Leadership recognized internally and externally as demonstrating strong ethics and values behaviour, as evidenced by:

• Leadership communication with employees about expected ethical behaviour and public service values;
• Selection, evaluation, promotion and discharge of leaders based on their conduct with respect to Public Serivce (PS) values and ethics.

1. Implement activities and events where leaders can consistently communicate directly with employees on values and ethics.
2. Continue to incorporate specific measures into the selection, evaluation, promotion and discharge of leaders based on values and ethics, by looking at what other departments or agencies have initiated in this area.

Organizational culture reflecting public service values and ethics, as evidenced by:

• Feedback from employees on fairness, respect, satisfaction and engagement;
• Departmental benchmark results and implemented improvements;
• Trends in management and program irregularities, regularly reported on and reviewed by management.

1. Continue to conduct comprehensive monitoring in order to track and report on trends in management and program irregularities.
2. Continue to identify areas within the organization that are particularly vulnerable to breaches in values and ethics.

V&E policies, guidelines, standards, recourse and disclosure mechanisms in place and understood by all employees as evidenced by:

• Customized codes of conduct, including standards of behaviour, consequences and rewards for exemplary behaviour;
• Effective communication, learning and orientation strategies for the Code of Public Service Values, for customized organizational codes and guidelines and for Public Service values and ethics in general;
• Appropriate, accessible avenues for: employee advice, reports of wrongdoing and resolution of conflicts.

1. Assess how employees and managers, both new and existing, understand and are impacted by the Public Service Code and the Agency’s customized code of conduct.
2. Track and monitor employee usage of the different avenues available for seeking advice or filing a report for potential wrongdoing or harassment.

A legal framework of powers, duties and functions related to the institution (or its Minister) reflective and enabling of its objectives, as evidenced by:

• Programs and activities authorized by and in compliance with the law (e.g., constitutive legislation, the Financial Administration Act, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and other applicable statutes or regulations);
• A corporate process to identify areas where legal authority may be lacking or issues of lawfulness, including:
  • A requirement that an assessment of the adequacy of legal authority and lawfulness for new programs and activities be incorporated into the decision-making process when these programs and activities are developed;
  • A process and work plan to review whether current programs and activities are authorized.

A stable Management Resources and Results Structure (MRRS), the foundation for results-based management, as evidenced by:

• Clearly defined, measurable strategic outcomes that reflect the organization’s corporate mandate and vision;
• Clear results outcome statements that are linked to corporate government-wide priorities;
• Program Activity Architecture (PAA) sufficiently populated with results and financial information;
• Defined governance structure outlining the decision-making, mechanisms, responsibilities, and accountabilities of the department.

An effective planning function, as evidenced by:

• Approved organizational strategy to integrate business and strategic planning, human resources planning, resource management, and performance monitoring;
• Established process and calendar for corporate planning and decision making;
• Operational plans and performance agreements aligned with and linked to strategic plans.

Commitment and contribution to the results- based management of horizontal initiatives, as evidenced by:

• Leadership where appropriate;
• Active participation; and,
• Responsibilities for horizontal initiatives reflected (including leadership) in performance agreements.

CBSA will face serious challenges in delivering on the SPP commitments where the success will depend to a large degree on the cooperation from other government departments within and outside the PSEPC portfolio. * In the next round of assessments, both CBSA and TBS would be in a better position to assess CBSA performance in regards to the SPP, which will have a significant impact on the overall assessment of this indicator.

An effective portfolio management structure and process in place, as evidenced by:

• Clear direction, leadership and communications;
• Information exchange, sharing of common best practices;
• Structured consultations on: priority-setting and decision-making, resource allocation and budgeting, policy development and planning;
• Committee processes and an organized governance structure;
• Integrative operational mechanisms and shared services;
• Graduated portfolio-based approval processes;
• Integrated mandate and common objectives.

A solid policy framework, as evidenced by:

• Consistency with the departmental mandate;
• Alignment with the government-wide policy agenda;
• Appropriate horizontal linkages to the policy frameworks of other departments;
• Clarity to central agencies and other departments; and,
• Utility in managing competing demands and allocating scarce resources.

