ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Agriculture and Agri-food Canada - 2008

1.1 Leadership: Strong

• Executive leaders engage employees and stakeholders on an ongoing basis in ethical discussions and openly address organizational ethical issues through public statements and internal messaging.

1.2 Infrastructure: Strong

• Regarding Values and Ethics Risk Assessment and Mitigation, the organization is maintaining its Round V (2007-08) assessment of Strong. It has submitted a Management Assertion to CPSA that no significant changes have occurred within the organization to affect this rating.
• Values and ethics plans or strategies are tailored to an organization's work, span several years, and measure results and are used to inform senior management on the state of the organization's values and ethics.

1.3 Culture: Acceptable

• Organization has a good understanding of the current state of public service values and ethics as evidenced by qualitative or quantitative information.
• Public service values and ethics are generally understood.
• Organization has a solid understanding of public service values and ethics as a result of balanced and robust evidence.

2.1 PAA Consistency: Strong

• The Strategic Outcome(s) indicates an obvious departmental area of influence and clearly align(s) with the organization's mandate.
• The Strategic Outcome(s) is/are (a) clear outcome statement(s) that can be understood within and outside the department as a benefit to Canadians.

2.2 Measurability: Acceptable

• An adequate Program Activity Architecture has been developed with some issues to be resolved. 2.3 Quality:
• Expected results are not clear and distinct, and are not appropriate to their respective program descriptions.
• The performance indicators are not clear and cannot be used for data collection to provide reliable insight into program effectiveness.

3.1 Business Plan: Acceptable

• Corporate business plan generally aligns resources and accountabilities to priorities.
• Corporate business plan generally integrates human resources, IM/IT, communications or other key corporate plans.
• Sector or branch business plans are generally aligned with the corporate business plan.

3.2 Governance Structure: Acceptable

• Management oversight of the organization's program activities is clearly evident.
• Organization's corporate governance structure is generally aligned to the organization's PAA.
• Recordkeeping is generally complete and current. (minutes of meetings and records of discussion, decision, and follow-up).
• Senior corporate management structure or subordinate governance structure (e.g., committees) meet regularly.
• Senior management sets priorities for and is briefed regularly on the work of the supporting governance structure.
• Terms of reference are generally current and complete.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Strong

• Senior management is engaged in all the initiatives.
• The organization contributes effectively to priority interdepartmental initiatives.
• The organization shows strength in its participation in Public Service Renewal.

4.3 Portfolio Coordination: Strong

• Substantial communication occurs between Deputy Minister and portfolio deputy heads.
• Substantial communications occur between departmental and portfolio entities' executives.
• The Department's portfolio coordination displays deliberate and effective leadership. TBS has assessed AAFC with regard to its participation in Public Service Renewal, in the Web of Rules effort, and in the Federal Science and Technology Strategy and for its portfolio responsibilities.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• Organization has established a capacity to assemble usually accurate, reliable and complete supporting information in TB submissions.
• Organization has the capacity to respond effectively to most TBS feedback.
• Response to TBS comments is appropriate.

5.2 Analysis: Acceptable

• Established capacity to analyze value for money, effectiveness and efficiency is evident.

5.3 Consultations: Acceptable

• Established capacity to initiate consultations with TBS with sufficient lead time is evident.
• Organization should be better able to predict factors that lead to occasional lateness.
• Submissions are usually on time (six weeks before TB meetings).

5.4 Quality control: Acceptable

• Generally rigorous and effective quality control process is in place and is usually followed for TB submissions.
• Submissions always have SFO or Head of Evaluation sign offs when appropriate.

6.1 Quality: Acceptable

• Evaluations submitted to TBS usually present findings, conclusions and recommendations that are supported by the evidence found in the evaluation report.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS consistently address questions of program relevance, success and effectiveness.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS consistently employ appropriate methodologies to gather data and inform the analysis.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS include analysis of the limitations of the methodology and data sources used.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS use multiple lines of evidence. Evaluations reflect the diversity and perspectives of multiple program stakeholders.

6.2 Neutrality: Acceptable

• Evaluation function resourcing is commensurate with the organizational evaluation plan.
• Head of Evaluation has explicit authority to submit evaluation reports directly to the deputy head. Head of Evaluation has access to the deputy head, as required.
• Senior management committee is in place to support, oversee and monitor the evaluation function and management accountabilities arising from evaluations and evaluation related products. The committee is chaired by the deputy head or senior level designate. The committee meets regularly during the year.
• The majority of resources dedicated to evaluations are directed by the Head of Evaluation.

