ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Canadian Food Inspection Agency - 2008

1.1 Leadership: Strong

• This section is based on the assessment submitted by this separate employer to TBP.
• Executive leaders engage employees and stakeholders on an ongoing basis in ethical discussions and openly address organizational ethical issues through public statements and internal messaging.

1.2 Infrastructure: Strong

• This section is based on the assessment submitted by this separate employer to TBP.
• Managers are trained in and apply risk management concepts, techniques and tools.
• Organization monitors risks in regard to possible breaches of public service values and ethics, and risk management is integrated into decision making.
• Values and ethics plans or strategies are tailored to an organization's work, span several years, and measure results and are used to inform senior management on the state of the organization's values and ethics.

1.3 Culture: Strong

• This section is based on the assessment submitted by this separate employer to TBP.
• Mechanisms are in place to promote public service values and ethics and are reflected in organization practices and employee behaviour.
• Organization has a solid understanding of public service values and ethics as a result of balanced and robust evidence.
• 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• There is little evidence that the Strategic Outcome(s) is/are measurable and does/do not clearly represent an end-state.
• The Strategic Outcome(s) is/are not at an appropriate level given the nature and resources of the organization.

2.2 Measurability: Opportunity for Improvement

• A Program Activity Architecture has been developed with major issues to be resolved.

2.3 Quality:

• The organization has not developed a performance measurement framework.

3.1 Business Plan: Acceptable

• Corporate business plan generally aligns resources and accountabilities to priorities.
• Sector or branch business plans are generally aligned with the corporate business plan.

3.2 Governance Structure: Acceptable

• Senior corporate management structure (e.g., committees) interacts with and provides oversight to the supporting governance structure.
• Senior corporate management structure or subordinate governance structure (e.g., committees) meet regularly.
• Terms of reference are generally current and complete.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization contributes effectively to priority interdepartmental initiatives.
• The organization contributes effectively to Public Service Renewal.

TBS has assessed the Canadian Food Inspection Agency with regard to its participation in the Web of Rules - Opportunity for Improvement and Public Service Renewal Initiatives - Acceptable.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• Information aligns fairly well with TBS financial data.
• Organization has the capacity to respond effectively to most TBS feedback.
• 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 in the understanding of external pressures exists.
• Generally, the correct policy authorities are used.

5.3 Consultations: Opportunity for Improvement

• Submissions are usually on time (six weeks before TB meetings).

5.4 Quality control: Acceptable

• Clarity and consistency of language are good.
• Description of resource requirements is clear.
• Submissions usually have SFO or Head of Evaluation sign offs when appropriate.

CFIA should continue to improve its internal coordination to support the TB submission process. The central role played by the Agency's Resource Management group should assist in this regard. Given the complexity of the Agency's submissions, both the accuracy and completeness of supporting information contained in TB submissions, and the timeliness of consultations with TBS should be considered as areas for improvement.

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 analysis of the limitations of the methodology and data sources used.
• The majority of evaluations submitted to TBS use multiple lines of evidence. Evaluations reflect the diversity and perspectives of multiple program stakeholders.

6.2 Neutrality: Acceptable

• 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

• Option 1: The organization is working according to its evaluation plan and has shown evidence of moving towards full evaluation coverage of its program base (e.g. over a five-year cycle). Current annual evaluation coverage is between 10-15% of total direct program expenditures.

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.
• 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.

7.2 Credible information: Strong

• DPR consistently provides independently verifiable evidence-based performance information.

7.3 Context: Strong

• DPR effectively discusses lessons learned.
• DPR is for the most part balanced. It presents both positive and negative aspects of performance, and substantiation or explanation is consistently provided.
• Reports present the strategic context and operating environment including challenges, risks, opportunities and capacities. The reports link them directly to Strategic Outcome-level planning and performance information.

9.1 Engagement: Strong

• Senior management reviews the organization's Risk Management approach on a regular basis - scanning the environment to anticipate changes. This takes place often during the three-year planning cycle.
• Senior management ensures that the organization's Risk Management approach is tailored to the specific needs of the organization and is adjusted as required.
• Each year, senior management reviews/approves the Corporate Risk Profile more than once.
• 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.

9.2 Implementation: Strong

• The organization's Risk Management approach is regularly communicated to staff and stakeholders in a variety of ways.
• 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 in a variety of ways. This is proactively communicated to staff.

