ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Canada School of Public Service - 2008

1.1 Leadership: Acceptable

• Executive leadership regularly communicates and encourages ongoing dialogue on public service values and ethics among employees.

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.

1.3 Culture: Strong

• Organization, on an ongoing basis, uses employee feedback from across the entire organization to measure its values and ethics culture and employee engagement.
• Results are analyzed to inform senior management on progress made.

2.1 PAA Consistency: Acceptable

• The Strategic Outcome statement(s) can be understood within and outside the department as a benefit to Canadians, however its/their clarity should be improved.

2.2 Measurability: Acceptable

• An adequate Program Activity Architecture has been developed with some issues to be resolved.

2.3 Quality:

• An adequate and complete performance measurement framework is in place; however some minor issues still need to be resolved.

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.

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.
• 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.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Strong

• Senior management is actively engaged in Public Service Renewal and is involving employees at all levels.
• The organization shows strength in its participation in priority interdepartmental initiatives.
• The organization's commitments to the initiatives are clear, measurable, and consistent with its role, and internal management structures have been established.

CSPS was assessed with regards to its participation in the Web of Rules (Strong) and Public Service Renewal (Strong) initiatives.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• Adequate explanation for the level of resources requested is partially sufficient.
• Adequate information is submitted for business cases.
• Emerging capacity to assemble supporting information in TB submissions.
• Emerging capacity to respond appropriately to TBS feedback.

5.2 Analysis: Acceptable

• Appropriate and complete links to MRRS, strategic objectives, etc., are used.
• Business cases may have comprehensive information and demonstrate good analysis.
• Emerging understanding of external pressures is only partial.
• Established capacity for appropriate responses to TBS comments is acceptable.

5.3 Consultations: Opportunity for Improvement

• Consultations are sometimes late (less than six weeks before TB meetings).
• Emerging capacity to plan and to initiate consultations with TBS with sufficient lead time is lacking.
• Organization should be better able to predict factors that lead to occasional lateness.

5.4 Quality control: Opportunity for Improvement

• Description of resource requirements is moderately clear.
• Moderate clarity exists and consistent language is used.
• Quality control process is sometimes evident and is partially effective.
• Some consistency of information throughout documents is evident.

6.1 Quality: Acceptable

• No evaluation was shared or submitted to TBS for review.

6.2 Neutrality: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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 no explicit authority to submit evaluation reports directly to the Deputy Head and occasionally has 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

• Option 1: The organization has committed to moving toward full evaluation coverage of their program base (e.g. over a five year cycle). However, relatively low number of evaluations are completed each year and they cover less than 10%.
• 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: Acceptable

• Active, systematic and regular tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations is in place.
• Most RMAFs are implemented (i.e. between 60-89%). Program managers are required to commit to implementation timelines.
• The results of evaluations are usually brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPR and Strategic Reviews.

7.1 MRRS Basis: Acceptable

• Any changes in resources are apparent, and the DPR discusses some of them and how they affected results.
• DPR identifies any changes in plans; some discussion of how they affected performance may be present.
• Good links between performance and plans are present.

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.
• Linkages between PA and Strategic Outcome (SO) level performance are not consistently made.
• Little or no information on the validity and credibility of data used is provided.

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.

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

• Employees are engaged in the strategy development phase.
• Individual and organization-wide change-related training programs are available.

8.3 Assessment: Opportunity for Improvement

• Change plans and strategies are included in Performance Management Agreements of Senior Executives.
• Results are not apparent.
• The organization does not effectively assess change plans.

9.1 Engagement: Acceptable

• 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.
• Senior management has reviewed/approved the Corporate Risk Profile within the past year.
• Senior management leads by example in this area.
• Accountability for key risks is assigned to senior management.

9.2 Implementation: Acceptable

• The organization's Risk Management approach is regularly communicated to staff and stakeholders.
• 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.
• 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 inconsistently linked to the organization's strategic outcomes.
• The CRP provides a comprehensive 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.

The Canada School of Public Service should be commended for its efforts in advancing the organization's enterprise-wide risk management approach. The organization has demonstrated progress particularly in the area of embedding risk in senior management decision making and in ensuring engagement of the Board of Governors and senior management in risk management discussions.

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 is in compliance with Labour Relations and Compensation Operations direction (terms and condition of employment, collective agreements and/or applicable legislation).
• The organization occasionally meets standards of timeliness in payments to employees.

10.2 Enabling: Strong

• Organization is representative of all four employment equity designated groups.
• Promotions among employment equity groups are greater than or equal to previous year's performance.
• Separations among employment equity groups are equal or greater than previous year's performance.

