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: 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.

2.1 PAA Consistency: Acceptable

• The Strategic Outcome(s) reflects the departmental area of influence and is/are adequately aligned with the organization’s mandate.

2.2 Measurability: Acceptable

• 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.

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).
• Terms of reference are generally current and complete.

4.2 Participation in Priority Initiatives: Acceptable

• The organization contributes effectively to priority interdepartmental initiatives.

TBS has assessed WD with regard to its participation in Public Service Renewal - Acceptable; the Web of Rules Initiative - Acceptable; and the Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative - Strong.

5.1 Supporting Information: Acceptable

• 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.

5.2 Analysis: Acceptable

• Business cases may have comprehensive information and demonstrate good analysis.
• Established capacity for options analysis is demonstrated.

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

• A highly rigorous and effective quality control process is followed for all TB submissions.
• Submissions always have SFO or Head of Evaluation sign offs when appropriate.

6.1 Quality: Strong

• All evaluations submitted to TBS include a management response and an action plan detailing implementation strategies, timelines and management accountabilities.
• 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.
• The large majority of evaluations submitted to TBS consistently address relevance, success, and effectiveness. They also address cost-effectiveness.

6.2 Neutrality: Acceptable

• Senior management committee is in place to support, oversee and monitor the evaluation function and management accountabilities arising from evaluations and evaluation related products. The committee is chaired by the deputy head or senior level designate. The committee meets regularly during the year.
• The majority of resources dedicated to evaluations are directed by the Head of Evaluation.

6.3 Coverage: Acceptable

• 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. Year to year percent coverage indicates organization is on track to achieve 100% coverage.
• 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: Strong

• Active, documented, systematic and regular tracking of management action plans arising from evaluation recommendations is in place.
• Large majority of evaluations submitted to TBS incorporate data from a performance measurement system to support the evaluation. As well, submitted evaluations rarely cite data availability and/or quality as constraints.
• Most RMAFs are implemented (i.e. between 60-89%). Program managers are required to commit to implementation timelines.
• The results of evaluations are usually brought for consideration in TB submissions, Memorandum to Cabinet, RPPs, DPR and Strategic Reviews.

7.1 MRRS Basis: Strong

• Clear performance expectations in the RPP are all tracked and rigorously reported on in the DPR.

7.2 Credible information: Strong

• DPR is based on the PAA, i.e. performance is reported consistently by Program Activity (PA) at the PA level.
• Linkages between PA and Strategic Outcome (SO) level performance are generally made in the DPR.
• The DPR is concise. It contains a high proportion of estimates-related information and is drafted in a concise reporting style.
• The DPR is concise. It contains an adequate amount of information relevant to the estimates process.

7.3 Context: Acceptable

• 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: 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

• Employees and stakeholders are actively engaged at all phases and are committed to advancing strategies and initiatives.

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

• Accountability for key risks is assigned to senior management.
• Senior management 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 leads by example in this area.
• Senior management reviews the organization’s Risk Management approach within the current three-year planning cycle.
• The organization has a common risk assessment approach that is adjusted and approved as required by senior management.

9.2 Implementation: Acceptable

• Risk Management guidance and tools that enable the organization’s risk management approach are made available to staff in a variety of ways. This is proactively communicated to staff.
• The Corporate Risk Profile is systematically (horizontally and vertically) implemented into most operational levels across the organization.
• The organization’s Risk Management approach is regularly communicated to staff and stakeholders.

9.3 Integration: Acceptable

• Operational level risks are prioritized into key risks.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles are adequately captured in senior management reporting.
• Risk information and Risk Management principles influence planning and resource allocation decisions.
• Risk information is routinely consulted in senior management decision-making. This is done systematically and explicitly.
• The organization makes adequate course corrections based on Risk Management performance and new information.

9.4 Continuous Improvement: Acceptable

• Comprehensive risk information was extensively gathered from internal sources of the organization for preparing the CRP.
• Many relevant external sources are consulted during the development of the organization’s 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.

Western Economic Diversification has focused attention on its risk management practices over the past two years and should be commended for its continual improvement.

In particular, WD is currently refining its Corporate Risk Profile to align with its Program Activity Architecture and ensure a more effective and integrated approach that links key risks to business lines, corporate functions and the broader government agenda.

