ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Parks Canada - 2008

2.1 PAA Consistency: Strong

• 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.
• 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 at an appropriate level given the nature and resources of the organization.

2.2 Measurability: Acceptable

• An adequate Program Activity Architecture has been developed with some issues to be resolved.
• A partial inventory of programs has been developed but many listed programs do not meet the definition of a program.

2.3 Quality:

• The organization has developed a weak performance measurement framework.

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.

TBS has assessed Parks Canada with regard its participation in the Web of Rules (acceptable) exercise.

• Organization has established a capacity to assemble usually accurate, reliable and complete supporting information in TB submissions.
• Established capacity to initiate consultations with TBS with sufficient lead time is evident.
• While TBS feedback is fully addressed in most cases, response to TBS feedback is uneven across submissions.

6.1 Quality: Opportunity for Improvement

• Evaluations submitted to TBS do not include a management response and/or action plan.
• Evaluations submitted to TBS sometimes but not consistently address questions of program relevance, success and effectiveness.
• Evaluations submitted to TBS sometimes but not consistently employ appropriate methodologies to gather data and inform the analysis.
• 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 use multiple lines of evidence. Evaluations rarely reflect the diversity and perspectives of multiple program stakeholders.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS include analysis of the limitations of the methodology and data sources used.

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. Funding for the evaluation function has declined in the last two years.
• 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.

6.3 Coverage: Opportunity for Improvement

• Option 2: The organization has committed to moving towards full evaluation coverage of their program base (e.g. over a five year cycle). However, year-to-year coverage of direct program spending is relatively low due to small number of evaluations completed.
• 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.

6.4 Usage: Opportunity for Improvement

• Active, systematic and regular tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations is in place.
• Only between 40% to 60% of RMAFs are implemented.
• The results of evaluations are rarely brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPRs and Strategic Reviews.
• Very few evaluations submitted to TBS incorporate data from a performance measurement system to support the evaluation. Submitted evaluations almost always cite data availability and/or quality as constraints.

7.1 MRRS Basis: Acceptable

• Linkages between resources and results are adequately demonstrated in the reports.
• Strong links between performance and plans are present. The DPR consistently discuses any changes in plans and how they affected performance.

7.2 Credible information: Strong

• DPR consistently provides independently verifiable evidence-based performance information.
• DPR is based on the PAA, i.e. performance is reported consistently by Program Activity (PA) at the PA level.

7.3 Context: Acceptable

• DPR is for the most part balanced. It presents both positive and negative aspects of performance, and substantiation or explanation is consistently provided.

8.1 Change plan: Acceptable

• Organizational change plan exists and is consistent with the scope of change identified.
• The organization has the capacity to evaluate whether or not change is required.

8.2 Engagement: Acceptable

• Change management related training programs are available to some components of the organizations.
• Employees are engaged in the strategy development phase.
• Individual and organization-wide change-related training programs are available.

8.3 Assessment: Acceptable

• Assessment plans exist and are broad in scope and detail.
• Change plans and strategies are included in Performance Management Agreements of Senior Executives.
• Change plans and strategies are priorities across the organization.
• Results are apparent.

9.1 Engagement: Acceptable

• Senior management reviews the organization’s Risk Management approach within the current three-year planning cycle.
• Accountability for key risks is assigned to senior management.
• 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 somewhat encourages Risk Management and a risk-smart culture.
• 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 inconsistently made available to staff.
• The Corporate Risk Profile is systematically (horizontally and vertically) implemented into most operational levels across the organization.

9.3 Integration: Opportunity for Improvement

• Operational level risks are prioritized into key risks.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles are inconsistently captured in senior management reporting.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles somewhat influence planning and resource allocation decisions.
• Risk information is inconsistently considered and consulted for senior management decision-making.

9.4 Continuous Improvement: Acceptable

• 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.
• 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 has implemented most recommendations provided during its last MAF assessment.

Parks Canada Agency should be commended on its focused efforts to improve its risk management capacity in MAF Round VI, after two consecutive years of an Attention Required rating.

PCA has established a strong foundation for effective risk management, leading to a significant improvement in its rating. However, PCA has just crossed into the Acceptable range and there is significant work ahead.

10.2 Enabling: Acceptable

• The Official Languages portion of this evaluation has been made by CPSA.
• Organization demonstrates a generally adequate linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• Work instruments, electronic systems and communication tools are generally available in both official languages.

11.2 Principled: Acceptable

• 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.

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 fully represented in the corporate-wide governance structure and in the corporate-wide governance or approval committee(s).
• Responsibilities are identified for IM policy development and implementation is wholly consistent with the GC IM Strategy and policy instruments.
• Extensive participation is evident in GC-wide approaches and initiatives related to developing, implementing, sharing, and leveraging IM policies and practices.

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.

12.3 Privacy Act: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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 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.

13.1 Leadership: Acceptable

• Senior official for information technology has responsibility and accountability for virtually the full scope of information technology responsibilities.
• Adequate 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.
• No evidence exists of service costing, asset management, performance measurement and reporting.

