Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Symbol of the Government of Canada

ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Library and Archives Canada - 2008

Warning This page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.


* An asterisk appears where sensitive information has been removed in accordance with the Access to Information Act and Privacy Act.

This document provides a Treasury Board Secretariat assessment of the department's performance against specific areas of management only. It does not present an assessment of management quality beyond these areas of management, nor does it reflect the level of effort a department may be making towards improving the quality of its management. The MAF assessments use standardized language to ensure consistent descriptions and characterizations. This assessment may not reflect the latest information available. Some departments and agencies have provided updated information in the form of a management response. Where management responses have been prepared, the link to the response is posted below the assessment.

Context

This year's Management Accountability Framework (MAF) Assessment for Library and Archives of Canada (LAC) is mixed. In total, for the twenty-one areas of management assessed, LAC received 3 'strong' ratings, 10 'acceptable' ratings, 7 'opportunity for improvement' ratings, and one 'attention required'. In comparison to last year's assessment, three areas of management ratings have improved and the ratings of seven areas of management have worsened. While LAC has made improvements in some areas, it continues to face management challenges in others.

Library and Archives should be recognized for its continued work to improve the following areas of management, including one that had been identified as a management priority in last year's MAF assessment (i.e. Quality of Performance Reporting):

– LAC has made improvements in its reporting to Parliament and has clearly communicated performance expectations in its Report on Plans and Priorities that are tracked and reported on in the Departmental Performance Report. LAC is encouraged to further improve its performance reports by substantiating its results, explaining how it plans to address any shortcomings, and focusing the reporting of results and outcomes at the Program Activity level.

  • Quality of Performance Reporting
  • Effectiveness of Information Management – LAC has made progress in this area and has addressed some of the recommendations made by TBS in the last MAF round. Particularly, LAC appropriately identified and described the collections of personal information under its control in registered Personal Information Banks and/or Classes of Personal Information in accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act.
  • Effective Management of Security and Business Continuity – LAC has in place an integrated security program which comprises all key policy elements and is aligned with the organization's strategic objectives and priorities. The organization demonstrates a strong commitment to continuously improving its security program. LAC also demonstrates leadership and contributes to the government-wide security program.

LAC should also be acknowledged for maintaining a consistent strong rating in the following area of management:

  • Effective Procurement – The organization's procurement governance structure and its wide array of proactive measures assures that the operational effectiveness of its procurement activities is enhanced. The organization's on-going efforts to apply lessons learned, and to review findings and best practices, all contribute to the overall strength of this area of management.

Finally, there are areas, however, where LAC should aim to make further progress in the coming year in the following areas of management, which have received an 'opportunity for improvement' rating:

- LAC should continue to refine its Performance Measurement Framework (PMF) to bring it in line with the standards set out in the Management, Resources and Results Structure (MRRS) Instructions. The organization should also ensure that actual data for the indicators in its PMF are being collected and analyzed to gain insights into program performance and to validate the indicators.

  • Utility of the Corporate Performance Framework
  • Quality and Use of Evaluation – The quality, the usage, and the coverage of evaluations present opportunities for improvement. LAC should consider conducting an assessment of its evaluation needs and developing a multi-year evaluation plan to address them, with due consideration being given to the level of resourcing required for implementation.
  • Effectiveness of Asset Management – While all elements of a materiel management framework are evident, there is no evidence of systematic investment planning. LAC should finalize an up-to-date investment plan that is integrated across the organization.

Furthermore, the Treasury Board Secretariat has identified the following three management improvement priorities as requiring particular attention: - LAC needs to strengthen its development and review process for Treasury Board Submissions and to put in place a better quality control process. Additionally, LAC needs to engage PCH Portfolio Affairs at the onset of the process as well as engage the Minister early in the process.