6.3 Coverage: Acceptable

• The organization has shown evidence of moving towards full coverage of all ongoing programs of grants and contributions over a five year cycle as per 42.1 of the FAA. Year to year percent coverage indicates organization is on track to achieve 100% coverage.
• The organization has shared its risk-based evaluation plan with TBS. The evaluation plan has information on evaluations planned, completed and carried over. It also includes links to the organization's PAA.

• Active, systematic and regular tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations is in place.
• Evaluation commitments, plans and requirements are delivered on time or extensions are due to circumstances beyond the department's control. Organization occasionally requests extension from TBS.

7.1 MRRS Basis: Acceptable

• Linkages between resources and results are adequately demonstrated in the reports.

7.2 Credible information: Acceptable

• DPR generally provides independently verifiable evidence-based performance information. Some information on the validity and credibility of data used is provided.
• Several relevant findings from audit and evaluation are included.
• The reader has a good sense generally of the source of the data and information in the DPR and its quality.

7.3 Context: Acceptable

• Comparisons are generally effectively and consistently used in the DPR.
• DPR is generally balanced - the report presents both positive and negative aspects of performance and substantiation or explanation is generally provided.
• Reports adequately present the strategic context and operating environment information including challenges, risks, opportunities and capacities.

8.1 Change plan: Acceptable

• Organizational change plan exists and is consistent with the scope of change identified.

8.2 Engagement: Acceptable

• Change management related training programs are available to some components of the organizations.

8.3 Assessment: Acceptable

• Assessment plans exist and are broad in scope and detail.

9.1 Engagement: Strong

• Senior management reviews the organization's Risk Management approach within the current three-year planning cycle.
• The organization has a common risk assessment approach and it has been approved by senior management.
• Senior management ensures that the organization's Risk Management approach is tailored to the specific needs of the organization and is adjusted as required.
• Each year, senior management reviews/approves the Corporate Risk Profile more than once.
• Senior management encourages effective Risk Management and a risk-smart culture.
• Senior management leads by example in this area.
• Accountability for key risks is assigned to senior management and performance is assessed.

9.2 Implementation: Strong

• The organization's Risk Management approach is regularly communicated to staff and stakeholders in a variety of ways.
• The Corporate Risk Profile is systematically (horizontally and vertically) implemented into all operational levels across the organization.
• Risk Management guidance and tools that enable the organization's risk management approach are made available to staff.

9.3 Integration: Acceptable

• Risk information is routinely consulted in senior management decision-making. This is done systematically and explicitly.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles influence planning and resource allocation decisions.
• Operational level risks are prioritized into key risks and are adjusted as required.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles are adequately captured in senior management reporting.
• The organization makes adequate course corrections based on Risk Management performance and new information.

9.4 Continuous Improvement: Acceptable

• Many relevant external sources are consulted during the development of the organization's CRP.
• Comprehensive risk information was extensively gathered from internal sources of the organization for preparing the CRP.
• Corporate risks are consistently linked to the organization's strategic outcomes and are adjusted as required.
• The CRP provides a reliable assessment of the quality of risk information used.
• The organization explicitly builds on past experience, better practice, and adjusts to fit any changes in management structures, priorities or strategic direction.
• The organization has implemented most recommendations provided during its last MAF assessment.

Senior management takes a proactive approach to developing and maintaining a current CRP. ADMs regularly scan and report on risks and risk mitigation progress within their branches. The CRP is systematically implemented into all operational levels across the organization, and operational level risks are prioritized into key risks and adjusted as required. Risk information is also extensively consulted in senior management decision making.

10.1 Fair: Acceptable

• Organization is undertaking action to improve the classification program in accordance with its level of risk.
• Evidence shows that labour relations matters are consistently and appropriately managed/addressed.
• Evidence shows that the organization exceeds standards of timeliness in payments to employees.
• Evidence shows that the organization is in compliance with Labour Relations and Compensation Operations direction (terms and condition of employment, collective agreements and/or applicable legislation).

10.2 Enabling: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization demonstrates the necessary linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• Organization has made progress in comparison to the previous year's representation, recruitments and promotions of the four employment equity groups.
• Organization is under-representative in one or more of the four employment equity designated groups.
• Promotions among employment equity groups are equal or less than previous year's performance.
• Separations among employment equity groups are equal or greater than previous year's performance.
• Work instruments, electronic systems and communication tools are generally available in both official languages.

10.3 Healthy and safe: Opportunity for Improvement

• A considerable number of employees do not feel recognized for positive performance.
• Evidence indicates that the organization has in place a well-managed program to protect employee's occupational health and safety.

11.1 Productive: Opportunity for Improvement

• An insufficient number of employees indicate their organization supports their career development and learning needs.

