This Financial Transactions and Report Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC)is not governed by Treasury Board policies on the Code of Ethics harassment, or disclosure of wrongdoing in the workplace.

1.1 Organizational performance for each family of Public Service values, as defined in the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Service (Unrated)

This organization is not governed by Treasury Board policies on the Code of Ethics, harassment, or disclosure of wrongdoing in the workplace.

1.2 Extent to which leaders foster a culture of respect and integrity (Unrated)

This organization is not governed by Treasury Board policies on the Code of Ethics, harassment, or disclosure of wrongdoing in the workplace.

1.3 Extent to which the organization maintains and promotes appropriate, accessible avenues for disclosure of wrongdoing (Unrated)

This organization is not governed by Treasury Board policies on the Code of Ethics, harassment, or disclosure of wrongdoing in the workplace.

FINTRAC‘s strategic outcome and Program Activity Architecture  (PAA) are consistent with its mandate. However, it is unclear how FINTRAC will measure its specific contributions towards its single strategic Ootcome. FINTRAC has not developed performance measures for this strategic outcome. Also, the alignment within its PAA, between its single Program Activity and its four sub-activities is questionable. It is unclear how the outcomes of the program activity will be different from those of the four sub-activities. FINTRAC should clarify its PAA.

2.1 Extent to which the organization's Strategic Outcomes and Program Activity Architecture are consistent with its mandate (Acceptable)

FINTRAC 's strategic outcome (Financial intelligence that contributes to the detection and deterrence of money laundering and terrorist activities financing in Canada and abroad) is consistent with its mandate and its legislative objectives as prescribed by the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act.

2.2 Clarity and measurability of the organization's strategic outcomes (Opportunity for Improvement)

FINTRAC's strategic outcome (Financial intelligence that contributes to the detection and deterrence of money laundering and terrorist activities financing in Canada and abroad) provides a general indication of the organization's long-term goals. The strategic outcome, however, is vague and should be clarified to clearly demonstrate the outcome commitment of the organization.

The measurability of the Strategic Outcome is unclear. FINTRAC did not develop performance measures for its strategic outcome.

FINTRAC's organizational structure was revised in late 2005-06 to support the Centre's evolving program delivery functions. As a result, there is currently a gap between the organizational structure and the Program Activity Architecture which should be addressed through FINTRAC’s revision of its Program Activity Architecture in the coming months.

Most management committees meet on a weekly or bi-weekly basis except for the Information Technology Steering Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Internal Audit Committee, which meet on an "as required" basis. Proper diligence is required to ensure that the Internal Audit Committee meets at least four times a year, as per the requirements of TBS' Directive on Departmental Audit Committees.

FINTRAC uses its Report on Plans and Priorities as its key corporate plan. It is currently in the process of developing a strategic plan in consultation with its staff.

The Departmental Performance Report needs to include deeper discussion of the linkages between the program activity and the strategic outcome. Emphasis of the performance should focus on results at the program activity and strategic outcome levels instead of on meeting priorities. The Report on Plans and Priorities contains results statements at the program activity and sub-activity level, but the Departmental Performance Report does not indicate whether these results were achieved.

3.1 Extent to which accountabilities of senior officials and internal decision-making structures are aligned to the organization's strategic outcomes (Acceptable)

A high-level organizational chart can be found in FINTRAC's 2006-07 Report on Plans and Priorities.

FINTRAC's organizational structure was revised in late 2005-06 to support the Centre's evolving delivery of its activities and to create a more streamlined, effective and cohesive organization. As a result, there is currently a disconnect between the organizational structure and the Program Activity Architecture. FINTRAC expects to update its Program Activity Architecture in the coming months to more accurately reflect the new accountability structure.

Most management committees meet on a weekly or bi-weekly basis except for the Information Technology Steering Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Internal Audit Committee, which meet on an "as required" basis. Proper diligence is required to ensure that the Internal Audit Committee meets at least four times a year, as per the requirements of Treasury Board's Directive on Departmental Audit Committees.

FINTRAC's management committee oversees the organization's responses to evaluations. Following an Auditor General review of the organization, FINTRAC's management committee created a team to implement the Auditor General's recommendations. An External Review Committee was also created to review the implementation plan, which was then presented to the Management Committee for approval.

3.2 Extent to which Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Reports are aligned and based on the approved MRRS (Opportunity for Improvement)

The assessment of this measure is based on the 2005-06 Reports on Plans and Priorities and the 2005-06 Departmental Performance Reports which are the reports of the most recently completed reporting cycle.

The program activity is aligned to the strategic outcome in logical manner that is easy for the reader to follow. However, the Departmental Performance Report needs to include deeper discussion of the linkages between the program activity and the strategic outcome. 

All priorities outlined in the Report on Plans and Priorities are addressed in the Departmental Performance Report. However, the emphasis of the performance story is focused on meeting priorities instead of results at the program activity and strategic outcome levels. The Report on Plans and Priorities contains results statements at the program activity and sub-activity level, but the Departmental Performance Report does not indicate whether these results were achieved.

3.5 Presence of a risk-based corporate plan which: is fully aligned to strategic outcomes; serves to align sector business plans; integrates strategic plans, HR plans, and resource plans; and is regularly monitored for progress and performance (Opportunity for Improvement)

FINTRAC uses its Report on Plans and Priorities as its key corporate plan, which is updated on a yearly basis. It does not have a risk-based corporate plan and there is no demonstration that other plans are integrated with the Report on Plans and Priorities. However, FINTRAC is currently in the process of developing a strategic plan in consultation with its staff.

FINTRAC also developed a risk-based compliance program composed of awareness activities, the monitoring of data quality, compliance questionnaires and examinations to prioritize its business actions.