9.3 Integration: Strong

• Risk information is routinely consulted in senior management decision-making. This is done systematically and explicitly.
• Risk information Risk Management principles are ingrained in planning and resource allocation decisions.
• Operational level risks are prioritized into key risks and are adjusted as required.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles are ingrained in senior management reporting.
• The organization makes course corrections on an ongoing basis 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 consistently linked to the organization's strategic outcomes and are adjusted as required.
• 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 most recommendations provided during its last MAF assessment.

Senior management actively engages in risk management and encourages its practice to all employees. It proactively reviews its RM approach and CRP and ensures communication of key risk information with staff and stakeholders. The organization is effectively implementing its RM approach through engaging operational levels in the CRP process, and through linking RM with corporate planning, reporting and all senior management decision making.

10.2 Enabling: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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

• The Official Languages portion of this evaluation has been made by CPSA.
• 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.
• Linguistic capacity is not always in place as is shown by the important proportion of incumbents of bilingual positions who do not meet the language requirements of their position.

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

• Organization submitted an Annual Report to Parliament but did not address all of the mandatory reporting requirements.
• 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.
• Organization submitted an Annual Report to Parliament but did not address all of the mandatory reporting requirements.

13.1 Leadership: Opportunity for Improvement

• The senior official has responsibility and accountability for the full scope of information technology responsibilities and ensures that information technology supports organizational outcomes.
• 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: Acceptable

• 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: Strong

• All elements of a real property management framework are implemented.
• There is evidence that authority limits and policy compliance are monitored.
• Certification of information in the DFRP is received and accepted.
• Certification of information in the FCSI is received and accepted.
• Contaminated site management is consistent with policy and program guidelines.
• Experience and best practices are shared internally and government-wide.
• New and evolving best practices are introduced.
• A culture of continuous improvement is evident.

14.3 Materiel Management: Strong

• 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.
• A culture of continuous improvement is evident.

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Business cases, which define expected outcomes, are required to support proposals for major projects.
• 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.
• There is evidence of formal and effective organization-wide governance and oversight mechanisms.
• 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.
• 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 consistently documents the achievement of project milestones, deliverables and outcomes for all projects and this information is regularly communicated organization-wide.
• The organization has formal, organization-wide procedures and processes that systematically provide project managers and project oversight mechanisms with all relevant project monitoring and performance information and this information is demonstrably used to support project decisions.
• There is evidence that the organization has a robust review mechanism for projects, which measures defined outcomes throughout the lifecycle of projects and project reviews are integrated into the formal decision making process.

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Strong

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

16.2 Meeting Operational Requirements: Strong

• Clear links to human resources planning are established (e.g., succession planning and recruitment strategies for procurement staff).
• Consistent procurement training and certification programs exist.
• Efficient, effective and integrated procurement information systems and processes are evident.
• Mandatory training underway.
• Proactive and informed decision making and oversight are evident.
• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are fully utilized.
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.
• Results and reviews are being used to continuously adjust and improve current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.
• 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 solid 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 shows some omissions in relation to reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Acceptable

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

17.3 Management Capacity: Acceptable

• A low proportion of FIs or management team members in the financial management organization have current, approved learning plans.
• A significant 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 all, or almost all, 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 weak 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.

17.5 Internal Reporting: Strong

• 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 well established.
• 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.

While the agency maintained its overall rating of Strong, the rating of its financial management capacity was downgraded from a Strong to an Acceptable.

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: 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 evident and applied.
• Most post-engagement follow-up activities are 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 not consistent with policy and internal audit standards requirements, containing one key methodological deficiency.
• Reasonable 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 very timely manner.
• Approved assurance products are made accessible to the public in a somewhat timely manner.
• Post-engagement follow-up process is well documented, and all 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

• 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 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 agency has made further progress in the areas of Internal Audit (IA) Governance and Professional Practices. In particular, the Departmental Audit Committee (DAC) has been established and the Chief Audit Executive (CAE) produced an 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): Acceptable

• Organization has in place measures to provide for the continuity of critical business operations and services, and is compliant with most or all the policy requirements.
• 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.
• Establishment of business continuity plans and arrangements is in progress.
• Maintenance cycle has been put in place to review, test and audit business continuity plans.

20.1 Management Engagement - Service and CLF: Acceptable

• There are generally documented and communicated priorities and goals for service at the institutional level; these priorities and goals are generally set by senior management based on the use of performance evidence.
• 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 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 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.
• There is monitoring of progress by senior management towards the achievement of the institution-wide goals for service, with course correction if necessary.

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.
• No complaint or minimal number of founded complaints exits.
• The institution does not always have the resources to serve the public in both OL.