The Agency has clearly defined its policy priorities reflecting the direction of the government to enhance Smart Borders (the Agency is responsible for the majority of the 32-point action plan), and the Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America (the CBSA is the lead or co-lead for more than 100 of the 300 action items of the SPP security agenda) and articulated these to PSEPC and Privy Council Office (PCO).

The Agency is exploring the establishment of a dedicated group within the Strategy and Coordination Branch responsible for strategic policy coordination, overseeing the Agency’s comprehensive policy framework, ensuring alignment with the government-wide policy agenda, and providing a centre of expertise for policy analysis.

The CBSA has already established a research unit to carry out econometric research and analysis to support decision-making in the Agency. This will ensure that decisions taken are based on evidence and analysis, as well as enhance our overall capacity to provide policy advice to the Minister. This team is also working with the research units of other government departments to facilitate the exchange of information and methodologies.

A solid strategic policy function and analytic capacity, as evidenced by:

• Ability to anticipate challenges and respond in a strategic rather than a reactive manner;
• Organizational model to harness distributed policy capacity;
• Strong and sustainable community of analysts;
• Policy development process grounded in fact-based analysis with reliable modeling and due regard for implementation and operational matters;
• Outcomes-focused policy and program development informed by past performance;
• Stakeholder engagement to effectively inform policy making without creating expectations that unduly constrain government decision-making.

An effective evaluation function, as evidenced by:

• Capacity of the evaluation function;
• The deputy head as Chair of an active evaluation (and audit) committee(s); 
• Risk-based evaluation plans;
• Management action plans to address evaluation findings/recommendations;
• Evaluation reports submitted to TBS and posted in a timely fashion (three months);
• Performance information regularly audited or evaluated;
• Audit and Evaluation or other executive committee review of performance information.

1. CBSA has made significant progress in establishing an evaluation function within the last fiscal year. In 2004-05, the evaluation function had no A-base funding; however, in 2005-06 a planned expenditure of $1.6M is noted.
2. CBSA has a joint Audit and Evaluation Committee Chaired by the President.
3. There is a risk-based evaluation plan that has been shared with TBS.
4. Evaluation action plans are approved and monitored by the Audit and Evaluation Committee. Two evaluation reports were approved in 2004-05 with three completed but yet to be approved in 2005-06. Only one has been submitted to TBS for the public website.
5. Although only one evaluation has been submitted for analysis, the report addressed the issue of relevance, but substantiation was not available. Value for money was not addressed by this evaluation.

Accounting and reporting of financial activities consistent with government policies, directives and standards, as evidenced by:

• Timely and accurate financial reporting including accuracy of public account plates and improvements on the quality and timeliness of departmental financial statements;
• Quality of Central Financial Management and Reporting System (CFMRS) trial balance submissions including materiality and number of errors and timeliness of corrections;
• Quality presentation and accounting for specified purpose accounts.

Departmental financial statements & Special Purpose Accounts: Overall, they conformed to Treasury Board Accounting Standards. Some items did not reconcile with Central Financial Management Reporting System. Some note disclosures could be improved. Signed financial statements have not been received.

Public Account Plates: Obtained a grade of B with 87% of plates submitted on time.

Trial Balance Submissions: Nineteen errors were reported during the year on submissions. It is noted that most of the errors occurred in the first three months of reporting and that by March 2005 only one error remained in the monthly trial balance submission.

Internal Audit Reports: No items related to financial reporting were noted.

Access to and use of integrated information for corporate decision making, as evidenced by:

• Integrated information from financial, human resources, payroll, and asset and real property management systems in support of senior management decision-making and related to the achievement of strategic objectives; and,
• Regular Deputy Minister and senior management challenge of proposed investment decisions on the basis of integrated information from various sources linked to strategic objectives.

Planning and reporting systems to support executive decision-making, as evidenced by:

• Reports on Plans and Priorities (RPPs)/Departmental Performance Reports (DPRs) reflective of information contained in Management, Resources and Results Structure (MRRS);
• DPRs linked to RPPs;
• Electronic, meaningful real-time data linking resources and results.

Anticipation and management of significant organizational change, as evidenced by :

• Change management strategies at the corporate and 'initiative' levels;
• Change management function:
• Assignment of responsibilities and support to change management practices.

