ARCHIVED - Office of the Auditor General of Canada - Report

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•  

This page has been archived.

Section III—Supplementary Information

Supplementary information tables

In addition to the tables in this section, the following supplementary information tables can be found on the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s website or on the Office of the Auditor General website.

• Sources of respendable and non-respendable revenue
• Internal audits planned for 2011–12 to 2013–14

Planned reports for 2011–12

Reports to the House of Commons

Spring 2011

Auditor General—Spring Report

• Spending on the June 2010 G8/G20 Summits
• Reserve Force Pension Plan—National Defence

Auditor General—Status Report (follow up on previous audit work)

• Financial Management and Control and Risk Management
• Large Information Technology Projects
• Internal Audit
• Programs for First Nations on Reserves
• National Police Services—Royal Canadian Mounted Police
• Regulating Medical Devices—Health Canada
• Special Examinations of Crown Corporations—2010

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

• Progress Against the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act (May 2011)
• Assessing Cumulative Environmental Effects of Oil Sands Projects

Fall 2011

Auditor General—Fall Report

• Canada’s Economic Action Plan
• Business Risk Management—Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
• Admissibility—Citizenship and Immigration Canada
• Drug Safety—Health Canada
• Maintaining and Repairing Military Equipment—National Defence

Report to the Board of Internal Economy of the House of Commons

• Administration of the House of Commons

Report to the Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration

• Administration of the Senate

Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development

• Environmental Science
• Land-based Pollution Emergencies
• Environmental Enforcement
• Environmental Petitions

Reports to Northern Legislatures

• Yukon—Status Report (February 2012)
• Northwest Territories—Status Report (February 2012)
• Nunavut Energy Supply (March 2012)

International activities

Our international strategy has the following four goals:

• Contributing to the development and adoption of appropriate and effective professional standards
• Sharing knowledge among audit offices
• Building capabilities and professional capacities of audit offices
• Promoting better managed and accountable international institutions

Contributing to the development and adoption of appropriate and effective professional standard

The standard-setting boards of The Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants decided to adopt International Standards on Auditing in 2010 and International Financial Reporting Standards in 2011. The Office plays an active role in shaping these standards, particularly as they relate to the public sector. To that end, employees in the Office participate in various task forces of the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board to revise and develop International Standards on Auditing. In January 2008, the Auditor General became a member of the International Public Sector Accounting Standards Board of the International Federation of Accountants.

The Office is also a member of the Professional Standards Committee’s Subcommittee on Financial Audit Guidelines of the International Organization of Supreme Audit Institutions (INTOSAI). This subcommittee supports and actively contributes to the work of developing high-quality guidelines for financial audit that are globally accepted for the audit of financial statements in the public sector.

Sharing knowledge among audit offices

Employees of the Office participate in various INTOSAI committees, including the Subcommittee on Performance Audit, the Working Group on Information Technology Audit, the Working Group on Environmental Auditing, the Working Group on Value and Benefits of Supreme Audit Institutions, the Capacity Building Committee, the Subcommittee to Promote Increased Capacity Building Activities Among INTOSAI Members, and the Task Force on the Global Financial Crisis. The Auditor General assumed the chair of the Professional Standards Committee’s Subcommittee on Accounting and Reporting of INTOSAI in November 2007.

Building capabilities and professional capacities of audit offices

The Office is actively involved in helping to build capacity in audit institutions located in French sub-Saharan Africa, in partnership with the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and two executing agencies. We provide training to auditors from other national audit offices as part of the International Legislative Audit Office Assistance Program for Improved Governance and Accountability of the CCAF-FCVI Inc. This CIDA-funded program, which was established in 1980, brings auditors from other national audit offices to Canada for 10 months of training in performance auditing, accountability, and governance.

Promoting better managed and accountable international institutions

In early 2007, the Office was selected as the external auditor of the International Labour Organization for a four-year term, effective in 2008.

Our performance indicators and measures

The following tables summarize our targets and actual performance for 2009–10 and our targets for 2011–12 (Exhibits 11 and 12).

