ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Fisheries and Oceans - 2008

1.1 Leadership: Strong

• Regarding Values and Ethics Leadership, the organization is maintaining its Round V (2007-08) assessment of Strong. It has submitted a Management Assertion to CPSA that no significant changes have occurred within the organization to affect this rating.

1.2 Infrastructure: Strong

• Regarding Values and Ethics Plans, the organization is maintaining its Round V (2007-08) assessment of Strong. It has submitted a Management Assertion to CPSA that no significant changes have occurred within the organization to affect this rating.

1.3 Culture: Strong

• Regarding the Current State of Organizational Values and Ethics, the organization is maintaining its Round V (2007-08) assessment of Strong. It has submitted a Management Assertion to CPSA that no significant changes have occurred within the organization to affect this rating.

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) is/are measurable and clearly represent(s) an end-state the organization is trying to achieve.

2.2 Measurability: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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.

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

• Organization's corporate governance structure is generally aligned to the organization's PAA.
• Terms of reference are generally current and complete.
• 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.

DFO is continuing to make progress in fully integrating departmental planning.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization's commitments are clear and are consistent with its role.

4.3 Portfolio Coordination: Acceptable

• Adequate attention is paid to the responsibility for portfolio affairs.
• The Department’s portfolio coordination is effective.

TBS has assessed DFO with regards to its participation in Public Service Renewal - Acceptable, the Web of Rules Initiative - Acceptable, and the Federal Science and Technology Strategy - Acceptable, and with regard to its portfolio management responsibilities.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• Organization has established a capacity to assemble usually accurate, reliable and complete supporting information in TB submissions.
• Minor inaccuracies in information relative to TBS financial data exists.
• Policy and budget authorities are usually identified.
• Submission contains an adequate level of detail.

5.2 Analysis: Acceptable

• Appropriate and complete links to MRRS, strategic objectives, etc., are used.
• Established capacity for appropriate performance measurement or evaluation analysis is evident.
• Established capacity for appropriate responses to TBS comments is acceptable.
• Established capacity for options analysis is demonstrated.
• Established capacity to analyze value for money, effectiveness and efficiency is evident.
• Generally, the correct policy authorities are used.

5.3 Consultations: Strong

• Consultations are always on time (6 weeks or earlier before TB meetings).
• Consultations with central agencies are planned and conducted in a timely manner with sufficient lead time.

5.4 Quality control: Acceptable

• Established capacity for consistency of information throughout documents is evident.
• Generally rigorous and effective quality control process is in place and is usually followed for TB submissions.
• Submissions usually have SFO or Head of Evaluation sign offs when appropriate.

TBS is generally satisfied with the quality and analysis of DFO's TB submissions. The department's strong ability to plan and conduct consultations with TBS on TB submissions in a timely manner with sufficient lead time is especially noted.

6.1 Quality: Acceptable

• Evaluations submitted to TBS usually present findings, conclusions and recommendations that are supported by the evidence found in the evaluation report.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS consistently address questions of program relevance, success and effectiveness.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS consistently employ appropriate methodologies to gather data and inform the analysis.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS include a management response and an action plan detailing timelines and management accountabilities.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS use multiple lines of evidence. Evaluations 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

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

6.3 Coverage: Acceptable

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

6.4 Usage: Acceptable

• Active, systematic and regular tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations is in place.
• Evaluation commitments, plans and requirements are delivered on time or extensions are due to circumstances beyond the department's control. Organization occasionally requests extension from TBS.
• 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 usually brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPR and Strategic Reviews.

7.1 MRRS Basis: Strong

• RPP and DPR present a clear PAA (with crosswalks as necessary).

7.2 Credible information: Acceptable

• DPR is based on the PAA, i.e. performance is usually reported by Program Activity (PA) at the PA level.
• The DPR is concise. It contains an adequate amount of information relevant to the estimates process.

8.1 Change plan: Acceptable

• The organization has the capacity to evaluate whether or not change is required.