DEPARTMENTAL FEEDBACK: The Agency consistently applies innovation and scientific solutions to its business. Both GTEC and the Public Service Awards of Excellence recognized the CBSA as being a highly innovative Agency, with seven awards in total over the past year.

The CBSA has one of the largest developmental agendas in the government and, through continuous learning, is continuously transforming and modernizing its business by applying the latest technology solutions. The Agency provides analytical, research, forensic and scientific advisory services within the Agency and to our partners. Some examples of programs the Agency is transforming in response to changing business demands are:

1. The API/PNR program was developed as a result of the events of September 11, 2001. It obtains information for the risk assessment of travellers in advance of their arrival in Canada.
2. NEXUS Air is a program being piloted by the CBSA and the United States Customs and Border Protection (US-CBP) to offer expedited border clearance to pre-approved, low-risk international air travellers using automated kiosks equipped with iris recognition biometric technology.
3. The FAST program is a bi-national initiative between Canada and the United States (U.S.) that offers pre-authorized importers, carriers, and commercial drivers, expedited clearance for eligible goods through dedicated FAST lanes, and/or FAST Primary Inspection Lines, where available.

The organization learns from its results, as evidenced by:

• An organizational learning strategy incorporating regularly reviewed learning objectives, opportunities and requirements;
• A strategy to determine organizational knowledge needs as well as to capture, manage and apply organizational knowledge to shape action and improve results.

DEPARTMENTAL FEEDBACK: The CBSA is working toward the building of a framework for learning in the agency in order to create high-performing employees and therefore a high-performing organization in a cost-effective and efficient manner; create the ability to plan and report on strong metrics; support CBSA priorities and initiatives; create a learning organization. The Learning Framework includes a three-year action plan. The Agency has implemented an organizational learning strategy for the implementation of the new Public Service Modernization Act (PSMA) incorporated with Training and Learning Directorate to engage and empower managers and HR professionals on the new Public Service Employment Act (PSEA).

The CBSA is moving forward in integrating Border Services Officer recruitment and basic recruit training.

Adequate management of legal risk, as evidenced by:

• Ongoing/regular scanning of programs for legal risks, in a manner commensurate with the nature of the department’s activities and mandate; 
• Senior management engagement in Legal Risk Management (LRM), including the active review, avoidance, mitigation and management of legal risks;
• Effective sharing of information on legal risks, including with the Department of Justice and central agencies (in large part to 'create' a whole on government perspective);
• Contingency planning to respond to risks that have materialized.

While discussions have begun on a process to more regularly monitor and review CBSA policies, programs and partnerships for legal risks, it will not be in place by the end of fiscal year 2005-2006.

Risk as an active factor in decision-making processes, as evidenced by:

• Evergreen Executive Committee assessment of corporate risks and the status of risk management (Corporate Risk Profile);
• An integrated risk management function (organizational focus) linked to corporate decision-making;
• Protocols, processes and tools to ensure the consistent application of risk management principles throughout departmental decision making and delivery; and,
• Continuous organizational learning about risk management and lessons learned from risks successfully identified, mitigated or not.

An initial Risk Base Profile was completed for the Agency for use in building the Risk Based Audit Plan and the multi-year Evaluation Plan. An innovative approach was used to integrate the concepts of the MAF and the Program Activity Architecture (PAA) into the Risk Based plans.

As part of work on the Agency’s Management Control Framework, a Corporate Risk Profile is being developed, building on the initial Risk Base Profile as well as work done by legacy organizations. The new Corporate Risk Profile is an integral part of an Integrated Risk Management Strategy for the CBSA. The Strategy will include senior-level governance for Agency risk management and promote ongoing awareness efforts in order to contribute to continuous organizational learning on risk management, including the sharing of best practices and lessons.

Strong operational risk management methodologies and tools are in place in the Agency.

