ARCHIVED - Management of Large Public IT Projects - Canada

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

1.5 Decisions and Assessment

It is government policy that all IM/IT and capital projects, with a total estimated cost above the level that the sponsoring Minister of the department concerned can approve, must be approved by Treasury Board (the committee of government ministers set up to review and approve expenditures). This applies even though the project may be funded from the department's authorized budget. Approval is sought by the preparation of a Treasury Board Submission, which is thoroughly reviewed by officials in the Treasury Board Secretariat before being submitted to Treasury Board Ministers.

All projects submitted for approval must be supported by documentation that adequately describes the full scope of the project including the associated management framework. All submissions relating to IM/IT are reviewed by the Portfolio Management Division (PMD) of the CIO Branch, in a business-team setting to ensure that they represent an effective and efficient solution to the operational needs as set out in the department's defined priorities or in the Long-term Capital Plan. PMD also reviews for compliance with the EMF to help departments and agencies meet their projected budget and scheduled time lines.

The approval process normally consists of two stages: Preliminary Project Approval (PPA) and Effective Project approval (EPA). Departments normally request PPA when the initial project planning and identification phase is completed but before the project definition phase starts. The formal Treasury Board approval process may be tailored to individual projects and departments, depending on the nature of the risks involved in those projects.

The requirements for PPA are as follows:

Proposal: It must list all authorities being sought from the Treasury Board, including:

• the cost objective for the project definition phase, which will establish the total amount of funds approved by the TB for the purpose of defining the project;
• any other objectives deemed to be sufficiently critical to require specific authority by the TB.

Supporting documentation: consisting of the following:

• A background section identifying the program's scope and requirements and providing justification that it directly relates to the department's or agency's goals and responsibilities;
• Indicative budget and total project cost estimates (total cost and annual cash-flow) for the overall project;
• An overall project schedule which should provide an estimated schedule of milestones for the overall project, a work breakdown structure, and a sequential implementation plan for all products/releases;
• The project management approach;
• The Enhanced Management Framework questionnaire (used to assess that all appropriate elements of the framework have been addressed);
• The Project Charter;
• A Business Case;
• A summary of comprehensive cost-benefit and options analyses;
• A risk assessment and mitigation strategy;
• A Human Resource plan;
• A Communications plan;
• An outstanding issues section;
• Gating of the project (if it is large enough to warrant it);
• Other objectives, such as
• Schedule objective
• Performance objective
• Procurement strategy.

Under certain circumstances, PPA may be deemed unnecessary. This is acceptable so long as all the conditions required for PPA are met within the EPA submission.

The EPA submission must include the above PPA requirements, and in addition:

• Any updates to the PPA documents;
• Substantive budget and total cost estimates (total cost and annual cash flow) for the overall project; and
• Full details of any agreements associated with the project; and
• Explanations for any variances between PPA and EPA schedules, costs etc.

After receiving Project Approval, departments have reporting obligations to the Treasury Board Secretariat. These follow the "gating" concept. Gates are significant completion events or quality milestones, placed at key points in the project lifecycle. Gates assess either the quality of the products produced so far, or the adequacy and completeness of the process to date, and a gate can only be "passed" if the products or process meet a predefined performance standard. Gates may take the form of technical reviews, risk assessments, completion of documents, demonstrations or test cases, or project audits. Gates are identified in a project's plan/schedule, and a gate review is required to formally "pass" each gate.

If, at a gate review, the gate's criteria have not been met, it is possible that a significant change in project direction may need to take place to address the lack of performance. The project should not continue "as is" unless each gate is passed.

Once projects are completed, audits are normally carried out by departmental review branches, which report directly to senior management. On a government-wide basis, projects of significant scope and/or cost may be reviewed by the Auditor-General of Canada. Large and/or long-term projects may be subject to audits while still in progress.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page