that entered into Canada this fiscal year (No evidence – Met):

The only incident of foreign regulated animal disease that entered Canada in 2010–11 was LPNAI in November 2010. The disease was contained within the initial control zone, and hence there was no spread of the outbreak.

  • For the past three years, the CFIA has met its performance target for this indicator.
Extent to which renderers and feed mills inspected are without any major deviations with respect to the Feeds Regulations and the Health of Animals Regulations (enhanced feed ban):

Feed Mills – 80% compliance – Not met

  • Feed Mills do not require licensing, and this reduces the number of methods that the CFIA can use to influence industry compliance. The CFIA continues to work with industry to promote a better understanding of the Feed Regulations, Health of Animals Regulations, and inspection requirements. For 2010–11, there was no significant change in performance for Feed Mills (compared to 2008–09). (2008–09 78%; 2010–11, 80%). This sub-indicator was not reported in 2009–10.

Renderers – 98% compliance – Met

  • For 2010–11, there was an increase in performance for Renderers (compared to 2008–09). (2008–09 93%; 2010–11, 98%). This sub-indicator was not reported in 2009–10.

Compliance Approaches and Methods

  • A monitoring approach is used to assess compliance for both sub-indicators. Compliance results are determined following a correction period of 60 days minimum after the end of the fiscal year.
Strategic Performance Analysis

In addition to the performance results summarized in Table 2-4, the CFIA also achieved the following results under the Animal Health Risks and Production Systems program activity:

The CFIA continued to modernize regulations and standards to better ensure that its work effectively meets the industry’s evolving standards. In 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Worked with the National Farm Animal Council to modernize guidelines for farm animal producers and handlers, particularly as they relate to practices in raising, housing, handling, treating, and transporting particular species of animals. In addition, the CFIA continued work towards proposing updates to the requirements concerning the humane transport of animals in Canada.
  • Regulated the Canadian animal health products industry, to facilitate timely access to safe and effective vaccines, antibody products, and diagnostic tests for the prevention, treatment, and diagnosis of infectious diseases in animals.

Traceability is the ability to follow an item or group of items – including animals, plants, food products, and agricultural inputs – from one point in the supply chain to another. In cases where problems are detected (e.g. disease outbreak, contaminated input), this ability allows the CFIA to better identify the source and extent of the problem (e.g. where the diseased animal, plant, or food product has been) and mitigate the impacts of the situation for a targeted, efficient, and effective response. The CFIA is working to enhance and expand the existing traceability program under the Health of Animals Act. For example, in 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Developed a Manual of Procedures and training programs associated therewith to enhance the resources and tools available to inspection staff when verifying adherence to regulatory requirements.
  • Enhanced risk mitigation strategies through the development of traceability data sharing agreements across jurisdictions.
  • Collaborated with industry stakeholders towards the development of livestock traceability systems.

Work also continued to protect animals from—and prepare for—disease threats. In 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Carried out several activities related to the CFIA’s readiness to respond to animal disease emergencies in an attempt to address recommendations made in the Office of the Auditor General’s (OAG) 2010 Fall Report (under Chapter 9 “Animal Diseases – CFIA”), completed in April 2010. In particular, the CFIA reviewed the status of all hazard-specific plans and prioritized them (based on risk) for updating and finalization purposes. Chapter 9 of the OAG’s Fall Report is available on the OAG’s website at
    http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_201010_09_e_34292.html
  • Continued ongoing animal health emergency preparedness to provide a rapid and effective response to any foreign animal disease incursion in livestock or poultry anywhere in Canada and at any time. Examples include developing functional and hazard specific plans; elaborating associated procedures; drafting and updating regulations, programs and policies pertaining to various diseases; and initiating, designing and delivering training programs and exercises. With respect to foreign animal diseases, the CFIA conducts immediate assessments of field information, provides rapid consultation and communication, and uses sound judgment under pressure to ascertain and anticipate whether or not a national scale response is required.
  • Continued to enhance Canada’s preparedness for deliberate threats to the animal resource base through collaborative activities and information sharing with Canadian and international partners. Activities included sponsoring a workshop called “Security Dimensions of the Global Food System” and hosting an international workshop entitled “Biological Threat Prevention: The Global Food Supply Chain.”
  • Recognizing that communications are an integral part of planning for an outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD), a FMD-specific web presence, public service announcements, and direct mail content have been prepared in advance for the public and for targeted groups. The CFIA also undertook efforts internationally (including support of research in diagnostic testing) to leverage best practices and prepare for possible outbreak scenarios.
  • Continued to encourage on-farm biosecurity through the “Animal Health Starts on the Farm” campaign. Information was shared with producers and industry associations via calendars, brochures, posters, DVDs, face-to-face exhibits, public notices, Google AdWords, and Twitter.
  • Maintained partnerships with 21 international airlines, which either broadcast the “Be Aware and Declare” biosecurity awareness video or distribute free brochures to passengers aboard flights to Canada. During the Foot and Mouth disease outbreaks in Asia in early 2011, Air Canada distributed over 20,000 “Be Aware and Declare” brochures on all their flights from the affected countries.
  • Continued to conduct animal health risk analysis by researching and developing 27 scientific documents related to the import and export of animals, aquatic animal diseases, scientific advice, and evaluation of the disease status of various countries, zones, and regions. The CFIA also developed the capacity to use tools such as socioeconomic analyses, systematic reviews, and modeling, all of which are needed for scientific integration (e.g. the Canadian Regulatory Veterinary Epidemiology Network).
  • Funded research in support of animal health programs to facilitate trade (e.g. molecular diagnostic technology for bovine leukemia, transmissible gastroenteritis, and porcine respiratory coronavirus).
  • Supported research to better understand the biology of anaplasmosis and ehrlichiosis, and to improve diagnostic capability for these conditions.

The CFIA strives to protect the health of Canada’s animals in an open and collaborative environment, working with partners in industry and other governments to encourage producer engagement and accountability, mitigate disease risks, and maintain market access. Ongoing improvements to compliance and enforcement activities, guided by the principles of fairness, impartiality, and transparency, enhance the CFIA’s ability to administer and enforce acts and regulations related to animal health. In 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Continued conducting feed establishment and feed product compliance verification activities, including monitoring for biological and chemical contaminants and verification of medication guarantees.
  • Designed, developed and piloted a CVS inspection protocol for feed ingredient manufacturers, which was designed to facilitate a consistent and standardized
    inspection protocol. The information from the pilot is being used to develop an improved inspection program.
  • Reviews of the CVS meat guidelines and verification tasks were conducted in May 2010 and March 2011. As a result, revisions and amendments were made to the CVS; these included the development and application of a risk-based strategy to ensure effective and appropriate food safety controls.
  • Began its focus on the new CVS approach for humane transportation and animal identification. An inspector training plan was created to address the compliance and enforcement activities that need to be captured in CVS for these two programs. Further implementation will take place following the Inspection Modernization Project.
  • Launched an enforcement transparency initiative that included publishing on its website the names of companies that have repeatedly violated humane transport regulations in Canada, in an effort to promote and regulate animal welfare.
  • Promoted the new reporting requirements for the NAAHP to the public and industry through articles in the Canadian Veterinary Journal, via the web, and in brochures. As legislative implementation of the NAAHP continues, the CFIA continued to work with its partners, such as the Assembly of First Nations, to ensure that information needs are met.
  • Published amendments to the Compensation for Destroyed Animals Regulations in order to increase the maximum amounts that may be paid to producers whose poultry is ordered to be destroyed in a disease outbreak. The amendments ensure a maximum poultry compensation rate that is reflective of today’s market realities, which in turn will help continue the promotion of early reporting of diseases controlled under the Health of Animals Act and its regulations. They also encourage producer cooperation and participation during control efforts meant to prevent or reduce the spread of disease.
  • Negotiated export certificates with different countries to protect market access for Canadian aquatic animals.

