ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Citizenship and Immigration 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.
• Regarding Values and Ethics Risk Assessment and Mitigation, 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 statement(s) can be understood within and outside the department as a benefit to Canadians, however its/their clarity should be improved.

2.2 Measurability: Opportunity for Improvement

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

2.3 Quality:

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

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.
• Sector or branch business plans are generally aligned with the corporate business plan.

3.2 Governance Structure: Acceptable

• Adequate management oversight of the organization's program activities and underlying programs is evident.
• Management decisions and interventions are generally proactive and timely.
• Organization's corporate governance structure is generally aligned to the organization's PAA.
• Recordkeeping is generally complete and current (minutes of meetings and records of discussion, decision, and follow-up).
• Senior corporate management structure (e.g., committees) interacts with and provides oversight to the supporting governance structure.
• Terms of reference are generally current and complete.

4.1 Leadership of Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization is effectively leading its priority interdepartmental initiatives.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization contributes effectively to priority interdepartmental initiatives.

4.3 Portfolio Coordination: Acceptable

• The Department’s portfolio coordination is effective.
• Substantial communications occur between departmental and portfolio entities’ executives.

CIC has been assessed for its leadership of the Temporary Resident Biometrics Project - Acceptable; Post-Implementation of Bill C-50 Ministerial Instructions - Acceptable and for its participation in Web of Rules - Acceptable, and Public Service Renewal - Acceptable.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• Funding information aligns fairly well with project authorities.
• Information on business cases is partial, and the level of detail required is somewhat lacking.
• Organization has the capacity to respond effectively to most TBS feedback.
• Policy and budget authorities are usually identified.
• Response to TBS comments is appropriate.
• Submission contains an adequate level of detail.

5.2 Analysis: Opportunity for Improvement

• Appropriate and complete links to MRRS, strategic objectives, etc., are used.
• Business cases may have comprehensive information but demonstrate only partial and incomplete analysis.
• Generally, the correct policy authorities are used.

5.3 Consultations: Acceptable

• Consultations are sometimes late (less than six weeks before TB meetings).

5.4 Quality control: Acceptable

• Generally rigorous and effective quality control process is in place and is usually followed for TB submissions.
• Good writing and translation standard have been used.
• Submissions always have SFO or Head of Evaluation sign offs when appropriate.

6.1 Quality: Acceptable

• All evaluations submitted to TBS use multiple lines of evidence. Evaluations reflect the diversity and perspectives of multiple program stakeholders. Non-stakeholder perspective is also included.
• 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: Acceptable

• All resources dedicated to evaluations are directed by the Head of Evaluation.
• 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.

6.3 Coverage: Opportunity for Improvement

• The organization has committed to moving towards full evaluation coverage of all ongoing programs of grants and contributions over a five year cycle as per 42.1 of the FAA. However, relatively low number of evaluations of G&Cs are completed each year and they cover less than 10%.
• The organization has shared its risk-based evaluation plan with TBS. The evaluation plan has information on evaluations planned, completed and carried over. It also includes links to the organization's PAA.

6.4 Usage: Acceptable

• Active, documented, systematic and regular tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations is in place.
• The results of evaluations are usually brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPR and Strategic Reviews.

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.
• DPR is based on the PAA, i.e. performance is usually reported by Program Activity (PA) at the PA level.

7.3 Context: Acceptable

• Comparisons are generally effectively and consistently used in the DPR.
• 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.

8.1 Change plan: Acceptable

• An organizational change plan exists, but it is only focused on some areas of the organization.
• The organization has the capacity to evaluate whether or not change is required.

8.2 Engagement: Acceptable

• Change management related training programs are available to some components of the organizations.
• Engagement of employees is only linked to general consultation processes.

8.3 Assessment: Opportunity for Improvement

• Change plans and strategies are included in Performance Management Agreements of Senior Executives.

9.1 Engagement: Acceptable

• The organization has a common risk assessment approach and it has been approved by senior management.
• Senior management ensures that the organization’s Risk Management approach is tailored to the specific needs of the organization.
• Each year, senior management reviews/approves the Corporate Risk Profile more than once.
• Senior management encourages effective Risk Management and a risk-smart culture.
• Accountability for key risks is assigned to senior management and performance is assessed.

9.2 Implementation: Acceptable

• 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: 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 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.
• Comprehensive risk information was extensively 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 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.