As FINTRAC uses its Report on Plans and Priorities as its key corporate plan, linkages between the plan and strategic outcomes are strong and clearly visible. 

FINTRAC participates in the Public Security and Anti-Terrorism initiative, and is a key player in the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing initiative under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA). In 2004, the Office of the Auditor General produced an audit highlighting certain weaknesses in the PCMLTFA initiative. Appropriate actions have been taken and were completed in 2006 to address those weaknesses.

Consideration was given to using the IT-Shared Services Organization when the organization expanded, but this option was not selected, as it did not meet FINTRAC’s security requirements.

FINTRAC is part of the Finance portfolio.

4.1 Level of organizational engagement (e.g. appropriateness, leadership, resource commitment) on horizontal policy and program initiatives (Strong)

4.1 Level of organizational engagement on horizontal policy program initiatives (appropriateness)

FINTRAC participates in the Public Security and Anti-Terrorism initiative, and is a key player in the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing initiative under the PCMLTFA.

In 2004, the Office of the Auditor General produced an audit highlighting certain weaknesses in the PCMLTFA initiative.  These wearnesess related to the creation of an effective management framework to provide direction and coordinate anti-money laundering efforts at the federal level; and, the establishment of a set of written criteria to guide FINTRAC analysts and its Disclosure Committee in determining which transactions to disclose.  They also included the identification of changes improve the value of FINTRAC disclosures, the establishment of public target turnaround times for the voluntary information reports FINTRAC receives, and the creation of effective mechanisms to monitoring the results of disclosures. Appropriate actions have were taken and completed in 2006 to address those weaknesses.

A five-year evaluation of the PCMLTFA took place in 2004. Due to the scarcity of quantitative data available on the results of some aspects of the initiative, the evaluators recommended that another full evaluation of the NICML be carried out in 2009.

4.1 Level of organizational engagement on horizontal policy program initiatives (Leadership Engagement)

The PCMLTFA initiative is core to FINTRAC’s mandate. Consequently, 100% of its activities and its governance structure are aligned to support anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing activities. FINTRAC has been an important player in the initiative, working closely with the Department of Finance and other partners to ensure the coordination of activities.

4.1 Level of organizational engagement on horizontal policy program initiatives (Resource commitment)

See above (4.1 – Leadership Engagement)

4.2 Level of organizational engagement (e.g. appropriateness, leadership, resource commitment) on horizontal administrative initiatives or other government-wide transformational initiatives, as set out in the Government's Agenda, the Clerk's Priorities, etc. (Not Applicable)

Measure 4.2 focuses on the level of engagement in horizontal administrative initiatives and other large-scale transformational efforts. For this round of MAF, departments were assessed on their lead or participant role in either Corporate Administrative Shared Services (CASS), or the IT-Shared Service Organization (IT-SSO), or their lead role with Service Canada, Real Property and Procurement Transformation.

Given this context, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada has been assigned a rating of "not applicable" for measure 4.2 for this round of MAF.

4.3 Presence of a clearly articulated portfolio management structure or plan and governance mechanisms to foster regular dialogue (Not Applicable)

FINTRAC is part of the Finance portfolio. This measure does not apply because this entity is not considered a lead portfolio department.

*

FINTRAC provided adequate information in its first draft of Treasury Board submissions to support the requests and responded well to feedback, regularly making all recommended changes. Linkages to the organization's mandate was fully detailed.

Consultations with central agencies are usually initiated early. The planning takes into consideration the different steps in the process and usually builds in adequate timelines in terms of meeting Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.

FINTRAC's Corporate Services Branch is involved in reviewing draft Treasury Board submissions. The Department of Finance also acts as an additional layer of due diligence.

However, the organization should carefully consider reallocation opportunities or cash-management potential for new initiatives carefully before seeking new funding to address short-term pressures.

5.1 Accuracy and reliability of supporting information in MCs and TB Subs (Opportunity for Improvement)

FINTRAC"s Treasury Board submissions usually provide adequate information in first drafts to support the request. FINTRAC has a good response to feedback, usually making all recommended changes. Financial components are generally accurate and clearly detailed. However, in one case in the past year FINTRAC sought funding to address an urgent requirement, but lapsed afterwards close to the equivalent of its request. In another case, it sought funding for a portion of an initiative, which was later cash-managed from existing reference levels.

5.2 Quality, adequacy and soundness of analysis (including outcomes, factual analysis, performance history, options, business case, financial and non-financial performance projections, risk factors and mitigation strategies to address audit findings) (Acceptable)

The information provided in the first drafts of Treasury Board submissions usually supports the request. Outcomes are clearly stated and options fully detailed. FINTRAC generally has a good response to TBS feedback, and recommended changes are incorporated in the documents.

Linkages to the Centre's mandate are usually fully detailed. Linkages to the organization's Program Activity Architecture are secondary, as FINTRAC has only one program activity.

5.3 Appropriate stakeholder consultations on MCs and TB Subs (Strong)

FINTRAC extensively consults with the other stakeholders involved in the initiatives under the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act(PCMLTFA) and central organizations when seeking additional funding, or when expanding its mandate in accordance with the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing legislation.

The level and timeliness of consultations are appropriate to ensure a full understanding of the issues at hand by the stakeholders.

5.4 Timeliness of consultations with central agencies on MCs and TB Subs (Strong)

Consultations with central agencies are usually initiated early. The planning takes into consideration the different steps in the process and most of the time builds in adequate timelines in terms of meeting TBS requirements.

FINTRAC generally has a good response to stakeholder feedback, and recommended changes are incorporated in the documents.

5.5 Presence of a quality control process on MCs and TB Subs and the extent of its rigour and effectiveness (Strong)

The Corporate Services Branch is usually involved in reviewing draft Treasury Board submissions. The Department of Finance also acts as an additional layer of due diligence. Due to internal portfolio processes, FINTRAC's Senior Financial Officer and Director must approve and sign Treasury Board submissions before they are submitted to the Minister for approval.