  • Quality of Analysis in Treasury Board submissions
  • Effectiveness of Internal Audit Function – Improvements are needed in most areas. As noted last year, LAC should focus on its Internal Audit Governance. LAC must appoint a qualified Chief Audit Executive at a senior executive level reporting to the Deputy Head to be compliant with the Policy on Internal Audit. Furthermore, LAC should prepare a complete multi-year Risk-Based Audit Plan (RBAP) for 2009-2010 as well as document and implement an internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program.
  • Effectiveness of Financial Management and Control – LAC should ensure that there are periodic independent reviews of management's financial practices. Procedures and support for individuals delegated with Section 34 as well as the processes for informing those delegated with section 33 authority of their responsibilities show evidence of deficiencies that are of serious concern.

TBS will endeavour to assist LAC in moving forward on these priorities in a constructive and sustainable manner.



Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

1. Values-based Leadership and Organizational Culture

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

1.2 Infrastructure: Acceptable

  • Organization has a plan that includes a strategy championed by senior management with medium-term activities to raise awareness of the importance of public service values and ethics.
  • Risks in regard to possible breaches in public service values and ethics are regularly assessed, documented and followed up with mitigation plans and action by management.

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.

 

Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly decreased

2. Utility of the Corporate Performance Framework

 

Opportunity for Improvement

   
Highlights Opportunities

2.3 Quality:

  • An incomplete or inadequate performance measurement framework has been developed.
  • 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.
  • As was highlighted in MAF Round V, LAC's Program Activity Architecture contains several programs that do not meet the definition of a program.
  • The organization should continue to refine its Performance Measurement Framework to bring it in line with the standards set out in the MRRS Instructions. The organization should also ensure that actual data for the indicators in its PMF are being collected and analyzed to gain insights into program performance and to validate the indicators.
Recommendations

LAC should take the opportunity to come forth during the next Management, Resources and Results Structure Change Process to update its PAA, clarify its programs, and at the same time present a revised PMF.


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly decreased

3. Effectiveness of the Corporate Management Structure

 

Opportunity for Improvement

   
Highlights Opportunities

3.1 Business Plan: Opportunity for Improvement

  • While progress is being made, the corporate business plan does not adequately integrate human resources, IM/IT, communications or other key corporate plans.

3.2 Governance Structure: Acceptable

  • Adequate management oversight of the organization's program activities and underlying programs is evident.
  • Organization's corporate governance structure is generally aligned to the organization's PAA.
  • Senior corporate management structure or subordinate governance structure (e.g., committees) meet regularly.

LAC needs to fully integrate overall business planning to ensure that all aspects of the organization's activities, including HR, IM/IT and communications, are aligned with the corporate business plan.

Recommendations

Provide details of HR, IM/IT and communications plans and clearly show the linkages to the corporate business plan.


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

4. Effectiveness of Extra-organizational Contribution

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

  • The organization contributes effectively to priority interdepartmental initiatives.
  • The organization's commitments are clear and are consistent with its role.
  • There is an opportunity for the organization to improve its contribution to Public Service Renewal.

TBS has assessed Library and Archives of Canada with regard to its participation in the Public Service Renewal (Opportunity for Improvement) and Web of Rules (Strong) initiatives.

  • TBS encourages LAC to continue its effective participation in the Web of Rules Initiative.
  • TBS encourages LAC to adopt a more systematic approach to collecting and utilizing employee feedback at all levels to drive improvements on Public Service Renewal.
Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly decreased

5. Quality of Analysis in TB Submissions


Attention Required

     
Highlights Opportunities

5.1 Supporting Information: Attention Required

  • Business cases lack sufficient information, they are not comprehensive.
  • Funding information is not aligned with project authorities.
  • Inaccuracies in information relative to TBS financial data.
  • Level of detail is not sufficient, e.g., no explanation for level of resources requested, i.e., why the amount requested is the correct amount.
  • Little or no capacity to assemble accurate and reliable supporting information for TB submissions.
  • Policy and budget authorities are not identified.
  • Responses to TBS comments are incomplete.
  • There is little or no capacity to respond to TBS feedback.

5.4 Quality control: Attention Required

  • No apparent quality control process exists.

