ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Canadian International Development Agency - 2008

1.1 Leadership: Acceptable

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

1.2 Infrastructure: Acceptable

• Risks in regard to possible breaches in public service values and ethics are regularly assessed, documented and followed up with mitigation plans and action by management.
• 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: Acceptable

• Managers and staff are encouraged to engage in values and ethics dialogue.
• Organization has a good understanding of the current state of public service values and ethics as evidenced by qualitative or quantitative information.

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 partial inventory of programs has been developed but many listed programs do not meet the definition of a program.

2.3 Quality:

• The performance indicators are not clear and cannot be used for data collection to provide reliable insight into program effectiveness.
• Expected results are not clear and distinct, and are not appropriate to their respective program descriptions.

3.1 Business Plan: Acceptable

• Corporate business plan generally aligns resources and accountabilities to priorities.

3.2 Governance Structure: Acceptable

• Adequate management oversight of the organization's program activities and underlying programs is evident.
• Organization's corporate governance structure is generally aligned to the organization's PAA.
• Recordkeeping is generally complete and current (minutes of meetings and records of discussion, decision, and follow-up).
• Resource reallocation is generally proactive when or where required.
• 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.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

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

CIDA has been assessed for its participation in the following initiatives: Web of Rules - Strong; Public Service Renewal - Acceptable; and, Afghanistan - Acceptable.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

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

5.2 Analysis: Opportunity for Improvement

• Business cases may have comprehensive information and demonstrate good analysis.
• Established capacity for analysis on implementation is evident.
• Established capacity for appropriate performance measurement or evaluation analysis is evident.
• Generally, the correct policy authorities are used.

5.3 Consultations: Acceptable

• Established capacity to initiate consultations with TBS with sufficient lead time is evident.
• Submissions are usually on time (six weeks before TB meetings).

5.4 Quality control: Opportunity for Improvement

• Important information is only sometimes included in the first draft.
• Moderate clarity exists and consistent language is used.
• Quality control process is sometimes evident and is partially effective.
• Some consistency of information throughout documents is evident.

6.1 Quality: Strong

• Evaluations submitted to TBS usually present findings, conclusions and recommendations that are supported by the evidence found in the evaluation report.
• The large majority of evaluations submitted to TBS consistently address relevance, success, and effectiveness. They also address cost-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 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: Strong

• Evaluation function resourcing is commensurate with the organizational evaluation plan.
• 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 and is attended by designated committee members.
• Some resources dedicated to evaluations are directed by the Head of Evaluation, some resources are directed by the program base.

6.3 Coverage: Strong

• 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.
• 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. Current annual evaluation coverage of G&Cs is more than 15%.
• The organization has shown evidence of moving towards full evaluation coverage of its program base (e.g. over a five-year cycle). Current annual coverage is over 15% of direct program expenditures. The organization has a demonstrated track record of completing planned evaluations.

6.4 Usage: Acceptable

• Active, documented, 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.
• Most RMAFs are implemented (i.e. between 60-89%). Program managers are required to commit to implementation timelines.
• Some evaluations submitted to TBS incorporate data from a performance measurement system to support the evaluation. Submitted evaluations usually 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: Acceptable

• Strong linkages between resources and results are consistently demonstrated in the reports.

7.2 Credible information: Acceptable

• Linkages between PA and Strategic Outcome (SO) level performance are generally made in the DPR.
• The reader has a good sense generally of the source of the data and information in the DPR and its quality.

7.3 Context: Acceptable

• Comparisons used in the DPR are extensive and particularly effective.
• There is adequate discussion of lessons learned.

8.1 Change plan: Acceptable

• Organizational change plan exists and is consistent with the scope of change identified.

8.2 Engagement: Acceptable

• Change management related training programs are available to some components of the organizations.

8.3 Assessment: Acceptable

• Assessment plans exist and are broad in scope and detail.
• Change plans and strategies are included in Performance Management Agreements of Senior Executives.