Treasury Board submissions are clearly written and there is consistency in the language used across the document.

In completion of a 2006 capacity assessment template submitted to the Treasury Board Secretariat Centre of Excellence for Evaluation, FINTRAC noted that as representatives of Canada on the Financial Action Task Force, peer evaluations are conducted of their operations and they have participated in the horizontal evaluation "National Initiative to Combat Money Laundering" completed in the fall 2005. However, FINTRAC does not have a dedicated evaluation unit for independent review of internal programs and policies. 

Although this small organization must comply with the TB Evaluation Policy in establishing an evaluation capacity, resource restrictions do not allow for full internal evaluation capacity at this time.

It should be noted that a clustered, shared-service model is being proposed by TBS in the new Evaluation Policy, anticipated to be approved early in fiscal 2007-08, that would provide small agencies access to evaluation services.

6.1 Progress in moving toward full coverage of the organization's program base (both G&C and other programs) on a five-year cycle (Unrated)

6.2 Neutrality of evaluation and focus on program improvement and value for money – including program performance and relevance (Unrated)

6.3 Extent to which evaluations are used to support decision-making in the organization (Unrated)

All of FINTRAC's functional areas (human resources, finance, procurement, asset management, operations, information technology) have appropriate systems in place to gather information on the inputs used to produce the Centre's outputs. The integration of financial and non-financial performance information comes together in several ways during the business planning cycle, with financial resources assigned to support approved priorities. Monthly financial reports are produced, presented to Management Committee and Executive Committee for review, approval and decisions to allocate incremental resources or reallocate existing resources.

The program activity is aligned to the strategic outcome in a logical manner. However, the Report on Plans and Priorities needs to include deeper discussion of the linkages between the program activity and the strategic outcome. Furthermore, neither the report on Plans and Priorities or the Departmental Performance Report adequately describe the program activity, making it difficult to determine what exactly the centre achieved at the program activity level. 

It is difficult to verify the performance results included in the Departmental Performance Report as the centre does not cite the sources of its information. 

The Report on Plans and Priorities does contain statements outlining expected results at the program activity level, but the Departmental Performance Report does not discuss whether the expected results are being achieved.

7.1 Extent to which integrated management information from financial, HR, payroll, asset and real property and program performance information systems are readily accessible for corporate decision-making (Strong)

All of FINTRAC's functional areas (human resources, finance, procurement, asset management, operations, information technology) have appropriate systems in place to gather information on the inputs used to produce the Centre's outputs. The Management Committee ensures that corporate decisions are taken with adequate corporate information on resources inputs. Operational statistics are provided to senior management on a monthly and quarterly basis.

The integration of financial and non-financial performance information comes together in several ways during the business planning cycle, with financial resources assigned to support approved priorities. The process begins with the centre's long-term strategic direction outlined in its strategic plan. An operational plan is then developed prior to the beginning of a fiscal year, in which priorities for the fiscal year are articulated. Once approved, resources are allocated according to approved priorities. Monitoring and reviews occur regularly (monthly after the first quarter) and ; resources can be reallocated to support changing priorities.

Monthly financial reports are produced presented to Management Committee and Executive Committee for review, approval and decisions to allocate incremental resources or reallocate existing resources.

The chart of accounts is set up to support the approved Program Activity Architecture.

Performance information is provided to senior management through the centre's committee structure by all functional areas to support proposed investments and potential reallocations of resources within FINTRAC's existing program base.

FINTRAC has a fully functionally bilingual Human Resources Management Information System. Managers have access to a full range of information pertaining to their own employees, which supports them in their managerial responsibilities. They are also able to produce detailed and accurate reports when needed.  

FINTRAC has a fully functionally bilingual financial System reporting system, as well as a Salary Management System. Managers have access to a full range of information pertaining to their area of responsibility to assist them in discharging their managerial responsibilities.

The Automated Material Management Information System software is used as a sub-ledger to manage the centre's capital assets. Facilities functions and related information are compiled in various MS applications and stored in the records and documentation management system.

7.2 Extent to which clear and integrated performance expectations in the RPP are tracked and reported on in the DPR (Opportunity for Improvement)

The assessment of this measure is based on the 2005-06 Reports on Plans and Priorities and the 2005-06 Departmental Performance Reports which are the reports of the most recently completed reporting cycle.

The program activity is aligned to the strategic outcome in a logical manner. However, the report needs to include deeper discussion of the linkages between the program activity and the strategic outcome. Further, neither report adequately describes the program activity, making it difficult to determine exactly what the centre achieved at the Program activity level. 

The Report on Plans and Priorities does contain statements outlining expected results at the program activity level, but the Departmental Performance Report does not discuss whether the expected results were achieved.

7.3 Extent to which public performance reports integrate credible performance information (beyond activities and outputs to results) (Opportunity for Improvement)

The assessment of this measure is based on the 2005-06 Reports on Plans and Priorities and the 2005-06 Departmental Performance Reports which are the reports of the most recently completed reporting cycle.

There is a lack of overall performance information at the program activity level. The report includes details of key results by priority, but there is no discussion of what the performance is at the program activity level or how program activity level performance contributes to the achievement of results at the strategic outcome level.

It is difficult to verify the performance results included in the Departmental Performance Report as the centre does not cite the sources of its information. The report discusses the implementation of a new information technology system that provides improvements to the quality of reporting, but it is unclear if the performance reported came from this system.

The Departmental Performance Report reports actual results in a logical manner that enables the reader to easily link between resources used and results achieved. However, a deeper discussion of how the results at the sub-activity level contribute to achievements at the program activity level would help substantiate value for money.