TB submissions and follow-up reports show no systematic consideration of the essential points, There is little attention to the accuracy, thoroughness and quality of the information and analysis presented. As a consequence, submissions require protracted exchanges with TBS and decisions require conditions.

LAC should consult with PCH Portfolio Affairs while developing its submissions.

Recommendations

LAC needs to strengthen its development and review process for Treasury Board submissions and to put in place a better quality control process. LAC needs to engage PCH Portfolio Affairs at the onset of the process.


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

6. Quality and Use of Evaluation

 

Opportunity for Improvement

   
Highlights Opportunities

6.1 Quality: Opportunity for Improvement

  • All evaluations submitted to TBS include a management response and an action plan detailing implementation strategies, timelines and management accountabilities.
  • Evaluations submitted to TBS sometimes but not consistently address questions of program relevance, success and effectiveness.
  • Evaluations submitted to TBS usually present findings, conclusions and recommendations that are supported by the evidence found in the evaluation report.
  • Large majority of evaluations submitted to TBS rarely include analysis of the limitations of the methodology and data sources used.
  • 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 use multiple lines of evidence. Evaluations reflect the diversity and perspectives of multiple program stakeholders.

6.2 Neutrality: Acceptable

  • All resources dedicated to evaluations are directed by the Head of Evaluation.
  • Evaluation function resourcing is not commensurate with the organizational evaluation plan.
  • Head of Evaluation has explicit authority to submit evaluation reports directly to the Deputy Head and has direct and regular access to the deputy head.
  • 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.

6.3 Coverage: Opportunity for Improvement

  • A one-year plan has been developed and shared with TBS. The plan has information on evaluations planned, completed and carried over and include links to the organization's PAA. As well, the organization has committed to developing a multi-year risk-based plan.
  • 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. Current annual evaluation coverage of G&Cs is more than 15%.
  • The organization has shown no evidence of moving toward full evaluation coverage of their program base over a set cycle (e.g. over a five-year cycle).

6.4 Usage: Opportunity for Improvement

  • Active, systematic and regular tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations is in place.
  • Less than 40% of RMAFs are implemented.
  • Majority of evaluations submitted to TBS incorporate data from a performance measurement system to support the evaluation. Submitted evaluations sometimes cite data availability and/or quality as constraints.
  • The results of evaluations are sometimes brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPRs and Strategic Reviews.

Evaluation-related activities are planned for each of LAC's three program activities, which could help provide a foundation for evaluations in the future.

Recommendations

LAC should consider conducting an assessment of its evaluation needs and developing a multi-year evaluation plan to address them, with due consideration being given to the level of resourcing required for implementation.


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly increased

7. Quality Reporting to Parliament

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

7.1 MRRS Basis: Acceptable

  • Good links between performance and plans are present.
  • Linkages between resources and results are adequately demonstrated in the reports.

7.2 Credible information: Opportunity for Improvement

  • DPR is not sufficiently based on the PAA, i.e. performance is not reported consistently by Program Activity (PA) or at the PA level.
  • The DPR occasionally provides independently verifiable evidence-based performance information.

7.3 Context: Acceptable

  • DPR is generally balanced – the report presents both positive and negative aspects of performance and substantiation or explanation is generally provided.

The department could improve its performance reports by ensuring that the ratings assigned to performance statuses are substantiated by sound, evidence-based performance information. Furthermore, an explanation of the context in which performance did not meet plans and what the department intends to do to address these shortcomings could enhance the report. The department could further improve its reports by shifting the focus of reporting to results and outcomes at the PA level instead of reporting activities and outputs at the sub-PA level (or below).

Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly decreased

8. Managing Organizational Change

 

Opportunity for Improvement

   
Highlights Opportunities

As no organizational plan was provided, LAC demonstrates limited capacity to plan and manage organizational change.

It is evident that LAC has undergone significant and ongoing organizational change since 2004-2005 but no evidence related to assessment or results was provided.

As also identified in MAF Round 5, LAC could be more proactive in engaging its employees with regard to change management.  LAC could also provide more training to employees regarding change management.