9.1 Engagement: Acceptable

• Senior management reviews the organization’s Risk Management approach within the current three-year planning cycle.
• The organization has a common risk assessment approach and it has been approved by senior management.
• Senior management somewhat 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 is assigned to senior management.

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 most 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• Risk information is inconsistently considered and consulted for senior management decision-making.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles somewhat influence planning and resource allocation decisions.
• 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

• 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.
• Corporate risks are consistently linked to the organization’s strategic outcomes.
• The CRP provides an inconsistent assessment of the quality of risk information used.
• The organization adequately builds on past experience, better practice, and adjusts to fit any changes in management structures, priorities or strategic direction.
• The organization has implemented most recommendations provided during its last MAF assessment.

CIDA is making progress in implementing risk management practices throughout the department. Each year senior management regularly reviews and approves the Corporate Risk Profile (CRP). It is implemented and informs most levels of the organization and accountability for key risks appears to be assigned to senior management.

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: Strong

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

10.3 Healthy and safe: Opportunity for Improvement

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

11.1 Productive: Acceptable

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

11.2 Principled: Strong

• Organization is representative of all 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• Evidence indicates some human resources planning integrated with business planning exists.
• Support by means of governance/organizational infrastructure is not always present.

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.

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

• Organization submitted an Annual Report to Parliament but did not address all of the mandatory reporting requirements.
• A significant number of institution-specific Classes of Records do not meet Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.
• A significant number of the organization's functions, programs, activities and related information holdings have not been appropriately identified or described in its 2008 Chapter of Info Source: Sources of Federal Government Information. This information is a requirement of the Access to Information Act to facilitate public access to federal government information.

13.1 Leadership: 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• The organization does not have a current investment planning document.
• The organization’s investment planning documents do not cover all asset classes.

14.3 Materiel Management: Opportunity for Improvement

• Some elements of a materiel management framework are evident.
• There is no evidence that delegated authorities, governance structures and decision-making processes are documented and disseminated.
• Operating policies are absent or limited in scope.
• Reliable and sufficiently integrated information systems are in place.
• Some indicators of materiel performance are monitored.

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Business cases, which define expected outcomes, are required to support proposals for major projects.
• There is evidence of formal project governance and oversight mechanisms and that approved projects are generally linked with the strategic plans and priorities of the organization through established organization-wide procedures. Approval and corrective action decisions are documented.
• There is no evidence that the organization has exceeded Treasury Board project approval limits, or failed to notify TB/TBS when it did.

15.2 Effective Management of Project Resources: Opportunity for Improvement

• There is no evidence of project managers creating staffing plans and authorization for necessary resources is not secured before project execution.
• 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.

15.3 Effective Management of Project Results: Strong

• The organization requires that outcomes are clearly defined for projects in business case documentation and most projects are subject to a review.
• The organization requires that project milestones, deliverables and outcomes are documented for major projects.
• There is a clear link between the review process and project management governance and oversight mechanisms.
• There is evidence of organization-wide procedures and processes which communicate project monitoring and performance information to project managers and project oversight mechanisms.
• There is evidence that the organization monitors project performance and uses this information to support corrective action.

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Effective and accountable procurement management processes and controls are in place (e.g., contract review mechanisms, documented decision making, guidance documents, appropriate delegation instruments or proper use of delegated authorities).
• Some procurement planning.

16.2 Meeting Operational Requirements: Acceptable

• Efficient and integrated procurement information systems and processes are in place.
• Informed decision making and oversight exist.
• Links to human resources planning are inconsistent (e.g., insufficient succession planning and recruitment strategies for procurement staff).
• 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.
• Some timely and accurate procurement financial and non-financial reports exist.

An internal audit dated June 19, 2008, concluded that CIDA’s Management of Competitive Contracting is in compliance with the federal government’s regulatory framework.