FINTRAC is currently entering a period of change as a result of workload pressures and operational enhancements linked to Budget 2006 and proposed legislative changes to the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (PCMLTFA). Various processes have been launched to ensure staff buy-in and understanding of the changes, and stakeholders and partners under the PCMLTFA have been engaged in the change in its early steps.

An Operations Training Working Group was created and is responsible for developing a coordinated approach to deliver training. An orientation session for new operations employees was developed and presented for the first time in June 2006. A core corporate training course which includes training on the delegation of authority, salary management system, security and privacy awareness, operational standard for business continuity planning, occupational health and safety training, etc. was created. FINTRAC's strategic plan established a performance indicator relative to learning investments, and learning plans became an integral aspect of performance agreements with every employee and ensured an ongoing review of learning goals and investments.

FINTRAC’s current strategic planning exercise is included extensive consultations with more than 100 employees from all levels and sectors of the organization.

FINTRAC participates in a number of surveys each year to gather information on best practices in the private sector as well as in the public sector. Several human resources advisors in the human resources branch are members of network groups and participate in forums where professionals in the human resources field assess and identify opportunities for the implementation of best practices.

8.1 Level of organizational engagement on change management (Acceptable)

Although FINTRAC is a relatively small organization (183 full-time equivalents) and can easily involve all staff in changes that affect it, it is recommended that a formal change-management strategy be developed for large initiatives.

FINTRAC is currently entering a period of change as a result of workload pressures and operational enhancements linked to the Budget 2006 announcement on, and proposed legislative changes to, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act. This will lead to a significant increase in workload and number of employees in the organization and potential organizational changes.

Various processes were launched to ensure staff buy-in and understanding of the changes. Sector meetings including the Director were launched and sector retreats to discuss implications were held. Broad engagement processes were launched for the implementation of the new functions through policy working groups. Regular internal processes, such as for strategic and operational planning, will provide additional opportunities to keep employees informed on the changes.

*

FINTRAC has a well-developed information management program and engages in lessons-learned and information-sharing sessions. A number of initiatives have taken place in 2006 to enhance cross-sector learning.

There are four basic steps that FINTRAC follows for new initiatives: 1) all new initiatives are presented to the management, business and executive committees; 2) the committees approve the initiatives; 3) resources are allocated to support the initiatives; and 4) the committees provide oversight of the initiatives.

8.2 Extent to which individual and organizational learning contributes to organizational change management strategy (Strong)

The provision of training, for new employees as well as current ones, was identified by a number of working groups. As a result, an Operations Training Working Group was created and is responsible for developing a coordinated approach to training. This group was tasked with furthering a number of recommendations identified from a staff retreat held shortly after FINTRAC's reorganization. These recommendations included learning/networking events, understanding roles and responsibilities, training on policies and procedures, and training for new analysts.

An orientation session for new operations employees was developed and presented for the first time in June 2006. In addition to the orientation session, the employees will be able to participate in training on Internet toolkit, systems, the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Proceeds of Crime Unit, etc.

In addition to the training being developed in the operations sector, FINTRAC also developed this core corporate training includes training on the delegation of authority, salary management system, security and privacy awareness, operational standard for business continuity planning, occupational health and safety etc.

FINTRAC's strategic plan will establish a performance indicator relative to learning investments. Learning plans became an integral aspect of performance agreements with every employee and ensured ongoing review of learning goals and investments.

An Operations Training Working Group was created and is responsible for developing a coordinated approach to deliver training. The Operations Training Working Group will engage in a second phase to conduct training assessment needs to develop a long-term learning strategy. A leadership curriculum for the managers will also be developed.

8.3 Clarity of corporate vision, and commitment to continuous improvement and innovation (Strong)

FINTRAC's Executive Committee annually reviews the centre's mission and vision in preparation for production of the Report on Plans and Priorities.

FINTRAC's current strategic planning exercise included extensive consultations with more than 100 employees from all levels and sectors of the organization to ensure that its mission and vision are relevant and understood throughout the organization.

Implementation strategies are currently under development and will be complete before the end of the fiscal year.

FINTRAC participates in a number of surveys each year in order to gather information on best practices in the private sector as well as in the public sector.

Several human resources advisors in the Human Resources Branch are members of network groups and participate in forums where professionals in the human resources field assess and identify opportunities for the implementation of best practices. This participation allows FINTRAC to discuss issues, identify challenges, and learn about implementation strategies. 

As a fairly small federal organization, FINTRAC is making steady progress at establishing primary risk foundations at the operational level, but to date, it is not evident that there is effective integrated risk management at the corporate or entity-wide level consistent with MAF measures.

The organization should develop an understanding of the major risks it faces and explicitly include them in planning further, major risks should be assigned to the executive team for tracking progress made in addressing its major risks.

9.1 Level of engagement of the senior executive in corporate risk management (e.g. organizational focus, senior executive accountabilities, risk mitigation strategies, Business Continuity Plans, Emergency Preparedness Plans) (Opportunity for Improvement)

FINTRAC is making progress at establishing primary risk management foundations at the operational level. For example, the 2006-07 Report on Plans and Priorities notes that FINTRAC uses a risk-based cooperative approach to regulatory compliance and follows an examination approach  to identify sectors and individuals with a high risk of non-compliance. In addition, the centre has developed a security policy and supporting IM/IT strategy to safeguard information holdings. Lastly,  The Modern Management Action Plan (2003) cites "comprehensive business continuity plans" as a 2003-04 action item and a risk-based audit planning approach has been developed. More effort is required to embed integrated risk managment at the senior-management level.