Performance highlights for ongoing activities under Animal Health Risks and Production Systems included:

  • Conducting 3,117 pre-market assessments of livestock feeds to verify safety and efficacy. The pre-market assessment of livestock feeds is a preventative measure that contributes to the health of livestock and humans (via direct exposure or food) and to environmental safety.
  • Conducting feed establishment and feed product compliance verification activities, which include the inspection of 475 feed mills and 48 rendering facilities. These activities allow the CFIA to confirm the compliance of feeds in the marketplace and to ensure that appropriate manufacturing controls are in place.
  • Working with industry and federal/provincial/territorial partners, under Growing Forward, to develop national farm-level biosecurity standards. This also includes the development of biosecurity planning guides for animal and plant sectors. The CFIA’s ongoing work contributes to the sustainability of the animal and plant resource base.
DID YOU KNOW?

Through revisions to regulations supporting the National Aquatic Animal Health Program (NAAHP), the CFIA now has the authority to receive and respond to any suspected or confirmed cases of the 20 reportable diseases and 15 immediately notifiable diseases affecting aquatic animals.

Lessons Learned

In 2010, the presence of clinical signs suggestive of a Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) outbreak resulted in the CFIA investigating a Canadian Meat Packing Establishment. While no FMD (or any other swine vesicular disease) was found following laboratory analysis, the incident served to raise awareness about the prospects of finding a case of FMD in Canada. Activities related to the incident included the CFIA conducting a post-incident assessment, which resulted in the identification of a number of issues that warranted further attention. Subsequent to the CFIA’s post-incident assessment, an FMD workshop was held in early March 2011 to identify roles and responsibilities in the first 24-48 hours of a suspected case of FMD. The assessment and workshop identified the following key areas which require action:

  • Having learned from initial communication issues immediately following the plant closure, and the confusion among industry stakeholders that ensued, the CFIA identified that a brief, factual message related to the reason behind CFIA actions is needed within 2 hours of any regulatory action of this nature.
  • The appropriate chain of events and specific individuals that must be involved when suspicion of a reportable animal disease arises have been clarified to allow the CFIA to utilize available expertise in order to determine the associated level of risk and quickly identify the actions to be taken. This includes sending digital photographs of the specimen in question from the field location to experts at a CFIA laboratory so they may provide an expert opinion on the situation.
  • Contingency plans for an FMD investigation at a registered establishment were found to be incomplete in some areas. Following the incident, the relevant chapter of the meat hygiene procedures was completely revised and updated.
  • The CFIA worked with Industry partners to improve response measures and assisted industry by reviewing and suggesting revisions to their contingency plans.
Program Activity 4: Plant Health Risks and Production Systems

Program Activity Description:

Protection of the plant resource base is integral to the Canadian food supply and critical to the well-being of all Canadians. Plant health risks and production systems programming plays an important role in minimizing and managing risk by protecting Canada’s plant resource base (crops and forests) from regulated pests and diseases, including deliberate threats to the resource base, and regulation of agricultural products. Programs and services are developed and delivered to protect Canadian plant resources, fertilizers and plant products. Public confidence in plants, production systems and plant products is significantly enhanced by Canada’s reputation for effectively mitigating the risk of serious pests and diseases.

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
61.3 70.5 68.3

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
660 687 27

Variance Analysis:

Actual Spending decreased by $21.4 M since 2009–10 ($89.7M). This is mainly due to one-time funding received in 2009–10 to assist in the payment of litigation costs, a decrease in compensation payments which fluctuate annually ($2.2M), as well as other corporate adjustments.

The following table identifies the CFIA’s expected results, performance indicators, and targets for the Plant Health Risks and Production Systems program activity, and reports 2010–11 performance results measured against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 4.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2-5: Summary of Performance: Plant Health Risks and Production Systems


Expected
Results
Performance
Indicators*
Targets Performance Status Data Quality Rating*
Risks to the plant resource base are managed within acceptable limits. Extent to which CFIA data indicates the entry and establishment of new and foreign regulated plant diseases and pests into Canada (listed diseases/pests in the Regulated Pest List for Canada) No evidence, as confirmed by CFIA’s data, of the entry and establishment of new, foreign regulated plant diseases and pests into Canada through specified regulated pathways. 1 Entry Not Met Lower Confidence
Extent of change in the presence of regulated plant diseases or pests beyond the regulated areas No evidence of increase in the size of regulated areas for plant diseases/pests attributable to human activity. 3 pests outside regulated area Not Met Higher Confidence
Extent to which Plant Health risks identified by the CFIA (within and outside Canada) are communicated to the affected stakeholders Following the identification of a plant health risk, appropriate information is communicated with the relevant stakeholders in less than one month. 37% communicated in less than one month Not Met Moderate Confidence

* For more information on data ratings and limitations regarding the CFIA's performance indicators, please see Section 2.1.2.1.

Additional Information:

Plant Protection Programs: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/plavege.shtml

Plant Pests: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/pestrava/pestravae.shtml

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Performance Summary, Trending and Compliance Methods

Extent to which CFIA data indicates the entry and establishment of new and foreign regulated plant diseases and pests into Canada (listed diseases/pests in the Regulated Pest List for Canada) (1 entry – Not Met):

In 2010–11, one low-risk pest, Japanese apple rust (Gymnosporangium yamadae) which is currently identified on the Regulated Pest List was identified as having entered and established in Canada. Based on a pest risk assessment and initial risk management analysis, it has been determined that this is a low-risk pest for Canada. This pest is also present and not currently regulated in the US. When the CFIA confirms that a plant pest or disease has been detected in Canada, the CFIA responds quickly by investigating the risk posed to Canada’s plant resource base and by developing strategies for control and eradication as appropriate.

  • Over the past three years, 2010–11 was the only year in which a pest entered, and became established in, Canada.