Recommendations

Provide organizational change plan.

Provide action plans, assessment plans or other evidence of the results of change management and the specific actions taken regarding these results.


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

9. Effectiveness of Corporate Risk Management

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

9.1 Engagement: Acceptable

  • Accountability for key risks does not appear to be assigned to senior management.
  • Senior management encourages effective Risk Management and a risk-smart culture.
  • Senior management ensures that the organization's Risk Management approach is tailored to the specific needs of the organization.
  • Senior management has reviewed/approved the Corporate Risk Profile within the past year.
  • 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.

9.2 Implementation: Acceptable

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

9.3 Integration: Acceptable

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

9.4 Continuous Improvement: Acceptable

  • Corporate risks are consistently linked to the organization's strategic outcomes.
  • Key risk information was adequately gathered from internal sources of the organization for preparing the CRP.
  • Some relevant external sources are consulted during the development of the organization's CRP.
  • The CRP provides a reliable assessment of the quality of risk information used.
  • The organization adequately 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.

LAC deserves recognition for the progressive implementation of its risk management framework and integration of its risk management practices at the strategic, operational and project levels.

LAC has also moved ahead with development of practical risk management manuals, including a general risk management manual for managers, and one covering specifically the risks associated with the loan of documents for exhibits.

LAC should continue to promote internal evaluation of risk management practices and draw up an Integrated Risk Management manual at the earliest opportunity.

The organization should move ahead on the issue of senior management accountability for key risks and the associated mitigation strategies -- an important component of effective risk management.

Recommendations
 

 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly decreased

10. Extent to which the Workplace is Fair, Enabling, Healthy and Safe

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

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: Acceptable

  • Organization demonstrates the necessary linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
  • 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 less than or equal to previous year's performance.
  • Work instruments, electronic systems and communications with employees are always or nearly always available in both official languages.

10.3 Healthy and safe:

  • Employees 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.
  • Take action to achieve representation in all four Employment Equity groups.
Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

11. Extent to which the Workforce is Productive, Principled, Sustainable and Adaptable

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

11.1 Productive: Opportunity for Improvement

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

11.2 Principled: Acceptable

  • Communications with and services to the public in both official languages are always or nearly always available.
  • Employees consider that they always or nearly always can communicate in the official language of their choice within their organization and work instruments, electronic systems and communications in both official languages are always or nearly always available.
  • Necessary linguistic capacity is in place as is shown by the vast majority of incumbents of bilingual positions who meet the language requirements of their position.
  • Promotions among employment equity groups are less than representation for at least one group.

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: Acceptable

  • A sufficient number of employees indicate their organization encourages continuous learning, improvement and innovation.
  • Take action to ensure that employees feel the organization supports learning and career development.
Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly increased

12. Effectiveness of Information Management

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

12.1 Governance: Acceptable

  • IM requirements are somewhat integrated as a part of the approval, development, implementation, evaluation, and reporting of departmental policies, programs, services, or projects.
  • IM is represented in the corporate-wide governance structure and/or in the corporate-wide governance or approval committee(s).
  • Participation is evident in GC-wide approaches and initiatives related to developing, implementing, sharing, and leveraging IM policies and practices.
  • Responsibilities are identified for IM policy development and implementation consistent with the GC IM Strategy and policy instruments.

12.2 Strategy: Acceptable

  • A current and active IM strategy identifies support to business priorities and operations, information needs and accountabilities, IM policy considerations and is partially integrated with other corporate strategies, plans and planning cycles.
  • An IM strategy implementation plan, including some timelines and resources, is underway and some achievements to date are identified.
  • IM awareness activities are underway in the department to help staff and executives understand their IM roles, responsibilities and accountabilities.
  • The new GC IM Policy Instruments are cited in evidence (Policy on Information Management, Directive on IM Roles and Responsibilities).

12.3 Privacy Act: Acceptable

  • Most of the organization's collections of personal information are described in registered Personal Information Banks and/or Classes of Personal Information in accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act.