9.3 Currency of the corporate risk assessment and profile (Opportunity for Improvement)

The centre does not yet have some of the corporate risk management foundations expected by the Management Accountability Framework. The centre began work on a corporate risk profile in 2005-06. This exercise formally documented risks that the Centre felt were applicable and for which it had already initiated mitigation strategies. However, the profile remains a draft.

9.4 Extent to which corporate planning is informed by risk (Attention Required)

It is not evident how corporate plans and priorities noted in the 2006-07 Report on Plans and Priorities were informed by risk. Further information could change this rating.

9.5 Risk Mitigation strategies are in place for key program and corporate risks (Opportunity for Improvement)

There are some risk mitigation strategies in place for new initiatives or decisions required by the Executive Committee, but it is not evident that mitigation strategies are in place for key program and corporate risks or that they are monitored by senior management. Further information could change this rating.

Due to the fact that this organization is a separate employer, the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada does not collect information needed for a large portion of this assessment. Therefore, this indicator is unrated.  However,  there is opportunity for improvement in the number and percentage of supervisors that meet the language requirements of their position.   

10.1 FAIRNESS OF EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE PRACTICES AND EFFECTIVENESS OF LABOUR RELATIONS (Unrated)

Given that this organization is a separate employer, this measure is unrated.

10.1.1 Number of founded complaints related to Staffing (Unrated)

10.1.2 Number and frequency of removal of delegation of authority related to staffing (Unrated)

10.1.4 Number of classification grievances (Unrated)

Does not form part of core public administration

Source:  Population Affiliation Report - Overview

10.1.5 Development, promotion or adoption of PSMA practices (Unrated)

10.1.6 Number and pattern of promotions (EE groups) (Unrated)

The Public Service Human Resources Management Agency, Diversity Division, was not in a position to perform an assessment of all the separate agencies, as the data required was not available.  The employment equity policy centre will not generate an assessment this round.

10.1.9 ICMS is in place (Unrated)

10.1.10 Effective LMCC in place (meet on a regular basis, effectiveness rated by both management and unions) (Unrated)

Not subject to Informal Conflict Management System (ICMS), Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) and are not unionized, so Labour Management Consultation Committee (LMCC) not applicable.

10.1.12 Survey question index (Unrated)

10.2 EXTENT TO WHICH THE FOLLOWING ARE EXHIBITED IN THE WORKPLACE: CLEAR DIRECTION; COLLABORATION; RESPECT AND SUPPORT FOR EMPLOYEES' LINGUISTIC RIGHTS, DIVERSITY AND PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES (Unrated)

Given that this organization is a separate employer, this measure is unrated.  However, there is opportunity for improvement in the number and percentage of supervisors that meet the language requirements of their position.   

10.2.1 Organizational language capacity to provide personnel and central services in both official languages (Strong)

The Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre has 114 employees providing internal services. Of these, 114 are able to provide these services in English, and 88 are able to provide them in French.  

Source: Official Languages Information System II (OLIS II) – Data as of March 31, 2006.

10.2.2 Number and percentage of supervisors that meet the requirements of their position (Opportunity for Improvement)

The proportion of supervisors who are required to be bilingual and who meet the language requirements of their positions is 75.6%. This proportion is lower than in 2003 (91.2%) and 2004 (86.8%).

Sources: Official Languages Information System II (OLIS II) – Data as of March 31, 2006, 2005-2006 Review.

10.2.3 Availability of work, information and communication tools in both official languages (Acceptable)

The analysis of the annual review found that in general, Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre employees have access to work tools and computer systems in both official languages. In general, communications with employees are in both official languages.

Source: 2005-2006 Annual Review.

10.2.4 Absence of complaints related to language of work (Strong)

There were no complaints related to language of work.

Sources: 2005-2006 Annual Review; Commissioner of Official Languages report.

10.2.5 Evidence of targets in PMA's / planning documents (Unrated)

10.2.6 EE representation and separation rate (Unrated)

The Public Service Human Resources Management Agency, Diversity Division, was not in a position to perform an assessment of all the separate agencies, as the data required was not available.  The employment equity policy centre will not generate an assessment this round.

10.2.7 Number of discrimination complaints (based on race, colour, gender, person with disability) (Unrated)

10.2.10 Survey question index (Unrated)

10.3 EXTENT TO WHICH THE WORKPLACE IS A HEALTHY AND SAFE PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT (Unrated)

Given that this organization is a separate employer, this measure is unrated.

10.3.4 Number of EAP usage (Unrated)

The Policy on Employee Assistance Program (EAP) does not apply to separate agencies.  PSHRMAC/TBS are not mandated to assess separate agencies' EAPs.

10.3.5 Percentage of employees who get adequate recognition from their immediate supervisor when they do a good job (Q21) (Unrated)

10.3.6 Survey question index (Unrated)

Due to the fact that FINTRAC is a separate employer, the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada does not collect information needed for a large portion of this assessment. Therefore, this indicator is unrated.

For those areas that could be assessed (official languages), the organization demonstrated strong practices.

11.1 CAPACITY OF THE WORKFORCE TO PERFORM ITS DUTIES (e.g. ITS SIZE, MIX OF SKILLS, AND DIVERSITY OF BACKGROUNDS) (Unrated)

Given that this organization is a separate employer, this measure is unrated.

11.1.4 The department has an effective Performance Management Program for executives, based on the annual and triennial scorecard (Unrated)

11.1.7 Survey question index (Unrated)

11.2 EXTENT TO WHICH THE WORKFORCE REFLECTS CANADA'S POPULATION, RESPECTS OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AND IS GUIDED BY PUBLIC SERVICE VALUES AND ETHICS (Unrated)

Given that this organization is a separate employer, this measure is unrated. For those areas that could be assessed, the organization demonstrated strong practices.