Compliance Approaches and Methods

  • A monitoring approach is used to assess compliance. Compliance results are determined following a correction period of 60 days minimum after the end of the fiscal year.
Extent of change in the presence of regulated plant diseases or pests beyond the regulated areas:

Change in presence of plant diseases or pests – 3 pests outside regulated area – Not met

  • Prevention of the spread of plant pests through human activity relies on regulated parties’ and the general public’s awareness of any restrictions on the movement of regulated or high-risk materials from an infested area to a non-infested area and on adherence to the regulatory requirements.
  • The CFIA continues to focus on a proactive approach of education and outreach aimed at informing the general public about the significance of plant health in Canada. In addition, the CFIA is trying to broaden their surveillance reach through external partnerships with provinces and municipalities. The spread of plant pests through human activity is mitigated by public awareness of any restrictions on the movement of regulated or high-risk materials from an infested area to a non-infested area.
  • Many plant pests can also spread through natural means beyond human activity, such as flying, wind, etc. Unfortunately the natural spread of plant pests can only be prevented through eradication efforts, which may not always be feasible or possible. It is also very difficult to attribute pest spread to human activities or the natural spread of a pest because the scientific data focuses on the presence or absence of a pest in a specified area.
  • The three pests that spread outside of their regulated area were the Emerald Ash Borer, the Brown Spruce Longhorned Beetle, and the North American Gypsy Moth.
  • The CFIA’s proactive approach of education and outreach has contributed to improving the performance of this indicator over the past 3 years. The CFIA’s approach is aimed at informing the general public about the significance of plant health in Canada. (2008–09, Five pests spread; 2009–10, Four pests spread; 2010–11, three pests).
Extent to which Plant Health risks identified by the CFIA (within and outside Canada) are communicated to the affected stakeholders:

Plant Health Risk communication – 37% communicated within one month – Not met

The Pest Risk Analysis process is a three-step process, based on international standards, that includes Pest Risk Assessment, Pest Risk Management, and Pest Risk Communication. The CFIA first conducts Pest Risk Assessments to evaluate potential biological risks that a plant commodity, pest, or plant pest pathway (e.g. soil) had on Canada. Based on the Pest Risk Assessment and an assessment of other factors, such as economic and trade issues, a proposed management strategy is developed, and a Risk Management Document is completed. Following consultations with stakeholders on the management strategy contained in the Risk Management Document, the CFIA communicates the final approach.

  • In many cases, Plant Health Risks were not communicated within 30 days due to the level of analysis and consultation required to develop the necessary Risk Management Document. The CFIA will continue to work towards improving its tracking and timing of communications and consultations with stakeholders as well as the consistency in its communication tools.
  • Performance has improved moderately compared to 2008–09. This indicator was not reported in 2009–10 due to a change in methodology. (2008–09, 33%; 2009–10, Not Reported; 2010–11, 37%)
Strategic Performance Analysis

In addition to the performance results summarized in Table 2-5, the CFIA also achieved the following results under the Plant Health Risks and Production Systems program activity:

In keeping with most regulatory organizations, a significant contribution to the success of the regulatory programs that the CFIA administers is the awareness and engagement of the regulated parties, of partners, and of the Canadian public. This awareness helps stakeholders understand the objectives and importance of the programs and enables them to help meet the goal of mitigating risks to the plant resources base. This maximizes the effectiveness of the programs. In 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Delivered training in identification, detection, surveillance, risk assessment and risk analysis of plant pests (insects, diseases and plants) within the CFIA and for partners.
  • Developed and distributed information products (http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/invenv/invenve.shtml) to partners, stakeholder organizations, and members of the public across Canada to enhance Canadians’ awareness of invasive species and their spread.
  • Continued to develop a strengthened trading relationship with China; this included the expansion of two systems-based programs focused on risk mitigation and inspection at origin. In the fall of 2010, the CFIA undertook an audit of the export certification program for apples from China, and also approved an additional province for the export of apples to Canada.
  • Worked closely with the USDA and the North American Plant Protection Organization partners, and collaborated bilaterally with China, Japan, and Korea to identify high-risk ports for the Asian Gypsy Moth (AGM). Subsequently, increased requirements for inspection at origin and destination have been implemented to protect North America from this pest.
  • Worked closely with various stakeholders to revise import requirements for Canadian table and processing (non-seed) potatoes that come from areas infested with nematodes of quarantine significance to Canada. The revised directive includes a system-based approach to establishing compliance agreements for facilities that import material which would be otherwise prohibited. The directive also places a strong emphasis on risk mitigation at origin for commercially packed products and risk mitigation at destination, in Canada, for products imported in bulk or for re-packing.
  • Posted and updated Plant Protection Policy Directives and information on invasive alien species on the CFIA’s external website: (http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/protect/dir/directe.shtml). In addition, directive updates are also distributed through a public ListServ. These directives provide detailed and specific information regarding regulatory requirements for commodities of various origins. Clear documentation of the regulatory programs regarding import is aimed at reducing the entry and spread of invasive species.

The CFIA recognizes that mitigation of risks to the plant resource base depends on effective environmental scanning, identification of high-risk pests and pathways, and collaboration between internal and external stakeholders to develop and implement effective risk mitigation measures for plant commodities. Additionally, the ongoing evaluation of programs and subsequent refinement, where appropriate, is important to ensure continued relevance and effectiveness. In 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Developed the pilot project concerning the Invasive Plants Policy and Canada’s Least Wanted Plants, which included a broad stakeholder consultation to validate the policy and plant species being considered for regulatory action.
  • Delivered all initiatives entailed in the Detailed Technical Action Plan (DTAP) in response to the recommendations of the 2008–09 OAG Plant Health Audit, the 2009 Standing Committee on Public Accounts (PACP) report which focused on plant health imports, and the 2008 internal evaluation of the CFIA Invasive Alien Species (IAS) program. These initiatives were intended to strengthen processes and tools and to improve implementation and collaboration with other government departments and thus contribute to protecting the plant resource base.
  • Collaborated with federal/provincial/territorial partners and stakeholders to develop and implement preventative measures for IAS. This included initiating with partners and developing national Early Detection Rapid Response mechanisms, diagnostic methods, and tools for identifying high risk IAS.
  • Initiated a review of Canada’s List of Regulated Pests, of import monitoring processes, of tracking tools, and of inspection and surveillance activities to limit the introduction of IAS upon import and to determine the presence and distribution status thereof in Canada.
  • Continued to monitor plant imports and pest reports, conducted pest and weed risk assessments and surveys, and developed and implemented phytosanitary requirements in order to mitigate the risk of introducing newly identified pests of concern.
  • Continued ongoing risk mitigation regarding identified pests of concern in the country of origin thereof; this was done through the development and audit of systems approaches in foreign countries. The CFIA also required that plants undergo pest risk analysis prior to their importation.

Performance highlights for ongoing activities under Plant Health Risks and Production Systems included:

  • Regulating the movement or use of plants, plant products, and other pathways to mitigate the introduction and spread of plant pests and diseases, and issuing 63,751 phytosanitary certificates to facilitate the export of Canadian plants and plant products through plant movement certificates.
  • Delivering significant responses with respect to high-profile plant pests, including the Plum Pox Virus (PPV), Emerald Ash Borer (EAB), Brown Spruce Longhorn Beetle (BSLB), Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALHB), and Potato Cyst Nematode (PCR).
  • Conducting surveys of 23 different pests or pathways, including 17,500 surveys of various plant pests in approximately 20,000 sites.
  • Continuing engagement with federal/provincial/territorial government partners, stakeholders, and trading partners through stakeholder engagement (e.g. invasive plants policy consultation and on-going consultations/requests for information) to further collect information on the trade of specific plant species in Canada.
  • Consulting with industry, academia, provinces, and federal government partners in the development of farm-level biosecurity standards and producer guidance documents for the potato and grains and oilseeds industry sectors to provide nationally consistent tools that help commodity sectors to proactively manage risk.
  • Reviewing fertilizer and supplement products through the use of scientific evaluations made on all ingredients (active and inert) so as to ensure that they do not pose any risk to human, plant, or animal health or to the environment when used according to directions. This ensures that the products comply with current efficacy and safety standards, thereby supporting a safe food supply.
  • Regulating Canadian seed, fertilizer, and plant products to facilitate timely access to safe and effective products; this includes the receipt of 884 submissions for seed, fertilizer, and plant product re-registrations, new registrations, amendments, and inquiries.
  • Undertaking diagnostic tests for the detection of plant pests and diseases, for seed quality, and for fertilizer safety and efficacy; over 200,000 samples were received for analysis.
DID YOU KNOW?