Exhibit 11—Summary of our indicators of impact

Objectives and indicators	2009–10 Actual	2009–10 Target	2011–12 Target
Our work adds value for the key users of our reports
Percentage of audit committee chairs who find our financial audits add value	95	90	90
Percentage of members of selected parliamentary committees who find our performance audits add value	931	90	90
Percentage of board chairs who find our special examinations add value	80	90	90
Our work adds value for the organizations we audit
Percentage of Crown corporation and large department senior managers who find our financial audits add value	85	80	80
Percentage of department senior managers who find our performance audits add value	56	70	70
Percentage of Crown corporation chief executive officers who find our special examinations add value	90	80	80
Key users of our reports are engaged in the audit process
Number of parliamentary hearings and briefings we participate in relative to number of sitting days	39/113	maintain2	maintain2
Percentage of performance audits reviewed by parliamentary committees	68	maintain2	maintain2
Key users of our reports and the organizations we audit respond to our findings
Percentage of reservations that are addressed from one financial audit to the next	41	100	100
Percentage of performance audit recommendations substantially or fully implemented four years after their publication	90	75	75
Percentage of significant deficiencies that are addressed from one special examination to the next3	50	100	100

 

Exhibit 12—Summary of our organizational performance

Objectives and indicators	2009–10 Actual	2009–10 Target	2011–12 Target
Our work is completed on time and on budget
On time
Percentage of financial audits completed on time4
Federal Crown corporations with statutory deadlines	98	100	100
Other federal organizations with statutory deadlines	100	100	100
Federal organizations with no statutory deadlines	86	80	80
Territorial organizations	64	60	60
Percentage of performance audit reports completed by the planned tabling date as published in the Report on Plans and Priorities	96	90	90
Percentage of special examination reports delivered on or before the statutory deadline	100	100	100
On budget
Percentage of audits completed on budget5
Financial audits—federal Crown corporations	90	70	80
Financial audits—other federal organizations with statutory deadlines	84	70	80
Financial audits—federal organizations without a statutory deadline	89	70	80
Financial audits—territorial organizations	60	60	80
Performance audits	96	70	80
Special examinations	90	70	80
Our audit reports are reliable
Percentage of internal practice reviews that find the opinions and conclusions expressed in our audit reports are appropriate and supported by the evidence	100	100	100
Percentage of internal practice reviews and external reviews that find our Quality Management System is suitably designed and operating effectively	Mostly6	100	100
We provide a respectful workplace
Percentage of employees who believe the Office is either an above-average place to work or one of the best places to work	787	80	80
Percentage of management who meet our language requirements
Assistant auditors general and principals	85	100	100
Directors in bilingual regions	84	75	75
Percentage representation relative to workforce availability for
Women	117	100	100
People with disabilities	117	100	100
Aboriginal peoples	137	100	100
Members of visible minorities	90	100	100
Percentage retention of audit professionals	89	90	90
1 The results shown for 2009–10 are from the survey of parliamentarians conducted in June 2010. 2 There is no numeric target for these indicators as they depend on the number of sitting days and other factors beyond our control. Instead, the target is to maintain the number of parliamentary hearings and briefings we participate in, relative to the number of sitting days, and to maintain the percentage of audits reviewed by parliamentary committees. 3 In light of the change in the Financial Administration Act to the frequency of special examinations, we will be reviewing the appropriateness of this indicator in 2011–12. 4 “On time” for financial audits means the statutory deadline where one exists (usually 90 days after year end), or 150 days after the year end where no statutory deadline exists. 5 “On budget” means that the actual hours to complete an audit did not exceed the budgeted hours by more than 15 percent. 6 The result for 2009–10 is based on the findings of an international peer review led by the National Audit Office of Australia. It concluded that the Quality Management System (QMS) was suitably designed for all product lines and operating effectively for the performance audit and special examination practices. The QMS was generally operating effectively for the annual audit practice, but the peers identified two areas for improvement. These findings were similar to our internal practice reviews. 7 The employee survey results shown were received in May 2010. We conduct employee surveys every two years.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•