11.2 Principled: Opportunity for Improvement

• Adequate linguistic capacity is generally in place as shown by the majority of incumbents of bilingual positions who meet the language requirements of their position.
• Communications with and services to the public in both official languages are generally available.
• Employees consider that they generally can communicate in the official language of their choice within their organization and work instruments, electronic systems and communications in both official languages are generally available.

11.3 Sustainable: Acceptable

• Evidence indicates human resources planning integrated with business planning is generally in place and governance/organizational infrastructure generally exists to support it.

11.4 Adaptable: Opportunity for Improvement

• An insufficient number of employees indicate their organization encourages continuous learning, improvement and innovation.

12.1 Governance: Strong

• IM requirements are fully integrated as a part of the approval, development, implementation, evaluation, and reporting of departmental policies, programs, services, and projects and mechanism are in place to continuously evaluate and modify the requirements.
• IM is fully represented in the corporate-wide governance structure and in the corporate-wide governance or approval committee(s).
• Extensive participation is evident in GC-wide approaches and initiatives related to developing, implementing, sharing, and leveraging IM policies and practices.

12.2 Strategy: Strong

• An approved and resourced IM strategy identifies support to business priorities and operations, information needs and accountabilities, IM policy considerations and is integrated with corporate strategies, plans, and planning cycles.
• An IM strategy implementation plan, including timelines and resources, is underway and achievements are evident. Mechanisms are in place to continuously evaluate and modify the plan.
• An IM awareness campaign or strategy is underway and all staff and executives are informed of their IM roles, responsibilities and accountabilities, and most have attended awareness/training sessions.

12.3 Privacy Act: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization submitted an Annual Report to Parliament but did not address all of the mandatory reporting requirements.
• Significant collections of personal information under the control of the organization have not been appropriately identified or described in accordance with the Privacy Act.

12.4 Access to Information Act: Opportunity for Improvement

• A significant number of the organization's functions, programs, activities and related information holdings have not been appropriately identified or described in its 2008 Chapter of Info Source: Sources of Federal Government Information. This information is a requirement of the Access to Information Act to facilitate public access to federal government information.
• A significant number of institution-specific Classes of Records do not meet Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.
• Although the organization has made several improvements to its 2008 Chapter of Info Source: Sources of Federal Government Information, revisions are still necessary to meet all Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.

Although the overall rating for AAFC is Acceptable, the Department has not met several of the assessed statutory requirements of the Access to Information and Privacy Acts.

13.1 Leadership: Strong

• The senior official has responsibility and accountability for the full scope of information technology responsibilities and ensures that information technology supports organizational outcomes.
• Organization actively participates and demonstrates leadership in setting government-wide directions for information technology.

13.2 Planning: Acceptable

• Acceptable information technology plan is in place that aligns with the government-wide directions for information technology and departmental business needs.
• Organization has aligned corporate and information technology governance structures and has an integrated planning process.

13.3 Value: Strong

• Organization analyzes and plans for the appropriate use of information technology shared services to an optimal extent.
• Organization demonstrates management commitment to service costing, asset management, performance measurement and reporting to ensure value delivery.

14.1 Investment Planning: Strong

• The organization has a current long-term investment planning document that has been approved by the proper authority.
• The organization's investment planning process considers investments over multiple years.
• The investment planning process integrates investments decisions across all asset classes.
• The investment planning process includes continuous improvement mechanisms based on performance information for investment planning.

14.2 Real Property Management: Strong

• All elements of a real property management framework are implemented.
• A culture of continuous improvement is evident.
• Governance structures, approval processes and authority limits are documented and disseminated.
• There is evidence that authority limits and policy compliance are monitored.
• Comprehensive internal policies are documented and disseminated.
• Reliable and integrated information systems are in place.
• Certification of information in the FCSI is received and accepted.
• Indicators of real property performance are monitored and performance measurement is ongoing.

14.3 Materiel Management: Acceptable

• All elements of a materiel management framework are evident.
• Comprehensive internal policies are documented and disseminated.
• Governance structures, approval processes and authority limits are documented and disseminated.
• Reliable and sufficiently integrated information systems are in place.
• Some indicators of materiel performance are monitored.

14.2 Real Property Management: Certification of DFRP information is received and conditionally accepted.

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Business cases, which define expected outcomes, are required to support proposals for major projects.
• There is evidence of formal project governance and oversight mechanisms and that approved projects are generally linked with the strategic plans and priorities of the organization through established organization-wide procedures. Approval and corrective action decisions are documented.
• There is no evidence that the organization has exceeded Treasury Board project approval limits, or failed to notify TB/TBS when it did.