Highly integrated systems enable CBSA to provide comprehensive intelligence and analysis information to front line operations and Intelligence officers. Some of the systems that highlight the Agency’s commitment to risk management are:

1. TITAN – An automated targeting and risk assessment of electronic cargo, conveyance and supplemental information.
2. ACI – Marine - ACI is about getting the right information at the right time to make informed decisions about whether to examine shipments at the first point of arrival (or in the foreign port) in order to protect Canadian society from health, safety, security, terrorist and contraband threats.
3. NEXUS – Provides simplified border crossing for pre-approved low-risk travellers. This assists in the risk management of the border. Once approved by both Canada and the United States as low-risk travelers, NEXUS members enjoy a simplified entry process while traveling across the Canada – US border. The NEXUS programs enable Canadian and United States customs and immigration authorities to concentrate their efforts on potentially high-risk travellers and goods, thereby upholding security and protection standards at the border.
4. The Passenger Information System (PAXIS) enables the CBSA to perform risk assessments of air travelers prior to their arrival in Canada. The CBSA uses the data received to identify high-risk travelers * for closer examination upon their arrival in Canada.

These systems and tools were planned and implemented based on addressing the highest risk modes first, marine and air. The Agency believes that it has employed very sophisticated and innovative risk management approaches at its highest risk operations.

A workplace that is fair, enabling, healthy and safe in order to provide best services to Canadians, as evidenced by:

• Fair employment and workplace practices and effective labour relations;
• Clear direction, collaboration, respect and support for employees' linguistic rights, diversity and personal circumstances in order to enable them to fulfill their mandate;
• Healthy and safe physical and psychological environment.

The CBSA has faced numerous classification challenges as a result of inheriting three regimes from the legacy organizations and has been working closely with the Public Service Human Resources Agency of Canada (PSHRMAC) on a classification reform initiative to develop a tailored classification plan and structure. The final standard has been approved. The CBSA unions, principally the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), have been engaged in this initiative.

The CBSA continues in a building mode and will work with PSHRMAC in developing its internal classification-monitoring program and in dealing with outstanding classification issues. One of the CBSA’s priorities is to continue to build and work on improving labour relations. CBSA continues to seek out opportunities to increase bargaining agent involvement in workplace matters.

CBSA's Language of Work project’s objective is to reinforce the respect and support of employees’ linguistic rights. The Official Languages Division is hopeful that funds will be allocated to launch the project prior to end of fiscal year 2005-2006. In accordance with the Directive on Staffing of Bilingual Positions, the CBSA is now staffing more bilingual positions on an imperative basis.

With Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) commitments for fiscal 2005-2006 on target for completion with minor exceptions, the CBSA is assuring a healthy and safe workplace. In the area of Policies and Procedures, the Agency anticipates 100% completion. In the area of Officer Training and Provision of protective and uniform equipment, the CBSA anticipates getting very close to 100%; any slippage in this area will be minimal. Facilities improvements will be completed as recommended. Health and Safety management and accountability systems and processes are on schedule for completion with no known barriers.

A workforce that is productive, principled, sustainable and adaptable in order to provide best services to Canadians, as evidenced by:

• The size, mix of skills and diversity of backgrounds to competently perform its duties;
• Reflective of Canada’s population, respectful of Canada’s official languages and performs its duties guided by the values and ethics of the Public Service;
• Renewable and affordable over time;
• Versatile, innovative and engages in continuous learning.

CBSA has an opportunity for improvement with regards to language of work.

Employment Equity (EE) representation levels will be confirmed following the current workforce self-identification campaign with a target date of early Spring 2006 for final results. Once representation levels are known, the 2005-2006 EE strategy will identify specific targeted strategies to address gaps. The CBSA Resourcing Program will allow managers increased flexibility to better target required skills for program delivery. The CBSA has committed to hiring from the EX-01 Visible Minority selection process currently being conducted by the Public Service Commission (PSC).

Employees in designated bilingual offices for services to the public are regularly reminded of their obligations under Part V of the Official Languages Act (OLA). An action plan is currently being implemented in response to audit findings.

The CBSA has developed a web-based learning product for employees who have face-to-face interactions with internal and external clients of the CBSA. This product will be on top of diversity concepts already imbedded into other training modules covering specific functions at a port.

The CBSA and the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on December 7, 2005 that describes how the CBSA and the CHRC will collaborate on preventative strategies, including training, aimed at reducing discrimination and ensuring complaints are resolved quickly.

Embracing Change objectives for visible minorities met, and workforce availability targets met for designated groups, as evidenced by:

• Demonstrated results in meeting Embracing Change targets for: 
  • recruitment;
  • promotions;
  • EX appointments.
• Specific initiatives planned or underway to meet targets of Workforce Availability (WFA) for:
  • women;
  • persons with disabilities;
  • Aboriginal persons;
  • visible minorities.

