ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Environment Canada - 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• The Strategic Outcome(s) does/do not represent (an) outcome statement(s) that is/are understood within and outside the department as a benefit to Canadians.

2.2 Measurability: Opportunity for Improvement

• A Program Activity Architecture has been developed with major 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.

3.1 Business Plan: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization has identified the need for a corporate business plan (or TBS accepted equivalent) and is making progress in its development.

3.2 Governance Structure: Acceptable

• Organization's corporate governance structure is generally aligned to the organization's PAA.

4.1 Leadership of Priority Initiatives: Strong

• The organization has established a highly effective management structure for its initiative, including clear roles and responsibilities, outcomes and an engagement strategy.
• The organization shows strength in leadership of its priority interdepartmental initiative.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization contributes effectively to priority interdepartmental initiatives.
• The organization contributes effectively to Public Service Renewal.
• The organization’s commitments are somewhat clear.

4.3 Portfolio Coordination: Acceptable

• Adequate attention paid to developing coherent policy or program approaches across portfolio.
• The Department’s portfolio coordination is effective.

TBS has assessed EC with regards to its leadership of the international Climate Change Initiative, its participation in Public Service Renewal, the Web of Rules Initiative, and the Federal Science and Technology Strategy (FSTS), and for its portfolio management responsibilities.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• Organization has the capacity to respond effectively to most TBS feedback.
• Policy and budget authorities are usually identified.

5.2 Analysis: Opportunity for Improvement

• Business cases may have comprehensive information but demonstrate only partial and incomplete analysis.

5.3 Consultations: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization should be better able to predict factors that lead to occasional lateness.

5.4 Quality control: Acceptable

• TBS feedback is usually fully addressed.

6.1 Quality: Strong

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

6.2 Neutrality: Strong

• 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.
• 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 almost always brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPR and Strategic Reviews.

7.1 MRRS Basis: Acceptable

• Good links between performance and plans are present.
• Some linkages between resources and results are made in the reports.

7.2 Credible information: Acceptable

• DPR generally provides independently verifiable evidence-based performance information. Some information on the validity and credibility of data used is provided.
• Linkages between PA and Strategic Outcome (SO) level performance are generally made in the DPR.

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

• 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.

8.3 Assessment: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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.
• 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 encourages effective Risk Management and a risk-smart culture.
• Accountability for key risks does not appear to be assigned to senior management.

9.2 Implementation: Opportunity for Improvement

• The organization’s Risk Management approach is inconsistently communicated to staff and stakeholders.
• The Corporate Risk Profile is inconsistently implemented into 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.
• It is not evident that operational level risks are prioritized into key risks.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles are inconsistently captured in senior management reporting.
• The organization makes adequate course corrections based on Risk Management performance and new information.

9.4 Continuous Improvement: Acceptable

• Most relevant external sources are consulted during the development of the organization’s CRP.
• Risk information was inconsistently 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 reliable assessment of the quality of risk information used.
• The organization inconsistently builds on past experience, better practice, and adjusts to fit any changes in management structures, priorities or strategic direction.
• The organization has implemented some recommendations provided during its last MAF assessment.

The CRP 2008 includes an informal qualitative assessment of the draft CRP 2008 information. EC has plans to advance its risk management practices, and develop a risk management communications strategy, policy, guidelines, and a website containing key IRM documents and RM information. EC has demonstrated efforts to improve incorporation of risk management information into senior-management decision making, planning and reporting.

10.1 Fair: Acceptable

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

10.2 Enabling: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization demonstrates the necessary linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• Organization 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 equal or less than previous year's performance.
• Separations among employment equity groups are equal or greater than previous year's performance.
• Work instruments, electronic systems and communication tools are generally available in both official languages.

10.3 Healthy and safe: Opportunity for Improvement

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

11.1 Productive: Opportunity for Improvement

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

11.2 Principled: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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 is less than the organization's average for all employees.
• Promotions among employment equity groups are less than representation for at least one group.
• Some deficiencies in communications with and services to the public in both official languages.

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 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.

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

• Some 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

• 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.
• A significant number of institution-specific Classes of Records do not meet Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.