12.4 Access to Information Act: Opportunity for Improvement

  • A significant number of institution-specific Classes of Records do not meet Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.
  • 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.
  • Integrate IM requirements into planning, approval, management, operational and evaluation activities.
  • Organization is encouraged to fully implement the IM strategy and monitor and report on progress.
  • Ensure that all information relevant to the institution's functions, programs, activities and related information holdings is described in the Info Source publications.
  • Review institution-specific Classes of Records to ensure that all descriptions in Info Source are comprehensive, complete, up-to-date, and comply with Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.
  • Review institution-specific Classes of Records and replace with Standard Classes of Records where applicable.
Recommendations

Continue to improve descriptions of LAC's functions, programs, activities and information holdings.


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

13. Effectiveness of Information Technology Management

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

13.1 Leadership: Acceptable

  • Senior official for information technology has responsibility and accountability for virtually the full scope of information technology responsibilities.
  • Some participation in setting government-wide directions for information technology is evident.

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: Opportunity for Improvement

  • Organization is making efforts to appropriately use and plan for further use of information technology shared services.
  • Organization devotes adequate management attention to service costing, asset management, performance measurement and reporting to ensure value delivery.
  • Review and expand the span of control of the senior official for IT and contribute to setting GC-wide directions in order to reduce complexity and duplication, enable the adoption of common and shared services, promote alignment and interoperability, and optimize service delivery within the organization.
  • Continue to strengthen the integrated set of processes and practices for governance, planning and benefits realization in order to monitor and oversee the delivery of business value from IT investments.
  • Continue to strengthen the qualitative and quantitative set of Key Performance Indicators and techniques to assess performance that provide metrics to guide better decision making, increase performance levels and enable continuous improvement.
Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly decreased

14. Effectiveness of Asset Management

 

Opportunity for Improvement

   
Highlights Opportunities

14.1 Investment Planning: Opportunity for Improvement

  • The organization does not have a current investment planning document.
  • There is no evidence of systematic investment planning.

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.
  • All indicators of materiel performance are monitored and performance measurement is ongoing.
  • Experience and best practices are shared internally and government-wide.

14.2 Real Property Management: This Line of Evidence is unrated because the organization is not currently a custodian of real property.

Work on the custody transfer of all LAC-occupied special purpose facilities from PWGSC to LAC has begun. The target date for PWGSC and LAC management board approval of the implementation plan is September 2009.

  • Develop an up-to-date, integrated investment plan.
  • Special purpose properties should be administered by program departments and progress in reviewing and realigning real property occupancies is encouraged.
  • Resolve any issues related to the administration of special purpose real property in a timely manner.
Recommendations

Finalize an up-to-date investment plan that is integrated across the organization.


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

15. Effective Project Management

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

  • Business cases, which define expected outcomes, are required to support proposals for major projects.
  • Project governance and oversight mechanisms are limited and there are inconsistent links between approved projects and the strategic plans and priorities of the organization.
  • 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: Acceptable

  • 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.
  • There is no evidence of project managers creating staffing plans and authorization for necessary resources is not secured before project execution.
  • There is no evidence that the organization has failed to meet TB conditions regarding projects.
  • While project management related training is made available by the organization for employees, there are no processes to ensure that employees with project management responsibilities are encouraged to complete relevant training and the number of qualified project managers is unknown.

15.3 Effective Management of Project Results: Acceptable

  • 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.
  • While there is evidence of project monitoring and reporting activities, there is no evidence that these activities are ongoing or that the information is used to support corrective action.
  • While there is evidence that project milestones, deliverables and outcomes are documented for some projects, it is not a requirement across the organization.

 

Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

16. Effective Procurement

     


Strong

Highlights Opportunities

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Strong

  • Clear and continually updated links between procurement activities and the organization-wide program plans, priorities and long-term investments are evident.
  • Effective, accountable and integrated procurement management processes and controls have been established and incorporated in the organization's business cycle. (e.g., contract review mechanisms, documented decision making or proper use of delegated authorities).

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.
  • Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are fully utilized.
  • Results and reviews are being used to continuously adjust and improve current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.

