ARCHIVED - MAF Assessment: Public Safety Canada - 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

• 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.

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.

2.1 PAA Consistency: Attention Required

• The Strategic Outcome(s) is/are not appropriate given the nature and resources of the organization

2.2 Measurability: Acceptable

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

2.3 Quality:

• An incomplete or inadequate performance measurement framework has been developed.
• 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.
• 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: Opportunity for Improvement

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

4.3 Portfolio Coordination: Acceptable

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

PS has been assessed for its participation in the following initiatives: Web of Rules - Opportunity for Improvement, and Public Service Renewal - Acceptable.

The department has taken note of the MAF Round V recommendation and has sought to increase its issue coordination with portfolio entities in the area of Cabinet affairs.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• Adequate explanation for the level of resources requested is partially sufficient.
• Adequate information is submitted for business cases.
• Funding information aligns fairly well with project authorities.
• Information aligns fairly well with TBS financial data.
• Organization has established a capacity to assemble usually accurate, reliable and complete supporting information in TB submissions.
• 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

• Analysis of value for money is partially effective or efficient.
• Appropriate consideration is given to a range of issues, such as gender-based analysis and sustainable development implications.
• Appropriate performance measurement or evaluation analysis is incomplete.
• Business cases may have comprehensive information but demonstrate only partial and incomplete analysis.
• Established capacity for appropriate responses to TBS comments is acceptable.
• Established capacity for options analysis is demonstrated.
• Established capacity in the understanding of external pressures exists.
• Generally, the correct policy authorities are used.
• Partial analysis of value for money, effectiveness or efficiency.
• Some links to MRRS, strategic objectives, etc., are present.

5.3 Consultations: Acceptable

• Established capacity to initiate consultations with TBS with sufficient lead time is evident.
• Organization is usually able to avoid lateness by predicting and planning for uncontrollable factors.
• Submissions are usually on time (six weeks before TB meetings).

5.4 Quality control: Opportunity for Improvement

• Description of resource requirements is clear.
• Good writing and translation standard have been used.
• 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.
• Submissions usually have SFO or Head of Evaluation sign offs when appropriate.
• TBS feedback is usually fully addressed.

6.1 Quality: Acceptable

• Evaluations submitted to TBS do not include a management response and/or action plan.
• 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 use multiple lines of evidence. Evaluations reflect the diversity and perspectives of multiple program stakeholders.

6.2 Neutrality: Opportunity for Improvement

• Evaluation function resourcing is not commensurate with the organizational evaluation plan.
• Most of the funding for evaluations is from program area budgets rather than directly from the evaluation function budget base.

6.3 Coverage: Attention Required

• Option 1: The organization has committed to moving toward full evaluation coverage of their program base (e.g. over a five-year cycle). However, relatively low number of evaluations are completed each year and they cover less than 10%.
• The organization has shown no evidence of moving towards full coverage of all ongoing programs of grants and contributions over a five year cycle as per the FedAA.

6.4 Usage: Attention Required

• Evaluation commitments, plans and requirements are regularly missed or deadlines extended. Organization almost always requests extensions from TBS.
• No tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations exists.
• 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 sometimes brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPRs and Strategic Reviews.

PS took some important steps in developing its evaluation function, including the establishment of a corporate evaluation unit and re-establishing a home for its evaluation governance function. If these and other planned capacity developments are successful and sustained, PS will be well positioned for future improvements.

7.1 MRRS Basis: Opportunity for Improvement

• Some linkages between resources and results are made in the reports.

7.2 Credible information: Opportunity for Improvement

• It is difficult for the reader to determine what the source of data and information reported in the DPR is and what the quality of the underlying data is.

7.3 Context: Opportunity for Improvement

• DPR uses some comparisons, but they are not effective.

8.1 Change plan: Acceptable

• Organizational change plan exists and is consistent with the scope of change identified.
• The organization has the capacity to evaluate whether or not change is required.

8.2 Engagement: Acceptable

• Employees are engaged in the strategy development phase.
• Individual and organization-wide change-related training programs are available.

8.3 Assessment: Acceptable

• Assessment plans exist and are broad in scope and detail.
• Change plans and strategies are priorities across the organization.

9.1 Engagement: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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 ensures that the organization’s Risk Management approach is tailored to the specific needs of the organization.
• Senior management has not reviewed/approved the Corporate Risk Profile for over a year.
• Senior management somewhat encourages Risk Management and a risk-smart culture.
• Accountability for key risks is assigned to senior management.

9.2 Implementation: Opportunity for Improvement

• The organization’s Risk Management approach is regularly 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 do not appear to be made available to staff.

9.3 Integration: Opportunity for Improvement

• Risk information is adequately 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 inconsistent course corrections based on Risk Management performance and new information.

9.4 Continuous Improvement: Opportunity for Improvement

• It is not evident whether external sources are consulted during the development of the organization’s CRP.
• Risk information was inconsistently gathered from internal sources of the organization for preparing the CRP.
• Corporate risks are consistently linked to the organization’s strategic outcomes and are adjusted as required.
• The CRP provides an inconsistent assessment of the quality of risk information used.
• The organization inconsistently builds on past experience, better practice, and adjusts to fit any changes in management structures, priorities or strategic direction.
• The organization has implemented some recommendations provided during its last MAF assessment.

During this assessment period Public Safety's integrated business planning approach stands out as a noteworthy one that directly links performance indicators, risks and risk mitigation strategies to objectives.