8.2 Engagement: Acceptable

• Engagement of employees is only linked to general consultation processes.
• Individual and organization-wide change-related training programs are available.

8.3 Assessment: Acceptable

• Change plans and strategies are included in Performance Management Agreements of Senior Executives.
• Change plans and strategies are priorities across the organization.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada is not currently implementing an organization-wide change initiative.  That said, the department has exhibited the capacity to identify and address specific areas in need of change within its organization.

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 that is adjusted and approved as required 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 not reviewed/approved the Corporate Risk Profile for over a year.
• Senior management encourages effective Risk Management and a risk-smart culture.
• Senior management leads by example in this area.
• Accountability for key risks is assigned to senior management and performance is assessed.

9.2 Implementation: Acceptable

• The organization’s Risk Management approach is inconsistently 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 adequately consulted for senior management decision-making.
• 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 inconsistent 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.
• Key risk information was adequately gathered from internal sources of the organization for preparing the CRP.
• The CRP provides a reliable assessment of the quality of risk information used.
• The organization explicitly builds on past experience, better practice, and adjusts to fit any changes in management structures, priorities or strategic direction.
• The organization has implemented all recommendations provided during its last MAF assessment.

The department is continuing to make steady progress in its efforts to implement IRM in the organization. Senior management is actively engaged in participating in risk management and encouraging a risk-smart culture, and it has assigned accountability for its key risks. The CRP is clearly implemented into operational levels, and the organization has demonstrated progress in incorporating risk management into business planning.

10.1 Fair: Strong

• Organization is undertaking action to improve the classification program in accordance with its level of risk.
• Evidence shows that labour relation matters are proactively and innovatively managed/addressed.
• Evidence shows that the organization exceeds standards of timeliness in payments to employees.
• Evidence shows that the organization is proactively seeking labour relations policy direction (terms and conditions of employment, collective agreements and/or applicable legislation).

10.2 Enabling: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization demonstrates the necessary linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• Organization is under-representative in one or more of the four employment equity designated groups.
• Organization progress remains unchanged from the previous year in representation, recruitment, promotions and separations of the four employment equity 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.
• Work instruments, electronic systems and communication tools are generally available in both official languages.

10.3 Healthy and safe: Opportunity for Improvement

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

11.1 Productive: Opportunity for Improvement

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

11.2 Principled: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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.
• 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.
• Organization is under-represented in one or more of the four employment equity designated groups.
• Progress against the previous year's performance on recruitment, promotion and separation for employment equity groups equal the organization's average for all employees.
• Promotions among employment equity groups are greater than or equal to representation.

11.3 Sustainable: Acceptable

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

11.4 Adaptable: Opportunity for Improvement

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

12.1 Governance: Acceptable

• IM requirements are 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.
• Although the organization has made several improvements to its 2008 Chapter of Info Source: Sources of Federal Government Information, revisions are still necessary to meet all Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.

13.1 Leadership: Strong

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

13.2 Planning: Strong

• A comprehensive information technology plan is in place and it aligns with the government-wide directions for information technology and with departmental business needs.
• Information technology management position is held by a highly engaged senior official designated within the corporate governance structure and related planning processes.

13.3 Value: Strong

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

14.1 Investment Planning: Strong

• An evergreen and fully integrated long-term investment plan has been approved by the proper authority and is in use operationally.
• The investment planning process identifies program needs across the organization and considers all investments in assets and acquired services.
• The investment planning process includes continuous improvement mechanisms based on performance information for investment planning.

14.2 Real Property Management:Opportunity for Improvement

• Some elements of a real property management framework have been implemented.
• Governance structures, approval processes and authority limits are documented and disseminated.
• Internal operating policies have not been implemented or internal policies are limited in scope.
• 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.
• Indicators of real property performance are monitored and performance measurement is ongoing.
• Contaminated site management is consistent with policy and program guidelines.

14.3 Materiel Management: Acceptable

• All elements of a materiel management framework are evident.
• Governance structures, approval processes and authority limits are documented and disseminated.
• Comprehensive internal policies are documented and disseminated.
• Reliable and sufficiently integrated information systems are in place.
• 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 DFRP has been conditionally accepted.