A well-developed Human Resources (HR) planning process integrated with its business planning, as evidenced by:

• HR planning aligned with the organization’s strategic outcomes and integrated with business planning;
• HR planning incorporating future needs, effective recruitment and retention, succession planning, learning and diversity.

1. Determining business goals (based on Discussion of the Speech from the Throne, TB priorities, CBSA’s Strategic Plan and RPP).
2. Scanning the environment (Deliverables: External and internal scans and workforce analysis). The goal is to have a process that will integrate EE, OL, skills requirements and demographics for a comprehensive Agency plan.
3. Conducting a gap analysis at the local, regional national and program levels.
4. Measuring, monitoring and reporting on progress (Deliverable: integrated process).
5. Setting HR priorities and developing strategies to achieve business goals (Deliverable: local, regional and national action plans).

An approved process and certain tools will be completed by end of fiscal year 2005-2006. In particular, one component of the HR planning process has been the development of a resourcing strategy that involves training, looking at attrition rates, succession planning and identification of future trends and changes to the business line. Workshops are near completion, which will assist managers in doing comprehensive HR planning. Horizontal integration is being achieved through a CBSA Planning Network at the Headquarters level. Vertical integration is being achieved through a Human Resources Regional/Branch Planning Consultation Network. The HR planning function has recently been integrated with the Resourcing and Employment Equity Division to facilitate better integration between the planning and resourcing functions and the development of integrated strategies which include recruitment, development, apprenticeship and learning.

Explicit consideration is being given by programs to the HR implications of achieving the Agency’s priorities, goals and objectives outlined in its Three-Year Strategic Plan, and this will be reflected in the Agency’s RPP.

Legislation and policy on Official Languages in the workplace respected, as evidenced by:

• Composition of the workforce reflecting the presence of both official language communities of Canada;
• Incumbents of positions with bilingual requirements meeting those requirements;
• Use of the official language of their choice by employees in bilingual regions;
• Availability of communications, tools and products in both official languages in bilingual regions;
• Availability of training in both official languages.

Source: CBSA’s 2004–05 Official Languages Annual Review

An effective performance assessment process, as evidenced by:

• Performance agreements that:
  • Have specific outcomes and are results- based;
  • Clearly identify expectations in line with Clerk’s priorities;
  • Require sound financial and human resource management
• Rigorous performance assessment process (e.g. quality and distribution of performance pay) and HR follow up.

The percentage of EXs who received a bonus was slightly lower than for the rest of the public service.

New legislation and delegations of authority, policies and procedures in place, as evidenced by:

• Collaborative labour relations;
• Training, tool kits, guides and other supports available for managers and HR professionals;
• Current and future needs identified leading to their use in clear staffing criteria;
• Internal policies, procedures and monitoring to ensure consistent and fair implementation of new Act.

Both LMCC and ICMS internal policy development were still underway in August (five months after CIF of legislation) although it was indicated that LMCC was holding meetings. Other elements not started as of August included Co-development, Two-tier bargaining (although interested), Exclusions, and Essential Services Agreement. Grievance and Adjudication policy was underway with intention to manage own cases. No training had been done of staff, either internally or at the school. Work had not started on the FAA policy and internal delegation.

PSEA:

An ADAI and sub-delegation arrangements have been approved, with all mandatory policies and processes also approved. Training has been provided to 90% of managers and 100% of HR. The establishment of mechanisms for PSEA monitoring and reporting are underway. A CBSA resourcing policy suite was approved by the CBSA President prior to PSEA Coming-Into-Force, after consultation with management, HR Professionals and union members. The resulting policies will be placed on the CBSA intranet site. As well, conferences to review staffing policies, receive information on the PSST, Official Languages and Employment Equity were held in Toronto and Montréal in November 2005 for HR professionals and HR Directors. HR Specialists have also attended Get Ready Phases 1 and 2. A majority of HR professionals have written the AFKT test and been successful. The Agency has been going through aspects of classification reform (implementation of new short form generic job description and a new classification standard - FB) that are aligned with the PSMA. Classification delegation instruments are in place at the Agency.