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 demonstrates the necessary linguistic capacity to provide personal and central services and supervision in both official languages.
• Organization is representative of all 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

• 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

• Communications with and services to the public in both official languages are generally available.
• Employees consider that they always or nearly always can communicate in the official language of their choice within their organization and work instruments, electronic systems and communications 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 representative of all 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.

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: Strong

• A significant 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).
• 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.
• 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: Acceptable

• Some 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: Acceptable

• Most of the organization's functions, programs, activities and related information holdings have been appropriately identified and described in its 2008 Chapter of Info Source: Sources of Federal Government Information.
• 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: 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: Acceptable

• The organization has a current long-term investment planning document that has been approved by the proper authority.
• The organization has a planning document that ranks priority investments.
• The organization’s investment planning process considers investments over multiple years.
• Organizational priorities and areas of highest risk are identified and guide investment decisions.

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.
• Comprehensive internal policies are documented and disseminated.
• Reliable and sufficiently integrated information systems are in place.
• Some indicators of materiel performance are monitored.

15.1 Governance and Oversight: Opportunity for Improvement

• Business cases support some project proposals, but are not required for all projects.
• Project governance and oversight mechanisms are limited and there are inconsistent links between approved projects and the strategic plans and priorities of the organization.
• 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 organization recognizes project management as a discipline and most employees with project management responsibilities have completed relevant project management training.
• 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.

15.3 Effective Management of Project Results: Acceptable

• 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.
• There is no evidence of formal processes or procedures which ensure that project managers and project oversight mechanisms have access to relevant project monitoring information.
• While there is evidence that project milestones, deliverables and outcomes are documented for some projects, it is not a requirement across the organization.

16.1 Governance and Oversight: Strong

• Effective, accountable and integrated procurement management processes and controls have been established and incorporated in the organization’s business cycle. (e.g., contract review mechanisms, documented decision making or proper use of delegated authorities).

16.2 Meeting Operational Requirements: Acceptable

• Competent (highly qualified or certified) procurement human resources are in place.
• Consistent procurement training and certification programs exist.
• Continuous links to human resources planning are in place (e.g., succession planning and recruitment strategies for procurement staff).
• Efficient, effective and integrated procurement information systems and processes are evident.
• Integrated, timely and accurate procurement financial and non-financial reporting exists.
• Proactive and informed decision making and oversight are evident.
• Procurement processes that contribute to cost savings and value for money are fully utilized.
• Results and reviews are being used to continuously adjust and improve current procurement management activities and future procurement plans.

17.1 Authorities and Policies: Strong

• Audit report results show evidence of good financial management practices.
• 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 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.
• Minimal Central Financial Management Reporting System (CFMRS) coding errors.

17.3 Management Capacity: Acceptable

• A low proportion of FIs or management team members in the financial management organization have current, approved learning plans.
• A significant amount of training is provided for the financial management organization.
• Positions, the duties of which are being performed by an individual indeterminately appointed to that position, comprise 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 reasonable 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.

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 good 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 well established.
• The scope of the internal financial reporting package is comprehensive.

17.6 Other Initiatives: Acceptable

• Evidence of some initial measures taken towards implementing the Guide to Costing.
• The organization has identified a number of financial management initiatives.

While the organization maintained an overall rating of Strong it achieved consistent ratings year over year on all lines of evidence.

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 a Departmental Audit Committee Charter in line with the 2006 Policy on Internal Audit.
• The Departmental Audit Committee has not prepared a draft Annual Plan for fiscal year 2008-2009.
• 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, for the most part, 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.
• Vast 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.
• 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.
• Internal Quality Assurance and Improvement Program is documented and is in the process of being implemented.
• Assurance products (reports) are produced in a very timely manner.
• Approved assurance products are made accessible to the public in a 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

• 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 exceeds 10% 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: 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.
• Limited periodic reporting on the follow-up of Management Action Plans.

The agency has made ongoing progress in the areas of Internal Audit (IA) Governance, Professional Practices and Reporting on IA Performance. In particular, the Chief Audit Executive produced an Annual Report that was recommended by the Departmental Audit Committee and approved by the Deputy Head. Audit report completion rate relative to the 2007-2008 planned engagements is high.

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 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 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

• 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: Acceptable

• Analysis of the Annual Review on OL shows the institution is fully meeting its obligations.
• Audits reveal few shortcomings 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.