14.1 Investment Planning: Acceptable

• Organizational priorities and areas of highest risk are identified and guide investment decisions.
• The organization’s investment planning process considers investments over multiple years.
• The organization has a current long-term investment planning document that has been approved by the proper authority.
• The organization’s investment planning documents do not cover all asset classes.

14.2 Real Property Management: Acceptable

• Comprehensive internal policies are documented and disseminated.
• Some elements of a real property management framework have been implemented.
• There is no evidence that approval processes and authority levels are broadly communicated.
• Information systems are in place but real property information is not reliable or integrated with other systems.
• Certification of information in the FCSI is not received and accepted.

14.3 Materiel Management: Acceptable

• Operating policies are absent or limited in scope.
• Some elements of a materiel management framework are evident.
• Some indicators of materiel performance are monitored.
• Experience and best practices are shared internally and government-wide.

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

14.3 Materiel Management: Information systems are not integrated.

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: 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.
• 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.
• While there is evidence that some managers prepare a staffing plan, it is not required prior to project execution.

15.3 Effective Management of Project Results: Acceptable

• There is a clear link between the review process and project management governance and oversight mechanisms.
• There is evidence of organization-wide procedures and processes which communicate project monitoring and performance information to project managers and project oversight mechanisms.
• There is no requirement for business cases that define project outcomes and few projects are subject to a review.
• 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.

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Clear links have been established between procurement activities and the organization-wide program plans, priorities and long-term investments.
• 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: Acceptable

• Clear links to human resources planning are established (e.g., succession planning and recruitment strategies for procurement staff).
• Consistent procurement training is evident.
• Efficient and integrated procurement information systems and processes are in place.
• Informed decision making and oversight exist.
• Lack of appropriate links to human resources planning is in place (e.g., little to no succession planning and recruitment strategies for procurement staff).
• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are in use.
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.
• Results and reviews are used to continuously adjust current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.
• Some staff enrolled in the Professional Development and Certification program.
• Timely and accurate procurement financial and non-financial reports have been submitted.

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 solid 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 good financial management practices.
• 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 meets or nearly meets the requirements of the 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.
• Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise a reasonable 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 all, or almost all, 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 an acceptable 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.
• There is not a position established in the financial management organization that is dedicated to community management and development.

17.4 Financial Statements: Strong

• The Financial Statements are compliant with Treasury Board Accounting Standard 1.2 – Departmental and Agency Financial Statements and reporting deadlines were met.
• The organization received an ‘unqualified audit opinion' with respect to its financial statements.
• There is no known financial internal control weaknesses.

17.5 Internal Reporting: Acceptable

• The internal financial reporting package is accompanied by a good 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 six to seven 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 reasonable.

The agency maintained its overall Acceptable rating while making improvements in the quality, timeliness and accuracy of reporting for the Public Accounts and the strength of its financial management capacity.

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 a 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.
• There is a written statement indicating that a Departmental Audit Committee Annual Report will be produced for fiscal year 2008-2009 and future years.

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: Acceptable

• 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.
• Most post-engagement follow-up activities are identified.
• There is complete and comprehensive identification of 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 identified with status or rationale.
• Approved assurance products are consistent with policy and internal audit standards requirements.
• High completion rate of assurance products (number of assurance audit reports) against 2007-2008 Risk-Based Audit Plan.
• An Internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program has been drafted.
• Assurance products (reports) are produced in a somewhat timely manner.
• Approved assurance products are made accessible to the public in a reasonably timely manner.
• Post-engagement follow-up process is in draft or partially documented, and some recommendations are followed up using a risk-based approach.
• The department or agency provides sufficient advanced notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat of the posting of reports.

18.3 Administration of the Internal Audit Function: Acceptable

• 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.
• Investment in Certified Internal Auditor certification, learning and training does not meet the basic requirement of 4% of FTE salaries.
• Recruitment and external resourcing activities are guided by a documented Human Resources Plan.
• Planned FTEs dedicated to internal audit have grown comparatively to 2007-2008. They exceed the resource level identified in the planned internal audit function’s budget for 2008-2009.

18.4 Internal Audit Performance: Opportunity for Improvement

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

One hundred per cent of planned engagements from the 2007-2008 Risk-Based Audit Plan have been completed.

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization has a partially developed security program that contains some of the required policy elements.
• Several 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): Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization has partially developed measures to provide for the continuity of critical business operations and services.
• Some deficiencies in meeting key 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.
• Business continuity plans and arrangements are in place and approved by senior management.
• Significant deficiencies in establishing a maintenance cycle to review, test and audit business continuity plans.

20.1 Management Engagement – Service and CLF: Acceptable

• Senior management has set priorities and goals in an ad hoc or informal fashion or not at the institutional-level.
• 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 has been no monitoring or no steps to set up monitoring of progress towards the achievement of goals by senior management.
• There is a committee at the institutional level, composed of senior management accountable for service, which has a documented and communicated responsibility for making decisions about the overall management of service.
• 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: Acceptable

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

20.3 Official Languages: Acceptable

• Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is generally able to meet its obligations.
• Audits reveal few shortcomings in active offer and service delivery in both OL.
• In general, the institution has adequate resources to serve the public in both OL.
• Small number of complaints deemed founded by the Commissioner of Official Languages.