ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Correctional Service 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: Acceptable

• Organization has a plan that includes a strategy championed by senior management with medium-term activities to raise awareness of the importance of public service values and ethics.
• 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.

1.3 Culture: Acceptable

• Organization has a good understanding of the current state of public service values and ethics as evidenced by qualitative or quantitative information.
• Public service values and ethics are generally understood.
• Values and ethics principles are reflected in communications.

2.1 PAA Consistency: Acceptable

• 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: Acceptable

• All elements of the Program Activity Architecture are in alignment with the Strategic Outcome(s).
• An adequate Program Activity Architecture has been developed with some issues to be resolved.

2.3 Quality:

• The organization has developed a weak performance measurement framework.

3.1 Business Plan: Strong

• Organization's corporate business plan is well aligned to corporate priorities.
• Sector priorities, accountabilities, business plans and resource allocations are fully aligned.
• Human resources, IM/IT, communications and other key corporate plans are well integrated and communicated internally.

3.2 Governance Structure: Strong

• Organization's corporate governance structure is fully aligned to the organization's PAA.
• Management decisions and interventions (includes resource reallocation) are consistently proactive and timely.
• Management oversight of the organization's program activities is clearly evident.
• Recordkeeping is complete and timely. It clearly outlines accountabilities for follow-up action.
• Senior management sets priorities for and is briefed regularly on the work of the supporting governance structure.
• Terms of reference for all levels in the governance structure are current and complete.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization shows strength in its participation in Public Service Renewal.
• The organization's commitments are clear and are consistent with its role.

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

5.1 Supporting Information: Strong

• Supporting information in TB submissions is always very accurate, reliable and complete.
• Explanation for the level of resources requested is fulsome.
• Detail is robust.
• The organization is highly responsive to TBS feedback.
• Response to TBS comments is excellent.

5.2 Analysis: Strong

• Sustained capacity for options analysis is demonstrated.
• Sustained capacity for appropriate responses to TBS comments is demonstrated.
• Sustained capacity for analysis on implementation is very evident.
• Sustained capacity in understanding of external pressures is strong.

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: Strong

• Sustained capacity for consistency of information throughout documents is evident.
• A highly rigorous and effective quality control process is followed for all TB submissions.
• All important information is always included in the first draft.
• Clarity and consistency of language are good.
• Description of resource requirements is clear.
• Submissions always have SFO or Head of Evaluation sign offs when appropriate.
• TBS feedback is always fully addressed.
• Very good writing and translation standard has been demonstrated.

6.1 Quality: Strong

• All evaluations submitted to TBS employ appropriate methodologies to gather data and inform the analysis.
• All evaluations submitted to TBS include analysis of the limitations of the methodology and data sources used. Evaluations also include mitigation strategies to address the limitations.
• All evaluations submitted to TBS present findings, conclusions and recommendations that are supported by the evidence found in the evaluation report. The report also discusses the degree of validity and reliability of the evidence.
• 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 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 include a management response and an action plan detailing timelines and management accountabilities.

6.2 Neutrality: Strong

• 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: Acceptable

• The organization has shared its multi-year, 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. As well, there is evidence to indicate that the organization has calibrated its evaluation efforts and/or approaches according to program context.

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.
• Majority of evaluations submitted to TBS incorporate data from a performance measurement system to support the evaluation. Submitted evaluations sometimes cite data availability and/or quality as constraints.
• The results of evaluations are usually brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPR and Strategic Reviews.

7.2 Credible information: Acceptable

• DPR generally provides independently verifiable evidence-based performance information. Some information on the validity and credibility of data used is provided.
• 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 are generally effectively and consistently used in the DPR.
• Reports adequately present the strategic context and operating environment information including challenges, risks, opportunities and capacities.

8.1 Change plan: Strong

• Comprehensive organizational change plan exists and matches the scope of change that has been identified.
• Established and robust capacity is in place to evaluate whether or not change is required.

8.2 Engagement: Strong

• A learning culture exists within the organization.
• Employees and stakeholders are actively engaged at all phases and are committed to advancing strategies and initiatives.
• Comprehensive change management related training programs are available throughout the organization.

8.3 Assessment: Acceptable

• Assessment plans exist and are broad in scope and detail.
• Change plans and strategies are priorities across the organization.
• 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 but it has not 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 and performance is assessed.

9.2 Implementation: Acceptable

• The organization's Risk Management approach is inconsistently communicated to staff and stakeholders.
• The Corporate Risk Profile is systematically (horizontally and vertically) implemented into 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 routinely consulted in senior management decision-making. This is done systematically and explicitly.
• 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

• Some 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 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.

CSC is to be commended for its practice of requiring links to the CRP and risk assessments in all project proposals presented for Executive Committee approval.  This process ensures that risk forms part of the considerations that senior management makes when deciding amongst project options.

10.1 Fair: Opportunity for Improvement

• Evidence shows that labour relations matters are not consistently managed/addressed.
• Evidence shows that the organization is not consistently complying with Labour Relations and Compensation Operations direction (terms and conditions of employment, collective agreements and/or applicable legislation).
• Evidence shows that the organization exceeds standards of timeliness in payments to employees.
• The organization is undertaking action to improve the classification program, which is at medium-high to high risk; however, there is evidence that the monitoring program is not yet fully effective.