Originally detected in the Toronto/Vaughn area of Ontario in 2003, the Asian Longhorned Beetle (ALHB) is currently under an eradication program being implemented by the CFIA in collaboration with the municipalities involved. More than 25,000 infested trees have been removed since 2003, with no beetles detected since 2008. After two more years of nil detections, in 2013, the CFIA will be able to declare ALHB as successfully eradicated from Canada. The CFIA is strengthening its import policy with respect to this pest, and it is continuing to conduct national surveys and collaborate with partners with regard to communication and research efforts.

Lessons Learned

In 2008, the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) completed an audit which highlighted the CFIA’s challenges with respect to managing risks to the plant resources base. Key findings of the OAG identified the need for tools, processes, and data analysis capacity to help prioritize and apply a targeted approach to delivering activities that focus on protecting Canada’s plant resource base within the resource levels available. Since 2009, the CFIA has implemented refined processes and prioritization tools to support the completion of pest risk assessments and the delivery of surveys.

Due to an increase in the volume and the complexity of global trade, plant protection organizations around the world are facing greater challenges with respect to implementing effective environmental protection measures. Based on past experience, the CFIA recognizes the value in working with other plant protection organizations to develop international standards that mitigate risks associated with global trade. In the longer term, the CFIA is also exploring the development of an international engagement strategy on plants, a strategy that will guide international engagement activities, thus targeting resource investments to maximize results and benefits. Continued risk mitigation will also be reliant upon clear and transparent communication of Canadian import requirements to all stakeholders, including the CFIA’s international partners.

Program Activity 5: Biodiversity Protection

Program Activity Description:

Protection of Canada’s biodiversity is critical to the sustainability of Canada’s environment. Biodiversity protection programming plays an important role in minimizing and managing risks to Canada’s environment by developing and delivering programs and risk mitigation strategies to protect Canada’s biodiversity from the spread of invasive species and other pests due to environmental change, and from novel agricultural products, including products of emerging technologies. Programs are developed and delivered to assess and manage environmental safety for the introduction of agricultural products. Through these programs, public confidence in Canada’s ability to assess and manage the risks associated with the introduction of new species and/or new agricultural products is maintained and significantly enhanced.

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
12.9 12.9 10.8

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
99 116 17

The following table identifies the CFIA’s expected results, performance indicators, and targets for the Biodiversity Protection program activity. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 4.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2-6: Summary of Performance: Biodiversity Protection


Expected
Results
Performance
Indicators*
Targets Performance Status Data Quality Rating*
Risks to bioversity within the animal and plant resource base are managed within acceptable limits Percentage of inspections of novel products that demonstrate compliance with the requirements and standards outlined in the respective authorizations for experimental purposes Plants with Novel Traits: 90% 96% Met Higher Confidence
Novel Supplements: 95% 96% Met Moderate Confidence
Novel Feed: 80% N/A No Inspections Performed N/A
Veterinary Biologics: 80% 100% Met Moderate Confidence

* For more information on data ratings and limitations regarding the CFIA's performance indicators, please see Section 2.1.2.1.

Additional Information:

Invasive Alien Species: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/invenv/refe.shtml

Plant Biosafety: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/pbobbve.shtml

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Performance Summary, Trending and Compliance Methods

Percentage of inspections of novel products that demonstrate compliance with the requirements and standards outlined in the respective authorizations for experimental purposes:

Plants with Novel Traits – 96% compliance – Met

  • Compliance rates for Plants with Novel Traits continue to be met or exceeded. The Plants with novel traits sub-indicator has met its target for the last three years due to applicants’ increasing experience with the program requirements and on-going communication with industry.

Novel Supplements – 96% compliance – Met

  • Compliance rates for Novel Supplements continue to be met or exceeded. The compliance rate for novel supplements has improved slightly from 2009–10. (2008–09, 80%; 2009–10, 95%; 2010–11, 96%)

Veterinary Biologics – 100% compliance – Met

  • The compliance rate for Veterinary Biologics has not changed. This is the second year that this sub-indicator has been reported. (2009–10, 100%; 2010–11, 100%)

Novel Feed – N/A

  • Performance against this target cannot be assessed as no Novel Feed inspections were performed in 2010–11. Individuals or companies who intend to conduct research with novel feeds must apply for an Authorization of the Release of a Novel Feed for Research Purposes from the CFIA. The CFIA reviews applications and assesses the potential of risk to livestock, humans, and the environment. Research trials authorized by the CFIA typically require the applicant to meet certain conditions, such as the safe disposal of research materials. These conditions can be verified by the CFIA through inspections depending on the level of assessed risk. For 2010–11, no compliance verification activities were carried out for the two novel feed products that received authorization, based on their low levels of assessed risk. No inspections were performed in 2009–10 and 2010–11. This is the second year that this sub-indicator has been reported. (2008–09, N/A; 2009–10, N/A; 2010–11, N/A)

Compliance Approaches and Methods

  • For the Plants with Novel Traits, Novel Supplements, and Veterinary Biologics sub-indicators, a monitoring approach is used for assessing compliance, and compliance results are determined in the initial inspection. For the Novel Feed sub-indicator, a directed approach is used for assessing compliance, and compliance results are determined in the initial inspection.
Additional Information

Invasive Alien Species: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/invenv/refe.shtml

Plant Biosafety: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/pbobbve.shtml

Strategic Performance Analysis

In addition to the performance results summarized in Table 2-6, the CFIA also achieved the following results under the Biodiversity Protection program activity:

Introducing new and innovative products contributes to maintaining the competitiveness of Canada’s agricultural sector. However, competitiveness and innovation cannot come at the expense of environmental safety or sustainability. With ongoing advancement in new technologies and new products, the CFIA must work closely with its partners to enable regulatory programs to keep pace with innovation in Canada wherever possible. To that end, in 2010–11, the CFIA:

  • Provided technical expertise on interdepartmental efforts to respond to current challenges in the low-level presence of low-risk unauthorized products that have future implications on trade.
  • Collaborated with technical experts in the federal government to ensure adequate coordination of the regulation of plants with novel traits that are not intended for general use as food or feed.
  • Developed a long-term research strategy, which includes biotechnology, to provide strategic direction for regulatory research to inform decision making, program design, and operational program delivery.
  • Supported research into new knowledge and technologies in support of plant pest risk analysis, invasive alien species, and biodiversity.
  • Continued work to propose revisions and development of safety standards, policies, and precautionary labelling statements for fertilizer and supplement products to ensure that they are safe and used in an environmentally sustainable manner.
  • Worked to increase the capacity to conduct scientific evaluations of novel products by collaborating with international partners through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and other forums in order to develop internationally harmonized risk assessment approaches. Efforts towards harmonization of the risk assessment process allowed the CFIA to build on lessons learned and best practices in other countries, enabling the CFIA to leverage foreign expertise and facilitate ongoing access to foreign markets for Canadian novel commodities (including plants with novel traits and other agricultural inputs derived through biotechnology).