 

Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly decreased

17. Effectiveness of Financial Management and Control

 

Opportunity for Improvement

   
Highlights Opportunities

17.1 Authorities and Policies: Attention Required

  • Audit report results show evidence of deficiencies that are of serious concerns.
  • Departmental procedures, tools, training and support for those individuals delegated with Section 34 authority show evidence of deficiencies that are of serious concern.
  • 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 deficiencies that are of serious concern.
  • Departmental processes to provide individuals delegated Section 33 authority with the information necessary to assess and approve transactions and to assess the adequacy of Section 34 account verification show evidence of good financial management practices.
  • The reporting of external user fee information shows only a few omissions in relation to reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Acceptable

  • Few Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.
  • Ninety to 96% (Grade A) of Public Accounts reporting plates submitted on time.

17.3 Management Capacity: Acceptable

  • A reasonable amount of training is provided for the financial management organization.
  • All, or almost all, FIs and management team members in the financial management organization have current, approved learning plans.
  • Few processes in support of a sound succession plan for key positions are in place.
  • Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise a reasonable proportion of the positions on the management team of the financial management organization.
  • Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise all, or almost all, of the FI segment of the financial management organization.
  • There is a position (or positions) established in the financial management organization that is dedicated to community management and development.

17.4 Financial Statements: Acceptable

  • "There is evidence of some work undertaken to assess and/or monitor and/or improve internal control over financial reporting."
  • 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: Acceptable

  • The internal financial reporting package is accompanied by a weak discussion and analysis.
  • The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management less than 15 calendar days 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 weak.
  • The scope of the internal financial reporting package is comprehensive.

There is a lack of internal audits reports on matters of financial management. Procedures and support for individuals delegated with section 34 show evidence of deficiencies that are of serious concern.

Processes for informing those delegated with section 33 authority of their responsibilities and dealing with requests for payments that are problematic show evidence of deficiencies that are of serious concern.

Independent reviews of the department's financial management practices are essential elements of a good risk-based audit plan and should be reviewed annually to provide senior management and the audit committee with the assurance of those practices.

Recommendations

Ensure there are periodic independent reviews of management's financial practices.


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

18. Effectiveness of Internal Audit Function

 

Opportunity for Improvement

   
Highlights Opportunities

18.1 Internal Audit governance: Opportunity for Improvement

  • 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.
  • An independent Departmental Audit Committee has either recently been established or is scheduled to be in place and is on track with planned timelines.
  • There is a Departmental Audit Committee Charter in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: Attention Required

  • Insufficient evidence of Deputy Head approval of Annual Risk-Based Audit Plan.
  • Annual Risk-Based Audit Plan methodology is somewhat evident and applied.
  • All post-engagement follow-up activities are clearly identified.
  • There is very little or no information of the planned use of all audit function resources.
  • Vast majority of planned work is on audit assurance versus other types of activities.
  • No identification of continuity with previous year's work.
  • Very low completion rate or no assurance products (number of assurance audit reports) against 2007-2008 Risk-Based Audit Plan.
  • Internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program has not been documented.
  • Post-engagement follow-up process is not documented and very few or no recommendations are followed up using a risk-based approach.

18.3 Administration of the Internal Audit Function: Opportunity for Improvement

  • Planned FTEs dedicated to internal audit fall well below the resource level identified in the planned internal audit function's budget for 2008-2009.
  • Investment in Certified Internal Auditor certification, learning and training exceeds 10% 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 fall well below the resource level identified in 2007.
  • Some elements of a comprehensive Human Resources Plan have been documented, and evidence of recruitment and external resourcing activity exists.

18.4 Internal Audit Performance: Acceptable

  • Limited periodic reporting on the follow-up of Management Action Plans.

LAC has prepared and submitted an Implementation Plan for the Policy on Internal Audit with the majority of items targeted for completion in the winter of 2008-2009 or later; however, there is no evidence of approval. LAC has made positive steps towards the creation of its DAC.