13.1 Leadership: Strong

• Senior official for information technology has responsibility and accountability for virtually the full scope of information technology responsibilities.
• 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization is making efforts to appropriately use and plan for further use of information technology shared services.
• Organization is developing 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.
• Best practices and lessons learned are shared internally and government-wide.

14.2 Real Property Management: Acceptable

• All elements of a real property management framework are implemented.
• Governance structures, approval processes and authority limits are documented and disseminated.
• Reliable and integrated information systems are in place.
• Certification of information in the FCSI is received and accepted.
• Indicators of real property performance are monitored and performance measurement is ongoing.

14.3 Materiel Management: Acceptable

• All elements of a materiel management framework are evident.
• 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.

14.2 Real Property Management: Submission of annual contaminated sites management plans have been delayed.

Certification of information in the DFRP is conditionally accepted.

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Strong

• Effective organization-wide decision-making processes and procedures ensure that all projects are aligned with the strategic plans and priorities of the organization and all relevant decisions are documented.
• The organization has established procedures that require all project proposals to be supported by business cases which clearly define project outcomes.
• There is no evidence that the organization has exceeded Treasury Board approval limits.

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 evidence that most project managers prepare a staffing plan to secure authorization for necessary resources prior to project execution.
• There is no evidence that the organization has failed to meet TB conditions regarding projects.

15.3 Effective Management of Project Results: Acceptable

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

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Clear 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.
• 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: Strong

• Audit report results show evidence of good financial management practices.
• Departmental procedures, tools, training and support for those individuals delegated with Section 34 authority show evidence of good 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 specific transactions and to assess the adequacy of Section 34 account verification show evidence of solid financial management practices.
• The reporting of external user fee information meets or nearly meets the requirements of the reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Opportunity for Improvement

• Few Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.
• Less than 79% (grade C or D) of Public Accounts reporting plates submitted on time.
• No 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 low proportion of the FI segment of the financial management organization.
• Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise a low proportion of the positions on the management team of the financial management organization.
• Some processes in support of a sound succession plan for key positions are in place.
• There is not a position established in the financial management organization that is dedicated to community management and development.

17.4 Financial Statements: Acceptable

• Several known financial internal control weaknesses remain unremedied.
• Most of the 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.

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 eight to nine times per year.
• The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management less than 15 calendar days after period end.
• 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.

17.6 Other Initiatives: Acceptable

• Evidence of some initial measures taken towards implementing the Guide to Costing.
• The organization has identified financial management initiatives in such areas as policies, reporting, systems and community development.

While the department maintained its overall rating of Acceptable, its financial management capacity decreased and requires attention. However, it scored Strong on its compliance with financial legislative authorities and policies.

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.
• The Departmental Audit Committee Annual Report for 2007-2008 has been submitted to the Deputy Head and the Office of the Comptroller General.

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: Opportunity for Improvement

• The Annual Risk-Based Audit Plan was received by the Office of the Comptroller General late in the fiscal year or was never received.
• 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 partial information on the planned use of all audit function resources.
• Vast majority of planned work is on audit assurance versus other types of activities.
• Continuity of previous years work is clearly identified with status and rationale.
• Approved assurance products are consistent with policy and internal audit standards requirements.
• Moderate 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 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 notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat on issues of importance on an ad hoc basis or is aware of this requirement.
• The department or agency does not provide 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.
• 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 been maintained comparatively to 2007-2008. They meet the resource level identified in the planned internal audit function’s budget for 2008-2009.

18.4 Internal Audit Performance: Strong

• A comprehensive 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 and Reporting on Internal Audit Performance. In particular, the Departmental Audit Committee is fully established and the Chief Audit Executive has produced an approved Annual Report for FY 2007-2008.

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Acceptable

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

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

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

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: Strong

• Evidence of incorporating feedback in the implementation of its services, programs, policies or initiatives.
• 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: 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.
• Small number of complaints deemed founded by the Commissioner of Official Languages.
• The institution does not always have the resources to serve the public in both OL.
• The institution has initiated the necessary follow-ups to improve service delivery in both OL.

*Erratum: TBS acknowledges that due to a technical error the correct rating for Environment Canada for AoM 21 is not accurate in this report.  The correct rating for AoM 21 is “Strong.”