11.2.1 Representation, Hiring, Gaps (Unrated)

The Public Service Human Resources Management Agency, Diversity Division, was not in a position to perform an assessment of all the separate agencies, as the data required was not available.  The EE policy centre will not generate an assessment this round.

11.2.2 Participation rate of Anglophones and Francophones (Acceptable)

Anglophones: 69%
Francophones: 31%

These participation rates are acceptable in light of the insitition's mandate, the location of its offices, and the members of the public that it serves.

Source: Official Languages Information System II (OLIS II) – Data as of March 31, 2006.

11.2.3 Absence of complaints with regard to equitable participation (Strong)

There were no complaints with regard to equitable participation.

Sources: 2005-2006 Annual Review; Commissioner of Official Languages reports.

11.2.4 Respect for Treasury Board's official languages policies (Strong)

According to the data available as of March 31, 2006, this organization has 203 employees.

As a separate employer, the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre is not subject to the Public Service Employment Act, and is not required to report on the number of bilingual positions held by bilingual employees.

The analysis of the annual review found that in general, employees receive training in the official language of their choice.

All indications show that the organization is fulfilling its obligations with regard to service to the public. Its Web site is fully bilingual. The Public Service Human Resource Management Agency of Canada's audit did not find any shortcomings in the area of active offer. Communications and documentation for the public are produced in both official languages.

The work environment is conducive to the use of both official languages. In general, the organization is able to fulfill its language of work obligations.

Sources:  Official Languages Information System II (OLIS II) – Data as of March 31, 2006; 2005-2006 Annual Review; 2004 Public Service Human Resource Management Agency of Canada audit.

11.2.5 Survey question index (Unrated)

11.3 EXTENT TO WHICH THE WORKFORCE IS RENEWABLE AND AFFORDABLE (Unrated)

Given that this organization is a separate employer, this measure is unrated.

11.3.1 Is there a process in place to integrate HR and business planning? (Unrated)

11.3.2 Does the department have an HR plan? (Unrated)

11.4 EXTENT TO WHICH THE WORKFORCE IS VERSATILE, INNOVATIVE AND CONTINUOUSLY LEARNS (Unrated)

Given that this organization is a separate employer, this measure is unrated.

11.4.1 Percentage of managers accountable for the learning plan of their employees (Unrated)

11.4.4 Percentage of deployments in relation to number of employees (Unrated)

11.4.5 Participation in development programs (MTP, CAP, AETP, AEXDP, Interchange Canada) (Unrated)

11.4.7 Survey question index (Unrated)

Within FINTRAC, all five core information management functions fall under the direct responsibility of the Manager of Information Management, who reports directly to the CIO of IM/IT. FINTRAC developed a Strategy and Information Management Plan in 2004, following an evaluation of the results of an Information Management Capacity Check in 2003. Many of the recommendations from the capacity check have been successfully implemented and continue to guide the ongoing information management program objectives.

The privacy and confidentiality of information is dependent on good security practices. FINTRAC is compliant with most of the Management of Information Technology Security Standard with no significant deficiencies.  

Transparency and accountability in privacy and access to information practices are essential to good information management. This year's assessment of this dimension was primarily limited to the department's compliance with public reporting requirements. FINTRAC's public reporting did not contain all the required elements necessary to fully inform parliamentarians and the public on certain aspects of its management of privacy and access to information. Specifically, FINTRAC's chapter in the TBS Info Source publication requires revisions to its information holdings. The TBS Info Source publication is used to inform the public about government information holdings, including personal information.

12.1 Level of corporate engagement in information management (integrated departmental management framework and governance structure that ensures IM strategies support departmental outcomes) (Strong)

Within FINTRAC, all five of the functions fall under the direct responsibility of the Manager of Information Management who reports directly to the Chief Information Officer of Information Management /Information Technology.

12.2 Degree of implementation of an IM strategy which, for large departments, is based upon a capacity assessment (Strong)

FINTRAC developed a Strategy and Information Management Plan in 2004, following an evaluation of the results of an Information Management Capacity Check in 2003. Many of the recommendations from the capacity check have been successfully implemented and continue to guide the ongoing IM program objectives.

12.3 Timeliness and completeness of reporting in support of access and privacy requirements (Acceptable)

Measure 12.3 assessed an institution's timeliness and completeness in terms of public reporting on access to information and privacy activities through annual reports to Parliament and descriptions of information holdings through the TBS Info Source publication. The key elements of this measure included an assessment of the institution's timeliness in meeting the legislated deadlines for submission of its annual reports to Parliament on access to information and privacy, input for the institution's chapter of the TBS Info Source publication, and the completeness of the reported information. This included whether or not the institution fulfilled specific requirements for reporting that were outlined in TBS Implementation Reports for preparing such documents.

FINTRAC met the legislated deadlines for submission of its annual reports to Parliament on access to information and privacy, input for the institution's chapter of the TBS Info Source publication, and met most of the reporting requirements concerning completeness of that information. However, FINTRAC's chapter of the annual TBS Info Source publication requires some revisions to its descriptions of information holdings to facilitate the right of access under the Access to Information Act.

12.5 Extent to which critical information is secure and an effective privacy regime is in place, monitored, and managed (Acceptable)

Measure 12.5 assessed the key elements required to maintain an effective privacy regime. This measure included an assessment of the accuracy of Personal Information Banks; an assertion that an appropriate delegation of authority is in place at the institution, as required under the Privacy Act; and, finally, that the institution demonstrated that it was successful in protecting personal information through effective information technology security measures.

Deficiencies were noted in the descriptions of FINTRAC's Personal Information Banks in the TBS Info Source publication.

FINTRAC is compliant with most of the Management of Information Technology Security Standard with no significant deficiencies.

The fundamentals of information technology governance, information technology planning, and measurement of information technology value are in place.