10.3 Healthy and safe: Opportunity for Improvement

• Employees feel recognized for positive performance.
• Evidence indicates that the organization fails to put in place a managed program to protect employees' occupational health and safety.

11.1 Productive: Strong

• A significant number of employees indicate their organization supports their career development and learning needs.

11.2 Principled: Acceptable

• Progress against the previous year's performance on recruitment, promotion and separation for employment equity groups is less than the organization's average for all employees.
• Promotions among employment equity groups are greater than or equal to representation.

11.3 Sustainable: Strong

• Evidence indicates human resources planning is integrated with business planning and there is ongoing support by means of governance/organizational infrastructure.

11.4 Adaptable: Acceptable

• A sufficient number of employees indicate their organization encourages continuous learning, improvement and innovation.

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 somewhat represented in the corporate-wide governance or approval committee(s).
• Responsibilities are identified for IM policy development and implementation consistent with the GC IM Strategy and policy instruments.
• 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 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• Senior official for information technology has only a partial scope of responsibility and accountability for information technology.
• 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: Strong

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

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.

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Business cases support some project proposals, but are not required for all 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 approval limits.

15.2 Effective Management of Project Resources: Opportunity for Improvement

• There is evidence of some processes and procedures which support resource management. However, these are largely informal and do not extend across the organization.
• There is evidence that the organization has consistently 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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.

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• 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).
• Clear links have been established between procurement activities and the organization-wide program plans, priorities and long-term investments.
• Organization prepares an annual procurement plan.

16.2 Meeting Operational Requirements: Acceptable

• Results and reviews are used to continuously adjust current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.
• 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.
• Mandatory training underway.
• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are in use.
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.
• Some staff enrolled in the Professional Development and Certification program.
• Timely and accurate procurement financial and non-financial reports have been submitted.

Following the 2007 audit of procurement and contracting, the School undertook a major review of its Contract Management Framework and has initiated a number of corrective measures.

The initiatives are embryonic but look very promising.

17.1 Authorities and Policies: Strong

• 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 solid 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: Strong

• Few Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.
• Greater than 97% (Grade A) of Public Accounts plates completed on time.

17.3 Management Capacity: Acceptable

• A low proportion of FIs or management team members in the financial management organization have current, approved learning plans.
• A reasonable amount of training is provided for the financial management organization.
• 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 a reasonable 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.

17.4 Financial Statements: Strong

• All concerns identified in the audit readiness assessment are addressed in a detailed action plan.
• The Financial Statements are compliant with Treasury Board Accounting Standard 1.2 - Departmental and Agency Financial Statements and reporting deadlines were met.
• Voluntary participation in the audited departmental financial statements initiative as evidenced by a strong departmental commitment and an existing detailed action plan.

17.5 Internal Reporting: Strong

• 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 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 well established.
• The scope of the internal financial reporting package is reasonable.

17.6 Other Initiatives: Acceptable

• Evidence of some initial measures taken towards implementing the Guide to Costing.

The school increased significantly its ratings from an Acceptable to a Strong on account of improvements of its financial management and control, the quality and timeliness of its trial balance and its compliance with TBAS 1.2.

18.1 Internal Audit governance: Acceptable

• 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 has either recently been established or is scheduled to be in place and is on track with planned timelines.
• There is an approved Departmental Audit Committee Charter in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.
• There is a draft annual Departmental Audit Committee Plan for fiscal year 2008-2009.
• The Departmental Audit Committee will meet (have met), but less than four times within twelve months of its inception.
• 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: 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 somewhat evident and applied.
• There is evidence of preparation to provide for holistic assurance.
• All post-engagement follow-up activities are clearly identified.
• There is limited information of the planned use of all audit function resources.
• Vast majority of planned work is on audit assurance versus other types of activities.
• 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.

18.3 Administration of the Internal Audit Function: Acceptable

• Recruitment and external resourcing activities are guided by a documented Human Resources Plan.
• 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 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: 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.
• Limited periodic reporting on the follow-up of Management Action Plans.

The Canada School continues to make progress implementing the requirements of the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit, particularly in the area of governance and has submitted the Canada School's first Risk-Based Audit Plan.

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization has a partially developed security program that contains some of the required policy elements.
• Some deficiencies in meeting key policy requirements for the departmental security program.

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.

20.1 Management Engagement - Service and CLF: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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 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 limited monitoring of progress by senior management towards the achievement of the goals for service, making course correction difficult.
• 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.

20.2 Public/client views: Acceptable

• Evidence of incorporating feedback in the implementation of its services, programs, policies or initiatives.
• Little evidence of making consultation results available to the public.
• 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: Strong

• Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is fully meeting its obligations.
• Audits reveal very good performance 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.