15.2 Effective Management of Project Resources: Opportunity for Improvement

• While there is evidence that some managers prepare a staffing plan, it is not required prior to project execution.
• Adequate processes/procedures exist to ensure that planned projects have the required resources to achieve expected outcomes.
• The funding models used for projects support the achievement of expected project outcomes and cost estimates are generated at the work package level and consider historical data and/or industry benchmarks.

15.3 Effective Management of Project Results: Acceptable

• There is evidence that the organization monitors project performance and uses this information to support corrective action.
• While lessons learned are used to improve project management governance and oversight in some instances, there is no formal or organization-wide mechanism which supports continuous improvement.

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Clear and continually updated links between procurement activities and the organization-wide program plans, priorities and long-term investments are evident.
• Effective and accountable procurement management processes and controls are in place (e.g., contract review mechanisms, documented decision making, guidance documents, appropriate delegation instruments or proper use of delegated authorities).
• Organization prepares an annual procurement plan.

16.2 Meeting Operational Requirements: Strong

• Consistent procurement training and certification programs exist.
• Continuous links to human resources planning are in place (e.g., succession planning and recruitment strategies for procurement staff).
• Efficient, effective and integrated procurement information systems and processes are evident.
• Informed decision making and oversight exist.
• Integrated, timely and accurate procurement financial and non-financial reporting exists.
• Mandatory training underway.
• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are in use.
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.
• Results and reviews are being used to continuously adjust and improve current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.
• Some staff enrolled in the Professional Development and Certification program.

17.1 Authorities and Policies: Acceptable

• Audit report results show evidence of deficiencies that are of some concern.
• Departmental procedures, tools, training and support for those individuals delegated with Section 34 authority show evidence of solid financial management practices.
• Departmental processes for classification of moneys, internal controls for receiving and recording money and depositing money show evidence of good financial management practices.
• Departmental processes for informing those delegated with Section 33 authority of their responsibilities and dealing with requests for payments that are problematic show evidence of solid financial management practices.
• Departmental processes to provide individuals delegated Section 33 authority with the information necessary to assess and approve specific transactions and to assess the adequacy of Section 34 account verification show evidence of solid financial management practices.
• The reporting of external user fee information meets or nearly meets the requirements of the reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Strong

• Few Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.
• Greater than 97% (Grade A) of Public Accounts plates completed on time.
• No errors found during the course of the OAG Public Accounts audit.

17.3 Management Capacity: Acceptable

• A reasonable amount of training is provided for the financial management organization.
• A reasonable proportion of FIs and management team members in the financial management organization have current, approved learning plans.
• Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise a low proportion of the FI segment of the financial management organization.
• Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise a low proportion of the positions on the management team of the financial management organization.
• Some processes in support of a sound succession plan for key positions are in place.
• There is a position (or positions) established in the financial management organization that is dedicated to community management and development.
• There is a weak functional relationship between the CFO/SFO and FI positions that exist outside the financial management organization. *This row is only applicable where the department or agency indicates there are FI positions outside the financial management organization.

17.4 Financial Statements: Acceptable

• All concerns identified in the audit readiness assessment are addressed in a detailed action plan.
• Several known financial internal control weaknesses remain unremedied.
• The Financial Statements are compliant with Treasury Board Accounting Standard 1.2 - Departmental and Agency Financial Statements and reporting deadlines were met.

17.5 Internal Reporting: Strong

• The internal financial reporting package is accompanied by a comprehensive discussion and analysis.
• The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management less than one month after period end.
• The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management ten or more times per year.
• The process for reviewing information before it is presented to senior management to ensure no material errors or omissions is well established.
• The scope of the internal financial reporting package is comprehensive.

17.6 Other Initiatives: Acceptable

• Solid evidence of proactive measures taken towards implementing the Guide to Costing.

While the department maintained a Strong rating, it improved its financial management capacity over last year from an OFI to an Acceptable rating.

18.1 Internal Audit governance: Strong

• There is an approved Internal Audit Charter in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.
• The Implementation Plan covers all of the required policy elements.
• Ongoing monitoring of, and progress in implementing, key elements of the plan are on track with planned timelines.
• Chief Audit Executive reports solely and exclusively to the Deputy Head.
• An independent Departmental Audit Committee is in place.
• There is an approved Departmental Audit Committee Charter in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.
• There is an approved Departmental Audit Committee Annual Plan for fiscal year 2008-2009.
• The Departmental Audit Committee has met at least four times over the past twelve months.
• A draft Departmental Audit Committee (DAC) Annual Report addressing some or all of the eight areas of DAC responsibility has been prepared for fiscal year 2007-2008.