There is a Chief Information Officer who has full scope of responsibility for information technology within the organization. This indicates an appropriate span of control for ensuring standards and processes are in place for consistency of design, development, implementation, operation and maintenance of information technology solutions and services across the organization. The level of information technology planning is considered acceptable through the existence of an information technology plan, which is aligned with the organization's strategic plans and priorities. The organization uses and has plans for the appropriate use of information technology shared services from the Information Technology Shared Services Branch of PWGSC.

13.1 Level of corporate engagement in IT management (senior executive accountability, integrated corporate and IT governance, IT planning) (Strong)

There is a Chief Information Officer, the Deputy Director, reporting to the Director of FINTRAC.

The Chief Information Officer has significant influence over the Computer Science function in the organization. All information technology development and support functions for the organization are performed by the information management / information technology sector which is viewed by the agency as a key business enabler and is closely aligned to the business.

There is an information technology plan, the information technology Plan for Applications and Systems Projects 2005-06 to 2008-09, and a Disaster Recovery Plan. Also, the information technology Plan is being revised based on new initiatives and will be resubmitted to Treasury Board by the fall of 2007.

13.2 Demonstrated value from IT investments and, where appropriate, plans for appropriate use of IT shared services (Strong)

Evidence of demonstrated value from information technology investments includes the Base Mining Technologies (a major overhaul of FINTRAC's reporting and base analytical infrastructure).

The organization has plans for appropriate use of information technology shared services. The Information Technology Shared Services Branch of PWGSC was consulted as part of the discovery process for FINTRAC's Business Continuity Project in an attempt to share disaster recovery facilities. FINTRAC also has an ongoing interest in the Secure Channel infrastructure and looks forward to making use of secure channel when identity management for businesses is addressed, as they are the majority of FINTRAC's reporting entities.

The Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada is not a major investor in either real property or moveable assets, and the relatively simple planning and management requirements related to these assets are met effectively through the management frameworks in place.

14.1 Extent to which appropriate long-term capital planning is in place (e.g. adequacy of asset information on condition/use, inclusion of all asset classes (real property, material, IM/IT), alignment with program delivery) (Not Applicable)

Assessment and rating of measure 14.1 apply only to organizations listed in appendix A of the Policy on Long-term Capital Plans, and other organizations, which are required to submit a Long-term Capital Plan to Treasury Board for approval.

14.2 Extent to which an appropriate real property management framework is in place for custodians and tenants (e.g. accountability/decision-making structures, information systems, certified completeness and accuracy of national inventory data) (Strong)

FINTRAC has seven tenancy agreements in place with Public Works and Government Services Canada and occupies 7,520.4 square metres of office space. FINTRAC is in a growth phase and accommodation is an important file. In concert with Public Works and Government Services Canada, it has an accommodation strategy that outlines short-, medium- and long-term needs of the organization.

FINTRAC is not a primary tenant. As a secondary tenant it is aware that emergency evacuation plans exist, are communicated and are tested, the most recent by in October 2006. FINTRAC Security is responsible for physical security and communicates frequently with the primary tenant regarding building emergency measures and systems.

14.3 Extent to which an appropriate material management framework is in place (e.g. clarity of accountabilities, consistency with organizational capabilities, reliability of life-cycle costs and performance information) (Acceptable)

FINTRAC does not have significant holdings of moveable assets as per 2006 Financial Statements and has evidence of a management framework commensurate with its investment, as per 2006 Departmental Performance Report.

For the purposes of this assessment, a project is defined as a set of activities required to produce certain defined outputs, or to accomplish specific goals or objectives, within a defined schedule and resource budget.

The centre manages very few significant projects and there is evidence of successfully implemented projects. However, FINTRAC experienced significant growth during the assessment period and the activities associated with this growth could also be managed as projects.

FINTRAC has provided evidence of most of the elements of a project management accountability framework. While its applicability differs between business projects and information management/information technology projects, it does address department wide planning, decision making, oversight and accountability for outcomes.

15.1 Presence of an explicit project management accountability framework that addresses decision-making and oversight and effective monitoring and ongoing review (Acceptable)

FINTRAC's Executive Committee (EXCO) is the primary decision-making body for the centre and is responsible for the approval of projects. Project approval decisions are recorded to ensure clear accountability. The Executive Committee is supported by the Business Committee which leads the planning of projects and considers available resources and departmental priorities before recommending projects for approval. A separate Project Review Committee (PRC) reviews business cases, project proposals and actively monitors information management/information technology (IM/IT) projects. Business projects are monitored by the Management Committee. The Business Transformation group partners with the Project Management Office which develops an overall IM/IT planning schedule, assigns human resources to projects and links with business teams.

The department has demonstrated key elements of a project management framework. While this framework does support a common approach to project management in the department, there are differences in how IM/IT projects and business projects are managed and monitored.

The Centre indicates that various steering committees are in place, (e.g. Project Steering Committee, Project Review Committee, IT Steering Committee) which support a more formal decision making process for approving and monitoring projects. Accountability for more significant projects is assured through records of decision.

Once a major IM/IT projects is approved, oversight  is undertaken by the Project Steering Committee. Accountability for IM/IT project outcomes rests with the IT project manager. Individual project monitoring is the responsibility of the project manager and is supported by MS-project, issue logs and status reports. Individual Project Steering Committees are responsible for corrective action and their decisions are recorded to ensure accountability.

FINTRAC indicated that more significant projects are subject to a close-out review and issues and lessons learned are recorded. These reviews are the responsibility of the appropriate review and steering committees. Evidence of one such review was provided. These reports are not directly linked to the decision-making process for consideration in the approval of future projects or the monitoring of existing projects. However, communication is facilitated by the small size of the organization and by the individuals who sit on different oversight and advisory committees.