Performance highlights for ongoing activities under Biodiversity Protection included:

  • Conducting almost 800 assessments and oversight activities concerning research trials for Plants with Novel Traits (PNT), fertilizer supplements, novel feeds, and the protection of veterinary biologics. These assessments help evaluate PNT performance, study their environmental safety, and prepare them for environmental release.
  • Conducting pre-market assessments of fertilizer and supplement products to verify
    their safety and efficacy and performing pre-market PNT assessments concerning the environmental safety of new crop technologies. These preventative measures contribute to the health of humans (via direct exposure or food), livestock, and environmental safety.
  • Continuing engagement in OECD efforts in the area of biotechnology. These efforts facilitate regulatory harmonization between OECD member countries with respect to biotechnology products. Activities include the creation and publication of consensus documents that provide useful information (e.g. information on approved best practices when performing risk assessments or biological information on agricultural crops).
DID YOU KNOW?

The CFIA conducted an environmental assessment and authorized unconfined environmental release of drought-tolerant corn. This made Canada the first country in the world to authorize a drought-tolerant crop for commercial planting. Drought-tolerant crops, which require less water, may enable Canadian farmers to obtain higher yields in spite of climate change. The environmental assessments of drought-tolerant crops are more complex and challenging than those for crops with more familiar types of traits, such as tolerance to herbicides or resistance to insects.

Lessons Learned

In the past, the Fertilizer Program experienced file review backlogs which caused significant delays in product approvals and registrations. This affected the CFIA’s ability to meet its service delivery standards, which then affected the introduction of new fertilizers and supplements into the Canadian marketplace for Canadian farmers. In consultation with stakeholders, a backlog reduction action plan was developed and implemented, resulting in the elimination of file backlogs. Over the past fiscal year, the Fertilizer program worked towards further streamlining the regulatory requirements and improving service delivery standards. This work included a tiered, risk-based approach where well established products with a history of performance and marketplace acceptance are subject to reduced requirements.

2.2.3 Strategic Outcome 3: Contributes to consumer protection and market access based on the application of science and standards

Strategic Outcome 3

[D]

The CFIA's programming contributes to securing the conditions needed for consumer protection (as it relates to food and certain agricultural products) and for a prosperous Canadian agri-food sector that is able to access domestic and global markets. The CFIA aims to verify that information provided to Canadian consumers through labels and advertising is truthful and not misleading. The CFIA also works to facilitate continued and new market access for Canadian agriculture, fishery, forestry, and food products by verifying that Canadian products meet domestic regulations and international standards and by reflecting Canada's interests when negotiating technical arrangements and standards in the international arena. In carrying out activities toward the achievement of this strategic outcome, the CFIA focused its efforts on the following five priorities:

  • Design and deliver risk-based inspection and surveillance services
  • Improve compliance through compliance management activities
  • Modernize the Agency's regulatory components and tools
  • Increase transparency and strengthen strategic partnerships and communications with key partners and stakeholders
  • Develop a workforce and workplace such that the Agency is innovative, more effective, and well-managed

Percentage of 2010–11 Actual Spending: Strategic Outcome 3

[D]

Work under the Integrated Regulatory Frameworks and Domestic and International Market Access program activities is primarily aimed at addressing the Program Framework and Partnerships risk areas; however, it also benefits the other key risk areas noted above.

Program Activity 6: Integrated Regulatory Frameworks

Program Activity Description:

Integrated regulatory frameworks programming enables the economic prosperity of Canadians through its contribution to the development and effective implementation of national and international regulatory frameworks for food, animals and plants, and their products that are transparent, science-based, rules-based and mutually reinforcing. By contributing to the development of these frameworks, the ability of different jurisdictions to protect against sanitary and phytosanitary risks and to pursue other legitimate objectives in a manner that is consistent with a fair and competitive market economy is reinforced.

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
9.7 9.1 6.8

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
66 51 (15)

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected results, performance indicators, and targets for the Integrated Regulatory Frameworks program activity. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 4.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2-7: Summary of Performance: Integrated Regulatory Frameworks


Expected
Results
Performance
Indicators*
Targets Performance Status Data Quality Rating*
The CFIA's regulatory framework provides the greatest net benefit for Canadians as it is based on scientific approaches and takes into account international contributions and stakeholders' interests. Percentage of regulatory initiatives that meet publication requirements for publication in either the Canada Gazette, Part I or Part II10 ≥ 95% of regulatory initiatives meet publication requirements 52% Not Met Moderate Confidence
Extent to which the net quantity, composition, labelling and advertising of non-registered11 food products inspected is accurate. 70% of products, labels and advertisements inspected are accurately represented. 79% Met Higher Confidence

* For more information on data ratings and limitations regarding the CFIA's performance indicators, please see Section 2.1.2.1.

Additional Information:

Paperwork Burden Reduction Initiative official site (Industry Canada): http://www.reducingpaperburden.gc.ca/epic/site/pbri-iafp.nsf/en/h_sx00001e.html

Fair Labelling Practices: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/labeti/labetie.shtml

Seeds: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/seesem/seeseme.shtml

Fertilizer: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/fereng/ferenge.shtml

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Performance Summary, Trending and Compliance Methods

Percentage of regulatory initiatives that meet publication requirements for either the Canada Gazette, Part I or Part II:

Regulatory initiatives that meet publication requirements – 52% compliance – Not met

  • In 2010-2011, the CFIA planned to publish 17 regulatory proposals in both the Canada Gazette, Part I (eight proposals) and Canada Gazette, Part II (nine proposals). However, the planned priorities had to shift to accommodate an additional five new priorities added during the year. This resulted in only nine of the original proposals being published, thereby resulting in a completion rate of 52% despite the publication of three of the new priorities.
  • Performance for this indicator has dropped since 2009–10. This is the second year the CFIA is reporting on this indicator since the methodology changed in 2009–10. (2009–10 77%; 2010–11, 52%)
Extent to which the net quantity, composition, labelling and advertising of nonregistered food products inspected is accurate:

Labelling accuracy – 79% compliance – Met

  • This year's performance exceeded the target, but is in line with results from previous years. Inspection strategies continue to be directed towards high-risk non-registered foods and establishments (importers, manufacturers, retailers with labelling and advertising responsibilities).
  • The compliance results for the last two years are given for information only. They cannot be compared to one another since different high-risk foods and establishments are inspected every year. (2008–09, 82%; 2009–10 82%; 2010–11, 79%)
Strategic Performance Analysis

In addition to the performance results summarized in Table 2-7, the CFIA also achieved the following results under the Integrated Regulatory Frameworks program activity:

The CFIA worked with stakeholders to address and provide guidance on priority regulatory areas of interest to Canadians and undertook the following in 2010–11:

  • Continued to work on pig identification and the humane transport of animals as well as work on amendments to the Health of Animals Regulations by developing regulatory proposals and cost benefits in support thereof.
  • Led implementation activities following publication of the Enhanced Labelling for Food Allergen and Gluten Sources and Added Sulphites regulations by HC; this included training inspection staff, developing analytical methodologies, and providing guidance to industry on the enforcement approach to be adopted.