Effective investment planning in capital assets, as evidenced by:

• Adequate information on condition and use of capital assets in support of investment planning;
• A long-term plan that integrates all capital asset classes (real property, materiel and IM/IT); and,
• A clear linkage between asset and program delivery.

Solid financial analysis, as evidenced by:

• Frequent and accurate year-end forecasts and variance reporting (most especially at mid-year) showing the organization’s true financial status;
• Analyses of high-risk areas in relation to reference levels by program activity and major funding approvals (real and projected) including anticipated funding pressures and re-profiling trends; and,
• A reasonable history of carry forwards and lapses.

An IM/IT vision and strategy supportive of the organization’s business strategy and government- wide directions, as evidenced by:

• A governance structure that includes program representation and is effective in priority setting of IM/IT investments and resources;
• IM/IT enabled projects that have effective governance and are executed well;
• Strategy and approved plans that reflect a Government of Canada (GoC) Enterprise approach to common IT services;
• Implementation of Management of Government Information (MGI) Policy strategy, based on an IM capacity assessment; and,
• Integrated privacy and security measures.

CBSA is also in the nascent stages of doing an IM capacity check and will need to work to harmonize its IM strategy and practices.

CBSA likely will not comply with the standard on the Management of IT Security (MITS) by December 2006. CBSA has currently completed or almost completed 59% of its MITS requirements, and some fundamental organization and risk management requirements are lacking. The risk is exacerbated by the fact that the CBSA environment is complex, 80% of their systems are critical, and there are dependencies on shared services with the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and with the Canada Revenue Agency.

An effective internal audit function, as evidenced by:

• An appropriate infrastructure to effectively discharge its internal audit responsibilities as outlined in the Internal Audit Policy (governance structure and appropriate level of resources);
• A completed risk-based audit plan; and,
• All reports including progress reports are submitted to TBS for follow-up activities.

Effective Transfer Payment Program management in place, as evidenced by:

• Timely renewal of transfer payment programs;
• Departmental internal audit plans include provision for the review of internal management policies, practices and controls of transfer payment programs;
• Regular audit of transfer payment programs and follow-up.

An appropriate materiel management framework in place, as evidenced by:

• Clear accountabilities consistent with organizational capacity; and,
• Reliable life- cycle cost and performance information that supports decision- making.

Risk-based approach to procurement and contracting management, as evidenced by:

• Clear delegations of authority are tied to knowledge and capacity;
• Demonstrated compliance with delegated contracting authorities and conditions identified by Treasury Board policy; and,
• Explicit oversight, monitoring and on- going review of procurement and contracting function and processes (e.g. Contracts Review Committee, quality of contracting data, timely completion of contracts over $10,000 disclosure information, implementation of audit recommendations where applicable, etc);
• Methods for procuring demonstrating the most cost-effective end-to-end process.

Contracting at CBSA represents less than 1% of the Federal Government activity and volume. In 2004, CBSA awarded 1,987 contracts valued at $11,495K, 97% (1,934) of which were under $25K.

CBSA made 8,942 acquisition card purchases for a value of $2.2M, at an average transaction value of $248.

The CBSA has met its reporting requirements under the Proactive Disclosure of Contracts over $10K. CBSA reported 962 contracts under the Proactive Disclosure of Contracts Over $10K for a value of $44.8M, of which six contracts exceeded $261.3K for a value of $2.9M or 6.5% of contracts over $10K.

CBSA is identified as having low risk in relation to the USA Patriot Act.

Risk-based project management approach, as evidenced by:

• An integrated, achievable up-to-date long-term capital plan or planning document in place that is being implemented (linked to the organization’s key priorities);
• Explicit project management accountability framework, that addresses decision- making and oversight and effective monitoring and ongoing review;
• Properly resourced projects (e.g. project management capacity, appropriately trained officials);
• Demonstrated compliance with delegated project approval requirements and conditions identified by Treasury Board.

The DPR states that the Agency has “developed a systematic project management approach and implementation plan with reporting mechanisms to senior management.”

CBSA reports projects in their DPR (2003-2004) amounting to $239M in total estimated cost.

There are acknowledged delays in some of the projects and CBSA is working to resolve issues.