15.2 Extent to which projects are properly resourced (e.g. project management capacity, appropriately trained officials) (Acceptable)

The centre indicated that when projects are considered by the Business Committee, the human resource and financial capacity of the organization is taken into account before a project is recommended to EXCO for approval.

The planning of information management/information technology (IM/IT) projects is led by the Project Review Committee which is responsible for aligning available resources with the planning of IM/IT projects.

The centre indicated that project managers in the Project Management Office undergo formal project management training and training plans are developed with each employee in the centre and reviewed on a biannual basis.

FINTRAC develops its cost estimates for projects through various methods including consultations, industry standards and historical information.

15.3 Extent to which the organization has demonstrated compliance with delegated project approval and contracting authority requirements and conditions identified by TB (Acceptable)

The department has consistently met Treasury Board conditions and complied with delegated authority for projects.

The centre has a relatively small procurement organization that handles some extremely sensitive acquisitions. Based upon the measures, the centre appears to have an acceptable procurement management regime and level of compliance with the applicable procurement policy requirements.

16.1 Level of oversight of procurement and contracting functions (e.g. presence of a Contracts Review Committee, quality of contracting data, timely completion of disclosure information for contracts over $10,000, implementation of audit recommendations where applicable, etc.) (Acceptable)

The centre has a contracts review committee and there is adequate evidence of records of decisions.

The centre provides its data to the annual procurement data system (DATACAP) on time, and complies with requests to update it.

The centre implemented its action plan in the wake of an audit that included recommendations regarding procurement.

16.2 Cost-effectiveness of end-to-end procurement processes (Acceptable)

The use of acquisition cards is relatively steady in the centre, but based upon the DATACAP information, there appears to be an opportunity to increase the use of acquisition cards and to increase the use of PWGSC's standing offers.

Acquisitions above $1 million are purchased through PWGSC.

The organization continues to provide timely and quality financial reporting information.  This is evidenced by a decrease in the number of errors on trial balance submissions.  As well, there were no significant post closing entries or errors on its internal financial management reporting information.

The organization's financial statement package was prepared in a timely fashion and was based on Treasury Board Accounting Standard 1.2 and Canadian generally accepted accounting principles.

17.1 Compliance with approved financial management legislation, policies and directives, including the Transfer Payment Policy (Unrated)

The Office of the Comptroller General has reviewed the centre's internal audit website, the Auditor General's website, and the Office of the Comptroller General's Internal Audit Sector's database for reports posted in 2006 that address the centre's compliance with financial management legislation, policies and directives. This review produced no information on which to base a conclusion on the centre's compliance or non-compliance.

17.2 Extent to which accounting and reporting, including external reporting, of financial activities are compliant with Government policies, directives and standards (accuracy, timeliness, completeness) (Acceptable)

On the Public Accounts scorecard, obtained a grade of A with 97% of plates on time, compared to 100% in the prior year. A decrease in the number of errors on trial balance submissions from 12 in fiscal 2004-05 to 11 in 2005-06.  

17.3 Timeliness, accuracy and frequency of departmental forecasts, as demonstrated by:

1. Forecasting reports; and
2. History and size of unplanned lapses and carry-forwards

(Unrated)

The methodology for assessing this measure is under development for application in future reviews.  As such, this measure is unrated at this time.

17.4 Progress in achieving readiness for reasonably efficient audit, and obtaining unqualified audit opinion, of departmental financial statements, as applicable (Acceptable)

The financial statement package was prepared in a timely fashion, and was based on Treasury Board Accounting Standard 1.2 and Canadian generally accepted accounting principles.

17.5 To be measured when possible this Round:
Quality of internal financial management reporting, as demonstrated by:

1. Completeness, frequency, timeliness and accuracy of internal monthly reports of operations (expenses, revenues)
2. Completeness, frequency, timeliness of analysis and reconciliation of material balance sheet accounts
3. Size and nature of year-end adjusting entries

(Acceptable)

No significant post-closing entries or errors.

17.6 To be measured when possible this Round: Quality and effectiveness of delegation of financial authorities, as demonstrated by:

1. Delegation of authority instruments
2. Training in place to upgrade and maintain knowledge & skills of those with delegated financial authority
3. Horizontal audit on delegation of authorities, where applicable

(Unrated)

The Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada was not subject to the recent horizontal audit conducted by the Office of the Comptroller General and therefore will not be rated.

The degree to which service standards are in place, the level of participation in whole-of-government service solutions and communications with the public around services were not assessed due to lack of applicability.  Accordingly, the indicator score only reflects performance in official languages, which was assessed as strong.

19.1 Extent to which client satisfaction and service standards are in place and published, performance against standards is assessed (using the Common Measurements Tool for client satisfaction) and findings are acted upon to achieve high levels of client satisfaction (Not Applicable)

Not applicable due to no external services.

19.2 Extent of participation, where appropriate, in whole of government service solutions that provide citizens with easy access to seamless service (Not Applicable)

Not applicable due to no external services.

19.3 Extent to which public/client views/needs are considered when developing new services/programs/policies (Not Applicable)

19.4 Accessibility to government services in both official languages (Strong)

The insitution has four offices that are designated bilingual for service to the public.

Linguistic Capacity: This separate agency has an excellent linguistic capacity. Of the 96 employees assigned to service to the public, 69 can provide service in French (71.9%) and 96 in English. Capacity is sufficient in all of the offices.

Availability of communications and services: All indications show that the institution is fulfilling its official languages obligations. The Web site is fully bilingual. Documentation and communication intended for reporting language is available in both official languages, as is communication for the general public. There have been no complaints about the institution.

Sources: SILO II – Data as of March 31, 2006; 2005-2006 and previous Annual Reviews; Commissioner of Official Languages reports.