Senior management reviews and approves the Corporate Risk Profile (CRP) on a regular, annual basis, and is taking a more proactive approach to identifying and managing its key risks, by monitoring risks at least once a year at mid-year, or more often as required. Key risk areas are assigned accountability at the ADM level and performance is assessed. Risk information is also extensively consulted in senior management decision making.

10.1 Fair: Acceptable

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

10.2 Enabling: Acceptable

• Organization demonstrates a generally adequate linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• Organization is under-represented 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 shows that the organization has an inadequately managed program to protect employees' 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: Acceptable

• 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 less than representation for at least one group.

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).
• Responsibilities are identified for IM policy development and implementation consistent with the GC IM Strategy and policy instruments.

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: Acceptable

• Most of the organization’s collections of personal information are described in registered Personal Information Banks and/or Classes of Personal Information in accordance with the requirements of the Privacy Act.

12.4 Access to Information Act: Acceptable

• Some institution-specific Classes of Records do not meet 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: Acceptable

• 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: Acceptable

• Organization is making efforts to appropriately use and plan for further use of information technology shared services.
• Organization devotes adequate management attention to service costing, asset management, performance measurement and reporting to ensure value delivery.

14.1 Investment Planning: Acceptable

• The organization has a planning document that ranks priority investments.
• The organization’s investment planning documents do not cover all asset classes.
• The organization’s investment planning process considers investments over multiple years.

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.

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.

15.2 Effective Management of Project Resources: Opportunity for Improvement

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

• 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

• Results and reviews are used to continuously adjust current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.
• Clear links to human resources planning are established (e.g., succession planning and recruitment strategies for procurement staff).
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.
• Mandatory training underway.
• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are in use.
• Some staff enrolled in the Professional Development and Certification program.
• Procurement training is done on an ad hoc basis.
• Some informed decision making and oversight exists.
• Timely and accurate procurement financial and non-financial reports have been submitted.
• No evidence of problems but no internal audit in 10 years.
• Excellent work documenting Management Control Framework and identifying gaps.
• CIC experiencing same HR issues as all departments regarding resources. CIC's pressures exacerbated by impending retirement of Director of Procurement and anticipated large, complex procurement for Biometrics.

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 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 solid financial management practices.
• Departmental processes to provide individuals delegated Section 33 authority with the information necessary to assess and approve transactions and to assess the adequacy of Section 34 account verification show evidence of good financial management practices.
• The reporting of external user fee information shows only a few omissions in relation to reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Strong

• Minimal Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.
• 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.

17.3 Management Capacity: Acceptable

• A reasonable amount of training is provided for the financial management organization.
• All, or almost all, FIs and management team members in the financial management organization have current, approved learning plans.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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: 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: Strong

• 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.

This department not only maintained its overall rating of Strong but it maintained an equivalent rating in each Line of Evidence from MAF Round V to Round VI.

18.1 Internal Audit governance: Acceptable

• There is an approved Internal Audit Charter in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.
• The Implementation Plan covers all of the required policy elements.
• Ongoing monitoring of, and progress in implementing, key elements of the plan are on track with planned timelines.
• Chief Audit Executive reports solely and substantively 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 a 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.
• There is a written statement indicating that a Departmental Audit Committee Annual Report will be produced for fiscal year 2008-2009 and future years.

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: 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.
• There is evidence of preparation to provide for holistic assurance.
• Most post-engagement follow-up activities are identified.
• There is partial information on the planned use of all audit function resources.
• 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.
• Post-engagement follow-up process is well documented, and all recommendations are followed up using a risk-based approach.
• Assurance products (reports) are produced in a somewhat timely manner.
• Approved assurance products are made accessible to the public in a reasonably timely manner.
• The department or agency provides sufficient advanced notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat of 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 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 Departmental Audit Committee is in place with two external members and an additional two members are anticipated to be appointed in September 2009. An audit follow-up process is documented and implemented.

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): 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: 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 well-established committee at the institutional level, composed of senior management accountable for service, which has a fully 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

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

20.3 Official Languages: Acceptable

• Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is generally able to meet its obligations.
• Audits reveal few shortcomings in active offer and service delivery in both OL.
• Relatively large number of complaints deemed founded by the Commissioner of Official Languages.
• The institution has the necessary linguistic capacity to serve the public in both OL.