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: Opportunity for Improvement

• The Risk-Based Audit Plan was approved by the Deputy Head and sent to the Office of the Comptroller General in a timely manner.
• Annual Risk-Based Audit Plan methodology is, for the most part, evident and applied.
• There is evidence of preparation to provide for holistic assurance.
• No identification of post-engagement follow-up activities.
• There is partial information on the planned use of all audit function resources.
• Vast majority of planned work is on audit assurance versus other types of activities.
• Continuity of previous years work is not clearly identified, or there is limited identification of status and rationale.
• Approved assurance products are not consistent with policy and internal audit standards requirements, containing one key methodological deficiency.
• Internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program is well documented and in place.
• Assurance products (reports) are produced in a reasonably timely manner.
• Approved assurance products are made accessible to the public in a somewhat timely manner.
• Post-engagement follow-up process is well documented, and recommendations are followed up using a risk-based approach.
• The department or agency provides notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat on issues of importance on an ad hoc basis or is aware of this requirement.
• The department or agency provides limited notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat on the posting of reports.

18.3 Administration of the Internal Audit Function: Acceptable

• The Internal Audit Human Resources Plan is linked to the business plan, and includes an elaborated recruitment action plan and an external resourcing strategy that are being actioned in a formal manner.
• Investment in Certified Internal Auditor certification, learning and training represents a minimum of 5% of FTE salaries.
• Planned spending, *, was given to the Office of the Comptroller General. When comparing current spending of 2008-2009 with planned financial resources of 2007-2008, resource levels identified maintain the resource levels identified in 2007.
• Planned FTEs dedicated to internal audit have been maintained comparatively to 2007-2008. They meet the resource level identified in the planned internal audit function's budget for 2008-2009.

18.4 Internal Audit Performance: Acceptable

• A Chief Audit Executive Annual Report for 2007-2008 was presented to the Departmental Audit Committee and the Deputy Head and submitted to the Office of the Comptroller General.
• Regular periodic reporting on the follow-up of Management Action Plans is evident.

The department has made significant progress in the areas of Internal Audit (IA) Governance, Professional Practices and Performance Reporting. In particular, the IA and DAC Charters have been approved and are in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit. An Internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program has been documented and implemented. The Chief Audit Executive submitted an Annual Report for FY 2007-2008.

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Acceptable

• Organization has in place a fully developed security program that comprises key policy elements and is administered by an appointed Departmental Security Officer (DSO) who is positioned to provide strategic advice and guidance to senior management.
• No significant deficiencies in meeting key policy requirements for the departmental security program.

19.2 Management of IT Security (MITS): Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization has achieved the three priority objectives that form the foundation for Management of Information Technology Security (MITS), but does not fully comply with MITS requirements.
• Some deficiencies in meeting key MITS requirements.

19.3 Business Continuity Planning (BCP): Acceptable

• Organization has in place measures to provide for the continuity of critical business operations and services, and is compliant with most or all the policy requirements.
• There are no significant deficiencies in meeting key Business Continuity Planning (BCP) program requirements.
• Business Continuity Planning (BCP) program governance has been established.
• Business Impact Analysis (BIA) has been completed to identify and prioritize the organization's critical services and assets.
• Establishment of business continuity plans and arrangements is in progress.
• Maintenance cycle has been put in place to review, test and audit business continuity plans.

20.1 Management Engagement - Service and CLF: Acceptable

• There are expectations set by senior management for an institutional focus on meeting the needs of clients, specifically with respect to service standards and client satisfaction measurement.
• There are generally documented and communicated priorities and goals for service at the institutional level; these priorities and goals are generally set by senior management based on the use of performance evidence.
• There is a well-established committee at the institutional level, composed of senior management accountable for service, which has a fully documented and communicated responsibility for making decisions about the overall management of service.
• There is monitoring by senior management to ensure that the requirements of CLF 2.0 are being met institution-wide; this information is generally used to make timely and proactive decisions and course correction.
• There is monitoring of progress by senior management towards the achievement of the institution-wide goals for service, with course correction if necessary.

20.2 Public/client views: Strong

• Many plans to obtain views from all target clients.
• Many tools are used to obtain views from some clients.
• Strong evidence of incorporating feedback in the implementation of its services, programs, policies or initiatives.
• Strong evidence of making consultation results available to the public.
• There is a clearly identified target clientele for public consultations.

20.3 Official Languages: Opportunity for Improvement

• Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is generally able to meet its obligations.
• Audits reveal numerous shortcomings in active offer and service delivery in both OL.
• No complaint or minimal number of founded complaints exits.
• The institution has the necessary linguistic capacity to serve the public in both OL.