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 project approval limits, or failed to notify TB/TBS when it did.

15.2 Effective Management of Project Resources: Acceptable

• The organization’s funding models, which do not generate cost estimates at the work package level or consider historical and/or industry benchmarks, are not complete and project funds are not fully committed.
• 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 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.
• 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: Strong

• All projects are subject to ongoing monitoring and reporting activities. There is evidence that this information is consistently used to support corrective action and decisions are documented.
• The organization requires that outcomes are clearly defined for projects in business case documentation and most projects are subject to a review.
• There is evidence of organization-wide procedures and processes which communicate project monitoring and performance information to project managers and project oversight mechanisms.

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.
• Mandatory training underway.
• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are in use.
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.
• Results and reviews are 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 deficiencies that are of some concern.
• Departmental processes to provide individuals delegated Section 33 authority with the information necessary to assess and approve specific transactions and to assess the adequacy of Section 34 account verification show evidence of solid financial management practices.
• The reporting of external user fee information shows some omissions in relation to reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Opportunity for Improvement

• Eighty to 89% (grade B) of Public Accounts reporting plates submitted on time.
• Few Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.
• No significant errors found during the course of the OAG Public Accounts audit.

17.3 Management Capacity: Opportunity for Improvement

• A low proportion of FIs or management team members in the financial management organization have current, approved learning plans.
• A relatively minor 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 very low proportion of the FI segment of the financial management organization.
• Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise 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 a strong 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: Acceptable

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

17.5 Internal Reporting: Acceptable

• The internal financial reporting package is accompanied by a comprehensive discussion and analysis.
• The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management less than one month after period end.
• The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management 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 comprehensive.

17.6 Other Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization has identified a number of significant financial management initiatives.

While the department maintained its overall rating of Acceptable, the quality, timeliness and accuracy of the trial balance and Public Accounts plates requires improvement and the FI component lacks stability and little attention is given to training.

18.1 Internal Audit governance: Strong

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

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: 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.
• There is partial information on the planned use of all audit function resources.
• All post-engagement follow-up activities are clearly identified.
• 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.
• Low completion rate of assurance products (number of assurance audit reports) against 2007-2008 Risk-Based Audit Plan.
• Internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program is documented and is in the process of being implemented.
• Assurance products (reports) are produced in a reasonably timely manner.
• Approved assurance products are made accessible to the public in a somewhat timely manner.
• The department or agency is proactive in providing notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat on issues of importance.
• The department or agency provides limited notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat on the posting of reports.

18.3 Administration of the Internal Audit Function: Acceptable

• Some elements of a comprehensive Human Resources Plan have been documented, and evidence of recruitment and external resourcing activity exists.
• Investment in Certified Internal Auditor certification, learning and training does not meet the basic requirement of 4% 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 exceeds the resource level 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.
• Regular periodic reporting on the follow-up of Management Action Plans is evident.

The department has made ongoing progress in the areas of Internal Audit (IA) Governance, Professional Practices and Reporting on IA Performance. The Departmental Audit Committee (DAC) is established and the documentation provided is of high quality.

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Acceptable

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

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

• Organization has achieved the three priority objectives that form the foundation for Management of Information Technology Security (MITS), but does not fully comply with MITS requirements.
• Several 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.
• Several deficiencies in meeting key BCP program requirements.
• Business Continuity Planning (BCP) program governance has been established.
• Business Impact Analysis (BIA) has been partially completed to identify and prioritize the organization's critical services and assets.
• Significant deficiencies in establishing business continuity plans and arrangements.
• Maintenance cycle has been partially put in place to review, test and audit business continuity plans.

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 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 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

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

20.3 Official Languages: Opportunity for Improvement

• Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is generally able to meet its obligations.
• Audits reveal numerous shortcomings in active offer and service delivery in both OL.
• 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.
• The institution has initiated the necessary follow-ups to improve service delivery in both OL.