The CFIA continued to strengthen and modernize its regulatory base to enhance its user fee regime and the regulation of animals, plants, and related products. For instance, the CFIA undertook the following work:

  • Pre-published a regulatory proposal that will create a more flexible system for the registration of seed varieties; this will reduce regulation while continuing to maintain the integrity of seed certification and environmental, food, and feed safety. This flexible system is designed to stimulate innovation in the seed industry and give producers more choice, thereby supporting the long-term growth of the seed sector.
  • Continued work related to the Honey Regulations in order to develop performance standards and improve enforcement. These improvements would modernize and update requirements for the preparation and marketing of honey products.
  • Amended the Health of Animals Regulations to protect the health of aquatic animals. This amendment allows Canada to meet international trade standards and prevent the loss of aquatic resources due to the introduction or spread of disease, thus ensuring access to international markets for Canadian exports.
  • Updated user fees for the Destination Inspection Service (DIS) as the first of three planned annual increases to reach a self-sustaining model for recovering CFIA service costs. The DIS provides impartial inspection services to all sectors of the fresh produce industry to support the resolution of buyer/seller disputes on fresh fruit and vegetable quality. Destination inspections, driven by demand and focusing on cost recovery, support market trade to ensure a sustainable food supply to Canadians.

In adherence with the GoC Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation, the CFIA worked to improve the horizontal regulatory framework for agri-food programs, and made the following efforts in 2010–11:

  • Continued to seek improvements to the consistency of the various regulations supporting agri-food programs.
  • Worked with the Treasury Board Secretariat to ensure that all regulatory packages are prepared in compliance with the Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulations.

The CFIA also continued to evolve its food labelling requirements to meet the needs of consumers and industry; this included:

  • Committing to review the "Product of Canada" guidelines to ensure that they continue to meet the needs of both consumers and Canadian industries. In September 2010, consultations ended on the potential exemption of imported sugar, salt, and vinegar from the "Product of Canada" claim and the possibility to remove certain qualifiers from the "Made in Canada" claim.
  • Implementing the new Food and Drug Regulations requirements, which are related to enhanced labelling of food allergen and gluten sources and added sulphites. This includes training inspection staff and developing analytical methodologies and provisions for guiding industry on the enforcement approach to be adopted.
DID YOU KNOW?

A new interactive food product labelling tool, providing stakeholders with an easy overview of the mandatory food labelling requirements in Canada, is available on The CFIA's website. More detailed food labelling requirements can also be quickly accessed online.

Lessons Learned

Through continual performance monitoring, the CFIA noted a marked decrease in its capacity to meet performance targets with respect to the completion and approval of regulatory packages. While analysis revealed several factors impacting its performance in this area, key factors included the CFIA's ability to comply with Government of Canada directives for streamlining regulations. Close examination demonstrated a need for internal enhancements in order to meet cost benefit analysis requirements. To address this challenge, the CFIA worked with various partners within the Government of Canada to obtain support in cost benefit training and to obtain other resources to enhance the CFIA's ability to comply with directives. These measures, in conjunction with a new regulatory prioritization approach that provides for more flexible work planning, are key to addressing the CFIA's performance in this area.

Program Activity 7: Domestic and International Market Access

Program Activity Description:

Domestic and international market access programming contributes to securing the conditions for an innovative and prosperous economy. It does so primarily by enabling products to enter markets through the implementation and enforcement of an effective and efficient regulatory system that is accessible, understandable and responsive to domestic and international market requirements. Information provided to consumers by producers is verified as truthful and not misleading, and Canadian products are verified as meeting high quality and safety standards.

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
32.3 35.3 34.5

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
528 525 (3)

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected results, performance indicators, and targets for the Domestic and International Market Access program activity. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 4.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2-8: Summary of Performance: Domestic and International Market Access


Expected
Results
Performance
Indicators*
Targets Performance Status Data Quality Rating*
Canadian producers of food, plants, animals and related products operate within a fair and efficient marketplace, from which Canadian consumers benefit Extent to which certified food, animal and plant shipments meet the receiving country's import requirements ≥ 99% meet requirements Food – Meat 99% Met Moderate Confidence
Food – Fish and Seafood 99% Met Higher Confidence
Food – Processed Egg 100% Met Moderate Confidence
Animal 99% Live Animal Only Met Lower Confidence
Plant 99% Met Moderate Confidence

* For more information on data ratings and limitations regarding the CFIA's performance indicators, please see Section 2.1.2.1.

Additional Information:

In 2010, the CFIA received 361 applications for plant breeders' rights (PBR), granting intellectual property rights to 300 plant varieties; this gives the breeder exclusive rights to produce for sale and to sell the reproductive material of a certain variety. The CFIA also renewed the protection of 1665 varieties previously approved for the granting of rights.

For more information on PBR, please visit: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/pbrpov/pbrpove.shtml

Destination Inspection Services: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/frefra/dis/dise.shtml#serv

Canada Organic Regime: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/orgbio/stainte.shtml

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity

Performance Summary, Trending and Compliance Methods

Extent to which certified food, animal and plant shipments meet the receiving country's import requirements:

Meat – 99% compliance – Met

  • Problems with meat product shipments and their rejection by foreign countries are addressed on a priority basis to resolve any issue with the importing market. This continues to produce positive results. Performance for the Meat sub-indicator has not changed significantly over the past 3 years. (2008–09, 100%; 2009–10, 99%; 2010–11, 99%) Animal – 99% compliance

Animal – 99% compliance – Met

  • For 2010–11, data was only available for live animal shipments. Due to data unavailability, a three year trend is not available at this time. (2008–09, No Data Available; 2009–10, No Data Available; 2010–11, 99%)

Plant – 99% compliance – Met

  • For the Plant commodity, the CFIA issues notices of non-compliance to countries importing Canadian plant products, as per international standard. For 2010–11, performance levels reflect the capacity and willingness of countries to report rejections of Canadian shipments to the CFIA. This may change in future years, and it may thus affect the CFIA's reported performance. Performance for the Plant sub-indicator has not changed significantly over the past 3 years. (2008–09, 100%; 2009–10, 99%; 2010–11, 99%).
Strategic Performance Analysis

In addition to the performance results summarized in Table 2-8, the CFIA also achieved the following results under the Domestic and International Market Access program activity:

The CFIA continued to work with international organizations to promote and influence the development and implementation of coherent and consistent international standards. To that end, the CFIA:

  • Coordinated and hosted incoming missions and audit teams from foreign regulatory counterparts. In 2010, CFIA hosted over 30 incoming missions relating to a number of activities including market access, senior level discussions on regulatory issues, capacity building, and technical assistance.
  • Continued its collaborative work with Chinese officials to promote an ongoing dialogue on food safety, animal health, and plant protection. As part of that mission, a cooperative arrangement was signed by Minister Ritz and the CFIA's counterpart agency. The agreement dealt with access for Canadian boneless beef and tallow for industrial use and Chinese cooked poultry.
  • Engaged senior level counterparts in Russia, China, the US, and the EU to increase knowledge and understanding of Canada's robust regulatory system regarding the safety of products from Canada.