The CBSA has had success with a number of IM/IT projects, which have achieved national and international recognition.

Quality TB submissions, as evidenced by:

• Draft submissions regularly vetted through common departmental quality control to ensure consistency, clarity and conciseness; 
• Accurate, substantiated and comprehensive financial components; and,
• Frequency with which TB conditions are imposed.

CBSA has developed and has consistently applied its costing model in support of funding requests. There have been a number of TB conditions imposed but most of them were related to the standard PSAT funding conditions and to the upcoming CBSA A-base review. Having said that, CBSA could further improve the quality of TB submissions by providing more thorough options analysis and risk assessment, specifically on projects involving a technology component.

An implemented real property management framework to meet its obligations under TB Real Property policies, as evidenced by:

• An organizational structure which includes clear accountabilities and appropriate delegations;
• Integrated support systems; and 
• An information management framework to provide complete and accurate inventory data.

Organizational compliance with conditions imposed by TB, as evidenced by :

• Timely compliance;
• Adequate engagement with TBS; and,
• Appropriate reporting.

Client centred external service delivery strategy that drives efficiencies, respects client privacy rights and reflects an enterprise view of government services and that results in effective external service delivery, as evidenced by:

• Review of key public-facing services to achieve measurable improvements in responsiveness to client needs, effectiveness and value for money;
• Partnerships with other programs, organizations or jurisdictions to achieve more client-centric or cost-effective service delivery or to align program rules and regulations (e.g., Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs)/service level agreements in place when partnerships established);
• Measurement of the cost-effectiveness of delivery by channel and migration of clients to lower cost channels where appropriate; and
• Measurement of client satisfaction in a transparent way (e.g., reporting to clients and Parliament) using the Common Measurement Tool, and use of the results to guide continued improvement in client satisfaction.

1. The Border Services NEXUS highway program received the Gold Medal at 2005 GTEC for Innovative Service Delivery to Citizens and Businesses (CANPASS Air received Bronze in 2004 for the same category) and an APEX award (Leadership in Service Innovation) in May 2005.*

Pursuing Program Partnerships:

1. The 2005 target for new partnerships was met.

Measuring Cost-effectiveness / Channel Migration:

1. TBS is unaware of any specific activity undertaken by CBSA to measure the cost-effectiveness of service delivery channels.

Client-satisfaction:

1. The Agency has registered for the Common Measurement Tool (CMT). The legacy work on service improvement (former CCRA service elements) continues to be excellent. Work on the development of a more comprehensive set of standards and improved information systems to support measurement against them did not advance over the past year. The Agency has not reported client satisfaction results or its performance in the development and publishing of service standards for the former Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) service element (Import Inspection Program). The Agency should broaden its service improvement activity as outlined in the Service Improvement Policy to include all applicable service offerings.

Horizontal Solutions (enterprise-wide initiatives): Not applicable

Internal service delivery supportive of enterprise- wide (Government of Canada-wide) approach (e.g. shared and common services and infrastructure in IT, HR, Finance, Materiel), as evidenced by:

• Commitments met on using Secure Channel services (timing and transaction volumes);
• Active participation in enterprise-wide initiatives and adoption of Shared service and systems.

1. CBSA prefers to participate in CA-SSO implementation at a time subsequent to CAS Wave 1.
2. The agency is engaged in broad community discussions and provides input in dialogue on enterprise wide internal service delivery for Corporate Administrative Services (HR, Finance and Materiel Management) and IT services.

Secure Channel:

1. All departments and agencies participate in common, core Secure Channel services: Data Network Service, Secure Application Key Management Service and Federated Infrastructure National Directory Service.
2. There are no known plans to integrate program delivery applications with Secure Channel.

External communications in both official languages, as evidenced by:

• Availability of communications, tools and products in both official languages, for external services to clients.

Compliance with service delivery and user fee requirements, as evidenced by:

• Performance information for all user fees to which the Act applies; it is based on the DPR (or an alternative report employed by the department) and observations of departmental compliance with the User Fees Act relative to the disclosure of service standards.

Compliance with approved financial authorities and delegations, as evidenced by:

• Issues identified through departmental contacts, Internal Audit reports, Office of the Auditor General (OAG) reports, by Program Sectors, and through review of media reports or other relevant sources of information.