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: Acceptable

• Organization demonstrates the necessary linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• Organization is under-representative in one or more of the four employment equity designated groups.
• Organization progress remains unchanged from the previous year in representation, recruitment, promotions and separations of the four employment equity groups.
• Promotions among employment equity groups are greater than or equal to previous year's performance.
• Separations among employment equity groups are equal or greater than previous year's performance.
• Work instruments, electronic systems and communications with employees are always or nearly always available in both official languages.

10.3 Healthy and safe: Opportunity for Improvement

• Employees 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: Acceptable

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

11.2 Principled: Acceptable

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

11.3 Sustainable: Acceptable

• Evidence indicates human resources planning integrated with business planning is generally in place and governance/organizational infrastructure generally exists to support it.

11.4 Adaptable: Opportunity for Improvement

• An insufficient number of employees indicate their organization encourages continuous learning, improvement and innovation.

12.1 Governance: Acceptable

• IM requirements are integrated as a part of the approval, development, implementation, evaluation, and reporting of departmental policies, programs, services, or projects.
• IM is 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.
• Participation is evident in GC-wide approaches and initiatives related to developing, implementing, sharing, and leveraging IM policies and practices.

12.2 Strategy: Strong

• An approved and resourced IM strategy identifies support to business priorities and operations, information needs and accountabilities, IM policy considerations and is integrated with corporate strategies, plans, and planning cycles.
• An IM strategy implementation plan, including timelines and resources, is underway and achievements are evident. Mechanisms are in place to continuously evaluate and modify the plan.
• An IM awareness campaign or strategy is underway and all staff and executives are informed of their IM roles, responsibilities and accountabilities, and most have attended awareness / training sessions.

12.3 Privacy Act: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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 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: Acceptable

• The senior official has responsibility and accountability for the full scope of information technology responsibilities and ensures that information technology supports organizational outcomes.
• Adequate 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 devotes adequate management attention to service costing, asset management, performance measurement and reporting to ensure value delivery.

14.1 Investment Planning: Acceptable

• Organizational priorities and areas of highest risk are identified and guide investment decisions.
• The organization’s investment planning process considers investments over multiple years.
• The organization has a planning document that ranks priority investments.

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.

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Acceptable

• Business cases, which define expected outcomes, are required to support proposals for major projects.
• There is no evidence that the organization has exceeded Treasury Board approval limits.

15.2 Effective Management of Project Resources: Acceptable

• 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.
• The organization recognizes project management as a discipline and most employees with project management responsibilities have completed relevant project management training.

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 that the organization monitors project performance and uses this information to support corrective action.

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Opportunity for Improvement

• Inconsistent links exist between procurement activities and the organization-wide program plans, priorities and long-term investments.
• Some procurement planning.

16.2 Meeting Operational Requirements: Acceptable

• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are in use.
• Qualified procurement human resources exist.
• Results and reviews are used to continuously adjust current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.
• Some staff enrolled in the Professional Development and Certification program.
• Timely and accurate procurement financial and non-financial reports have been submitted.

17.1 Authorities and Policies: Acceptable

• Departmental procedures, tools, training and support for those individuals delegated with Section 34 authority show evidence of deficiencies that are of serious concern.
• Departmental processes for classification of moneys, internal controls for receiving and recording money and depositing money show evidence of good financial management practices.
• Departmental processes for informing those delegated with Section 33 authority of their responsibilities and dealing with requests for payments that are problematic show evidence of good financial management practices.
• Departmental processes to provide individuals delegated Section 33 authority with the information necessary to assess and approve specific transactions and to assess the adequacy of Section 34 account verification show evidence of solid financial management practices.
• The reporting of external user fee information meets or nearly meets the requirements of the reporting guidelines.

17.2 Public Accounts Reporting: Strong

• Greater than 97% (Grade A) of Public Accounts plates completed 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.
• An inadequate 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.

17.4 Financial Statements: Acceptable

• "There is evidence of some work undertaken to assess and/or monitor and/or improve internal control over financial reporting."
• 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 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 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.

While the department maintained an overall rating of Acceptable, there were improvements in the quality, timeliness and accuracy of reporting for the Public Accounts, the strength of its financial management capacity and in the quality of its organizational financial statements, and progress towards realizing audited financial statements.

18.1 Internal Audit governance: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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.
• Chief Audit Executive does not solely report to the Deputy Head, but has a dual reporting relationship.
• An independent Departmental Audit Committee has either recently been established or is scheduled to be in place and is on track with planned timelines.
• A draft Departmental Audit Committee Charter exists and is in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.

18.2 Internal Audit Professional Practices: Opportunity for Improvement

• 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 limited information of 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 not clearly identified, or there is limited identification of status and rationale.
• Very low completion rate or no 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 not produced in a timely manner.
• Post-engagement follow-up process is not documented, and very few or no recommendations are followed up using a risk-based approach.
• The department or agency provides limited notification to the Treasury Board Secretariat on issues of importance.
• 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

• 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 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: Opportunity for Improvement

• Limited periodic reporting on the follow-up of Management Action Plans.

The department has made some progress in implementing the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit, in the areas of Internal Audit Governance and Professional Practices (produced a Risk-Based Audit Plan).

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): 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.
• Some deficiencies in meeting key MITS requirements.

19.3 Business Continuity Planning (BCP): Opportunity for Improvement

• Organization has partially developed measures to provide for the continuity of critical business operations and services.
• 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.
• Significant deficiencies in establishing a maintenance cycle to review, test and audit business continuity plans.
• 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 little monitoring by senior management to ensure that the requirements of CLF 2.0 are being met institution-wide; there is limited information on which to make 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.
• There are 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.
• In general, the institution has adequate resources to serve the public in both OL.
• No complaint or minimal number of founded complaints exits.