The CFIA also worked to further enhance the understanding of Canada's robust regulatory system by foreign counterparts in order to improve market access opportunities. This is achieved through regular meetings with its foreign counterparts, incoming or outgoing missions that involve reviewing how Canada's regulatory system protects plants, animals and the food supply. For example:

  • In July 2010, an incoming Indian delegation attended a CFIA working group meeting on pulses12. By coming to Canada, the Indian technical officials were able to appreciate and understand Canada's industry and the reasons why certain provisions and requirements were difficult to meet. As a result of the visit, a technical agreement on pulses was reached between Canada and India.

In 2010, the CFIA continued its efforts in monitoring and communicating Canadian herd disease status and managing herd certification programs. For example:

  • CFIA staff conducted their annual audit of Scrapie Canada, an industry organization that administers the Voluntary Scrapie Flock Certification Program for all of Canada as well as the Chronic Wasting Disease Herd Certification Program for cervid producers in Ontario.

In 2010–11, the CFIA continued to modernize the import/export certification process to facilitate compliance with import and export regulatory requirements:

  • This initiative includes the e-certification project, which aims to improve the security of export documentation, minimize fraudulent activities, and reduce the time required to issue import/export certificates. High-level business requirements have been identified, and business case documents have been completed.

The CFIA continued to participate in, coordinate, and support the development of international standards and trade rules relevant to food, animal, and plant products that reflect Canada's interests. For example:

  • The CFIA led negotiations on and implementation of the Santitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) component of trade agreements under the World Trade Organization (WTO), North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and bilaterial Free Trade Agreements (FTA). The CFIA is supporting work on a number of FTAs, including the Canada Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA).
DID YOU KNOW?

In January 2009, the Minister of Agriculture announced the creation of the Market Access Secretariat (MAS). The MAS is a collaborative effort between AAFC and the CFIA, and it is to be the focal point for targeted agricultural market access activities in priority international markets. The CFIA is committed to working in collaboration with the MAS to develop and implement strategic initiatives related to market access. The CFIA has contributed veterinarians and plant health specialists to be colocated in the MAS and has leveraged the role of Chief Technical Market Access Negotiator to provide technical trade support expertise to the MAS. The CFIA and MAS are continuing market access negotiations with a number of countries including China, Russia, Korea, India, and the EU.

Lessons Learned

In 2008, the CFIA piloted a program which established veterinary positions in Tokyo, Beijing, Mexico City, and Brussels to support market access and recovery efforts for beef and cattle following Canada's findings of BSE. The CFIA's representation abroad has been instrumental in minimizing market access restrictions when foreign animal disease outbreaks occur and in maintaining and regaining markets for beef, pork and poultry products. Positions abroad also enable enhanced access to important information on food safety, animal health, and plant health issues in the countries and regions represented.

This pilot was reviewed in 2010–11. Through interviews with industry and government stakeholders, it was confirmed that the program would play an important role in advancing market access initiatives and establishing strong regulatory relationships to more effectively manage food safety, animal health, and plant protection import programs. The review also provided the opportunity to identify areas for improvement, including enhanced communication of the role that CFIA staff members situated abroad play in the broader market access team, increased training and support for specialists prior to being posted abroad, and greater integration and communication with the headquarters team.

Given how CFIA staff located abroad contribute to both market access and broader CFIA import activities, an ongoing Technical Specialists Abroad program has been established. The four original postings have been augmented with additional positions in Moscow and New Delhi.

2.2.4 Internal Services

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; 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 to those provided specifically to a program.

Percentage of 2010–11 Actual Spending: Internal Services

[D]

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)


Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
118.6 155.3 160.7

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)


Planned Actual Difference
1,036 1,012 (24)

Variance Analysis:

In 2009–10, the CFIA incurred expenditures of $141.9M (19.8%) within Internal Services. Expenditures increased by $18.8M to $160.7M (22%) in 2010–11 largely due to payments made to Public Works and Government Services Canada for additional space occupancy for the CFIA, a one-time space consolidation project for the CFIA, costs incurred in support of an increased Information Management / Information Technology capacity, and other corporate adjustments.

Performance Summary and Analysis of Program Activity
Strategic Performance Analysis

The CFIA continued to strengthen its internal management processes and systems under the Internal Services program activity by:

  • Engaging in proactive efforts to promote and reinforce the importance of the values and ethics of the CFIA, in its role as Canada's largest science-based regulator. The CFIA's Values and Ethics (V&E) Strategy is one of the most comprehensive strategies within the GoC, and it ensures that the CFIA's values and ethics program evolves strategically both as part of the CFIA's overall strategic plan and as part of its Human Resources renewal initiative. The comprehensive V&E training program now includes 4 courses. A total of 1200 employees took V&E training in 2010–11, thereby increasing the overall understanding of the importance of the CFIA's values and ethics in decision making and in guiding employee behaviours.
  • Continuing its efforts to meet branch needs with respect to corporate services through the early identification of corporate, non-technical training priorities. Examples of priorities include Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP), Values and Ethics, Occupational Health and Safety (OHS), Orientation, Delegation training, Project Management, and Harassment Awareness. The communication of these priorities will help CFIA employees prepare and plan required training initiatives for future years.
  • Making notable progress in 2010–11 in support of its 2008–13 Human Resources (HR) Renewal Plan, which responds to challenges related to the planning, engagement, recruitment, building capacity, and provision of a human resource management architecture. Accomplishments include:
    • Creating a Leadership Development Framework to ensure a transparent, clear path for employees to follow (from entry to exit) through instructor-led training, mentoring, action learning, on-the-job training, e-learning, self-study, and exchanges. The CFIA continues to encourage all employees to work with their managers in developing and implementing Individual Learning Plans (ILPs) to address current and future training and development needs. The CFIA evaluates key training initiatives in order to continue to emphasize the most effective and efficient use of training resources and technology and the implementation of a revised Performance Management Program to develop future leaders.
    • Creating Agency-wide training for all supervisors, thereby ensuring better preparation for management roles and better succession planning. As part of the Leadership Development Framework, managers now have learning maps to assist them in building their leadership ability. In addition, an "Essentials for Supervision" course has been developed to provide support for managers early in their careers. A mentoring program, emphasizing leadership and management skills, is being piloted for executive feeder group members in the NCR.
    • Supporting its employees' learning through experience and the application of a rigorous executive performance management regime.
    • Introducing tools such as inspector training programs, an "Employee Engagement Strategy and Toolkit," and the "Inspector Commodity Identification system" (ICID). The ICID system, designed to better track the CFIA's inspection resources, was launched in May 2010. It identifies the number of people working on particular commodities and facilitates the assessment of resourcing and retention gaps to better plan for future hiring needs. Since its launch, the ICID has improved the CFIA's delivery of technical training, allowing trainers to better align courses to the appropriate workforce.
DID YOU KNOW?