As noted in MAF Round V, LAC should prepare a complete multi-year Risk-Based Audit Plan (RBAP) for 2009-2010, which demonstrates the use of a risk-based methodology, includes a risk-ranked audit universe as well as a complete and comprehensive identification of planned use of audit function resources. The RBAP should include a statement of constraints or adequacy of overall resources to cover all high risks identified in the plan and could be improved by including more detailed information on carry-over engagements. LAC should also increase its completion rate of planned engagements.

Additionally, an internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program should be documented and implemented. A documented process to track management action plans should be developed. Reporting to DAC on the status of follow-up of management action plans should be done at least semi-annually.

Recommendations

As noted last year, LAC should focus on its Internal Audit Governance. LAC must appoint a qualified Chief Audit Executive at a senior executive level reporting to the Deputy Head to be compliant with the Policy on Internal Audit.


 


Rating change since previous year: Slightly increased

19. Effective Management of Security and Business Continuity

     


Strong

Highlights Opportunities

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Strong

  • Organization's security program is fully developed and sustainable, and comprises all key policy elements.
  • Organization demonstrates leadership and contributes to the government-wide security program.
  • Organization's security strategy is completely aligned and integrated with its corporate priorities and business plan.

19.2 Management of IT Security (MITS): Acceptable

  • Organization has achieved the three priority objectives that form the foundation for Management of Information Technology Security (MITS) and complies with most MITS requirements.
  • No significant deficiencies in meeting key MITS requirements.

19.3 Business Continuity Planning (BCP):

  • Organization has conducted a Business Impact Analysis (BIA) and has determined that it does not provide critical services to the public and private sectors.

Note: The assessment methodology for Line of Evidence 19.3 will be revised for MAF Round VII.  Please refer to the assessment for details.

  • Pursue ongoing initiatives to continue improving the departmental security program, including communications and roll-out of the new security policy, development of sub-policies and chapters, and formalization of incident management procedures.
  • Maintain ongoing efforts to achieve and sustain MITS compliance.
  • Continue activities currently underway related to business continuity planning, including determining legal obligations and IT dependencies, and developing a crisis communications strategy. Sustaining management support at all levels will be key to ensuring adequate BCP capacity across the organization.
Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: No change since last year

20. Citizen-focused Service

   


Acceptable

 
Highlights Opportunities

20.1 Management Engagement – Service and CLF: Opportunity for Improvement

  • The institution may have committees or sub-committees which consider and/or make decisions about service. Such committees or sub-committees may not be composed of senior management accountable for services. The institution, however, does not have a committee which is responsible for making decisions about and overseeing service at the institutional level.
  • There are limited 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 priorities and goals for service, but not always at the institutional level; these limited priorities and goals are set by senior management based on the use of limited performance evidence.
  • There has been no monitoring or no steps to set up monitoring of progress towards the achievement of goals by senior management.
  • There is little monitoring by senior management to ensure that the requirements of CLF 2.0 are being met institution-wide; there is limited information on which to make decisions and course correction.

20.2 Public/client views: Strong

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

20.3 Official Languages: Strong

  • Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is fully meeting its obligations.
  • No complaint or minimal number of founded complaints exits.
  • The institution has the necessary linguistic capacity to serve the public in both OL.

TBS encourages LAC to:

  • Establish or modify an existing governance structure to ensure service oversight at the institutional level.
  • Use performance information, including the results of client satisfaction measurement and performance related to service standards, to identify goals and priorities for service improvement.
  • Conduct client satisfaction measurement for key services using the Common Measurements Tool (CMT) developed by the Institute for Citizen-Centred Service.
  • Set institutional-level service related goals and priorities and communicate them to staff.
  • Monitor the progress towards achievement of service improvement goals.
  • Make its major consultations available on the Canada site.
Recommendations

 


 


Rating change since previous year: Not available

21. Alignment of Accountability Instruments

     


Strong

Highlights Opportunities

 

All departments and agencies should place a heightened focus on clear accountabilities, face to face, mid-year review and performance improvement plans.

Recommendations