17.1 Authorities and Policies: Acceptable

• 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 serious 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: Strong

• Ninety to 96% (Grade A) of Public Accounts reporting plates submitted on time.
• No errors found during the course of the OAG Public Accounts audit.
• Several Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.

17.3 Management Capacity: Acceptable

• A reasonable proportion of FIs and 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 a reasonable proportion of the FI segment of the financial management organization.
• Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise a very 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 a position (or positions) established in the financial management organization that is dedicated to community management and development.
• There is an acceptable functional relationship between the CFO/SFO and FI positions that exist outside the financial management organization.* This row is only applicable where the department or agency indicates there are FI positions outside the financial management organization.

17.4 Financial Statements: Acceptable

• All concerns identified in the audit readiness assessment are addressed in a detailed action plan.
• Minor areas of non-compliance with Treasury Board Accounting Standard 1.2 – Departmental and Agency Financial Statements and/or some non-compliance with reporting deadlines related to the submission of annual departmental financial statements.
• Several known financial internal control weaknesses remain unremedied.

17.5 Internal Reporting: Acceptable

• The internal financial reporting package is accompanied by a weak discussion and analysis.
• The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management less than 15 calendar days after period end.
• The internal financial reporting package is presented to senior management ten or more times per year.
• The process for reviewing information before it is presented to senior management to ensure no material errors or omissions is established.
• The scope of the internal financial reporting package is reasonable.

17.6 Other Initiatives: Acceptable

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

While the agency maintained its overall rating of Acceptable, the quality of its internal financial reporting decreased.

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 ahead of schedule.
• Chief Audit Executive reports solely and exclusively to the Deputy Head.
• An independent Departmental Audit Committee has either recently been established or is scheduled to be in place and is on track with planned timelines.
• There is an approved Departmental Audit Committee Charter in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.

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.
• Vast majority of planned work is on audit assurance versus other types of activities.
• Most post-engagement follow-up activities are identified.
• Continuity of previous years work is clearly identified with status and rationale.
• Approved assurance products are consistent with policy and internal audit standards requirements.
• 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 well documented and in place.
• Assurance products (reports) are not produced in a timely manner.
• Post-engagement follow-up process is well documented, and recommendations are followed up using a risk-based approach.
• The department or agency is proactive in providing notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat on issues of importance.
• The department or agency is proactive in providing notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat for 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 represents a minimum of 5% of FTE salaries.
• Planned spending, *, was given to the Office of the Comptroller General. When comparing current spending of 2008-2009 with planned financial resources of 2007-2008, resource levels identified maintain the resource levels identified in 2007.
• Planned FTEs dedicated to internal audit have grown comparatively to 2007-2008. They exceed the resource level identified in the planned internal audit function’s budget for 2008-2009.

18.4 Internal Audit Performance: 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 ongoing progress in the areas of Internal Audit Governance, Professional Practices and Reporting on Audit Performance.

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Opportunity for Improvement

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

19.2 Management of IT Security (MITS): Acceptable

• Organization has achieved the three priority objectives that form the foundation for Management of Information Technology Security (MITS) and complies with most MITS requirements.
• No significant deficiencies in meeting key MITS requirements.

19.3 Business Continuity Planning (BCP): Strong

• Organization has a fully developed and sustainable ability to provide for the continuity of critical business operations and services.
• Completed and approved plans are in place for Pandemic and Information Management / Information Technology emergency preparedness.

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 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 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• Evidence of incorporating feedback in the implementation of its services, programs, policies or initiatives.
• Few tools used to obtain views from clients.
• Little or no evidence of making consultation results available to the public.
• Little or no evidence of plans to obtain views from clients.
• There is a clearly identified target clientele for public consultations.

20.3 Official Languages: Strong

• Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is fully meeting its obligations.
• Audits reveal very good performance in active offer and service delivery in both OL.
• No complaint or minimal number of founded complaints exits.
• The institution has the necessary linguistic capacity to serve the public in both OL.