The CFIA was once again selected as one of the NCR’s Top 25 Employers and, for the first time, as one of Canada’s Best Diversity Employers for 2010. These recognitions demonstrate the CFIA’s commitment to its employees and help in its ongoing efforts to attract talent and strengthen its position as an employer of?choice.


  • Launching a recruitment campaign which resulted in the hiring of 170 new food inspectors across Canada, thereby improving the CFIA's ability to protect the health and safety of Canadians. Considerable effort was placed on the development and implementation of a national training program for meat processing inspectors.
  • Performing a self-assessment of the Agency's internal control over financial reporting; this provides documented evidence that the appropriate financial controls are in place and ensures accurate and reliable financial reporting. In 2010–11, the CFIA performed its first annual self-assessment of internal control and financial reporting. This helped managers streamline financial control activities and ensure effective and efficient delivery of programs and services.
  • Renewing its planning and decision-making structure. Prior to 2010, the CFIA's management and planning of its programs and services were conducted vertically by its branches. Although this structure had its strengths, it created challenges with respect to cross-branch coordination of the core functions of Science, Operations, and Policy and Programs. In 2010–11, the CFIA developed an integrated and horizontal planning and reporting governance structure. The implementation of the new structure is intended to clarify and reaffirm accountabilities within the CFIA; realign the governance approach to support business needs; and foster a whole-of-Agency approach to the planning, execution and delivery of programs and policies. At the heart of the new governance is the establishment of a business line model that affects all branches and aligns to the CFIA's newly approved Program Activity Architecture (PAA). This has yielded a number of tangible benefits including improved communication among branches; a more structured, inclusive, and transparent decision-making approach; a progressive change in the CFIA's move towards more systematic horizontal discussions; and a better understanding of the CFIA's priorities.
  • Continuing key activities in the modernization of asset planning, including the establishment of capital funding envelopes as well as the development of a five-year investment plan. Modernizing asset planning will contribute to the enhancement of program integrity, operational continuity, and health and safety by ensuring that the CFIA activities are supported by the right assets at the right time and in the most cost effective manner.
  • Finalizing and beginning the implementation of a revised Program Activity Architecture (PAA) and associated Performance Measurement Framework (PMF) that better align the CFIA's activity structure with its strategic direction. Implementation included the creation of a comprehensive training package on the revised PAA and its related financial tracking processes followed by national delivery of the training.
  • Completing the CFIA lab capacity assessments. Information retreived therefrom was used to develop an infrastructure strategy that has since been integrated into the CFIA Investment Plan. The development of the strategy is a major step forward in better managing the CFIA's laboratory assets, which are critical to the delivery of Science programs.
  • Continuing to implement measures initiated in 2009–10 to better meet its obligations under the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act. The CFIA invested in new, up-to-date software and spent over $1 million in order to improve its capacity to respond to requests, thus reducing the request backlog. A developmental program was also launched to facilitate the recruitment and retention of ATIP talent. In addition to including an ATIP component in the CFIA's employee orientation session, a more regular ATIP training schedule was established, resulting in a total of 992 employees trained in the last fiscal year. Finally, a new streamlined ATIP process designed to confirm accountabilities and clarify roles and responsibilities was introduced in April 2010 for ongoing implementation across the CFIA.
  • Embarking on a project management improvement agenda to establish an agency-wide approach to project management, governance and reporting frameworks. This included the establishment of an Enterprise Project Management Office (ePMO). Adopting an Agency-wide approach to project management will enhance the CFIA's capacity to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of project delivery.
  • Undertaking public consultations on a draft of the Cost Recovery Policy and Framework, which set out the CFIA's approach to cost recovery. This will be applied when cost recovery is reviewed or considered in CFIA program areas. In September 2010, the CFIA posted its finalized Cost Recovery Policy and Framework13 on the CFIA's external website.
  • Information Management (IM) and Information Technology (IT) services have been modernized according to a service-oriented approach. The objective is to provide the CFIA with information, applications, and infrastructure services in order to provide timely and accurate information. This will not only enable long-term strategic decisions but also provide information required by program managers and inspectors to make tactical decisions based on risk and prevention, thus focusing resources effectively and enabling rapid response.
  • The CFIA's IT environment was sustained and enhanced through an expansion of the IT network functionality, in support of the inspector mobilization project and through the modernization of the CFIA's desktop applications. In addition, the IM environment continued to be supported through regular communications to employees, employee education and training courses on document management, and updates to the IM policy suite.
DID YOU KNOW?

As Canada's largest science-based regulator, the CFIA relies on high-quality, timely, and relevant science to make informed decisions that contribute to international capacity-building for global health and food security. To demonstrate the important multi-faceted work that CFIA scientists completed in 2010, the CFIA published the Science at Work brochure.

Lessons Learned

To ensure that the Agency is in a position to meet its core business of food safety and inspection and to respond to emergency situations should they arise, the Agency identified the resourcing, retention, learning, and succession planning needs of EG-03 and EG-04 inspectors as priority activities.

A Steering Committee on Inspector Hiring was established in May 2010 and given the task of redefining how staffing is carried out. Process improvements were identified and, as a result, the following solutions and tools were implemented:

  • A national resourcing strategy to manage the national area of selection for all inspection staff on behalf of all CFIA areas. This was done using consistent, automated, and national selection criteria. Pre-qualified pools of inspectors were also established.
  • The Inspector Commodity Identification Project (ICID) was also created based on PeopleSoft software. This tool identifies, tracks, and allows the organization to report on inspector numbers according to program and commodity (e.g. Meat, Fish, Dairy).

2.2.5 Canada's Economic Action Plan (CEAP)

In 2009–10, the CFIA focused on developing key plans for the future and improving critical areas of infrastructure by:

Delivering 19 of 21 projects in 2010–11. This was carried out in six provinces at the following laboratories: Burnaby, Calgary, Dartmouth, Lethbridge, Ottawa, Saskatoon, and St. Hyacinthe, and it provided the opportunity to address deferred maintenance. These projects were delivered on time and on budget. The CFIA delivered 93% of the Canada's Economic Action Plan projects on time. The program reduced the risk of asset failure and the associated impact on program delivery while ensuring safe modern facilities for our scientists.

Canada's Economic Action Plan ($ Millions)
Planned Spending Total Authorities14 Actual Spending14
14.2 16.0 15.8
Expected
Results
Performance Indicators Targets Performance Status
Deferred maintenance at seven laboratories (over 2 years) is addressed to modernize equipment and improve safety standards. Percentage of projects completed on time 100% 93% (28 of 30) of projects have been delivered as of March 31, 2011. The remaining two projects have slight schedule overruns due to the unavailability of equipment (air handlers) and qualified contractors. They will be completed in May 2011.
Percentage of CEAP funds spent 100% 99%

Of the total program funding of $24.03M for 2009–10 and 2010–11, 99% was spent. Note that the surplus ($1.8M) of 2009–10 funds was carried forward to 2010–11 as certain projects spanned both years.