10.2 Enabling: Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization demonstrates a generally adequate linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• 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.
• The organization is under-represented in more than one of the four employment equity designated groups.
• Separations among employment equity groups are less than or equal to previous year's performance.
• Work instruments, electronic systems and communication tools are generally available in both official languages.

10.3 Healthy and safe: Acceptable

• A considerable number of employees do not feel recognized for positive performance.
• Evidence shows that the organization has in place a well-managed program to protect employees' occupational health and safety which follows or establishes best practices in occupational health and safety.

11.1 Productive: Opportunity for Improvement

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

11.2 Principled: Opportunity for Improvement

• Communications with and services to the public in both official languages are generally available.
• Employees consider that they generally can communicate in the official language of their choice within their organization and work instruments, electronic systems and communications in both official languages are generally available.
• Necessary linguistic capacity is in place as is shown by the vast majority of incumbents of bilingual positions who meet the language requirements of their position.
• Organization is under-represented in one or more of the four employment equity designated groups.
• Progress against the previous year's performance on recruitment, promotion and separation for employment equity groups equal the organization's average for all employees.
• Promotions among employment equity groups are less than representation for at least one group.

11.3 Sustainable: Strong

• Evidence indicates human resources planning is integrated with business planning and there is ongoing support by means of governance/organizational infrastructure.

11.4 Adaptable: Attention Required

• Few employees indicate their organization encourages continuous learning, improvement and innovation.

12.1 Governance: Acceptable

• IM requirements are somewhat integrated as a part of the approval, development, implementation, evaluation, and reporting of departmental policies, programs, services, or projects.
• IM is somewhat represented in the corporate-wide governance or approval committee(s).
• Some responsibilities are identified for IM policy development/ implementation.

12.2 Strategy: Acceptable

• The IM strategy is in development but it is not clear how it supports departmental business priorities and operations nor how it integrates 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.
• Minimal IM awareness activities are underway to help staff and executives understand their IM roles, responsibilities and accountabilities.

12.3 Privacy Act: Acceptable

• Organization submitted an Annual Report to Parliament but did not address all of the mandatory reporting requirements.
• Some descriptions of institution-specific personal information under the control of the organization do not meet Treasury Board Secretariat requirements.

12.4 Access to Information Act: Opportunity for Improvement

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

Although the overall rating for Correctional Service of Canada is Acceptable, the department has not met several of the assessed statutory requirements of the Access to Information Act.

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

• 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: 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: 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.
• A culture of continuous improvement is evident.
• Experience and best practices are shared internally and government-wide.

14.3 Materiel Management: Acceptable

• Some indicators of materiel performance are monitored.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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 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 the organization has not met all TB conditions regarding projects.

15.3 Effective Management of Project Results: Acceptable

• 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

• 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).

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.
• Mandatory training underway.
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.

The department undertook an internal audit of contracting in 2006-2007, which included seven recommendations. All have been implemented except for a new departmental contracting policy, that the department plans to promulgate within a year. All of the actions in response to the audit contributed to the improved management of procurement within the department.

17.1 Authorities and Policies: Acceptable

• Audit report results show evidence of deficiencies that are of serious concerns.
• 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 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 meets or nearly meets the requirements of the reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Acceptable

• Minimal Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.
• Several accounting period 13 adjustments.

17.3 Management Capacity: Strong

• A significant 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 reasonable 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 all, or almost all, 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 position (or positions) established in the financial management organization that is dedicated to community management and development.

17.4 Financial Statements: Acceptable

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

17.5 Internal Reporting: Acceptable

• The internal financial reporting package is accompanied by a good 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 one month 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 reasonable.

While this department maintained its overall rating of Acceptable, there were considerable improvements in its financial management capacity.

18.1 Internal Audit governance: Strong

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

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: Strong

• 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 complete and comprehensive identification of 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 identified with status or rationale.
• Approved assurance products are consistent with policy and internal audit standards requirements.
• High completion rate of assurance products (number of assurance audit reports) against 2007-2008 Risk-Based Audit Plan.
• An Internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program has been drafted.
• Assurance products (reports) are produced in a reasonably timely manner.
• Approved assurance products are made accessible to the public in a reasonably timely manner.
• Post-engagement follow-up process is well documented, and 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 provides limited 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 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 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.
• Extensive periodic reporting on the follow-up of Management Action Plans is evident.

The department continues to progress towards full implementation of the Policy on Internal Audit. In particular, the CAE reporting relationship to the DH has been strengthened.

19.1 Departmental Security Program: Strong

• Organization's security program is fully developed and sustainable, and comprises all key policy elements.
• Organization demonstrates leadership and contributes to the government-wide security program.
• Organization's security strategy is completely aligned and integrated with its corporate priorities and business plan.

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 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 limited monitoring of progress by senior management towards the achievement of the goals for service, making course correction difficult.
• There is monitoring by senior management to ensure that the requirements of CLF 2.0 are being met institution-wide; this information is generally used to make timely and proactive decisions and course correction.

20.2 Public/client views: Acceptable

• Evidence of incorporating feedback in the implementation of its services, programs, policies or initiatives.
• Few tools used to obtain views from clients.
• Little evidence of making consultation results available to the public.
• Minor 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 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 has the necessary linguistic capacity to serve the public in both OL.