4. Findings, recommendations and management responses

4.1. Design of the ECCC Project Management Framework

Findings: The ECCC DPMO has established a project management framework to communicate project management expectations and support consistency across the department.

The ECCC PMF is adequately designed, in compliance with the TB policy instruments related to project management, and key requirements are well articulated within the ECCC PMF. Three areas could benefit from more clarity: conducting independent reviews, governance requirements for joint and enterprise projects and provisions for outsourced ECCC real-property and infrastructure projects.

What we examined

The audit compared the ECCC PMF, associated guidance and processes against the TB Policy on the Planning and Management of Investmentsand the TB Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes, to determine whether the ECCC PMF aligned with the requirements of the TB policy instruments. The audit team also conducted interviews to assess whether the ECCC PMF takes into consideration all ECCC business lines and is well understood within the Department.

Why is this important?

A project management framework sets out project management processes and provides guidance to deliver projects in an effective manner. Formal project management instruments provide adequate guidance to meet TB obligations and support consistent project delivery across the Department.

What we found

In 2017, as required by the TB Policy on the Management of Projects, the DPMO has developed the ECCC PMF, along with associated guidance, procedures and templates, to enable a systematic approach to managing projects across the Department and to support project teams throughout the project lifecycle.

The ECCC PMF was reviewed and updated in October 2019 to align with the new TB Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes. The oversight committees (the Information Management Steering Committee and the Assistant Deputy Minister Operations Committee) endorsed the ECCC PMF, which was then formally approved by the Executive Management Committee.

The ECCC PMF defines projects and programs and outlines the six phases of project lifecycle: Intake, Initiation, Planning, Execution, Close-out and Post-implementation. The ECCC PMF also defines approval authority limits and expectations with regard to project gating, project monitoring and project reporting. In addition, the ECCC PMF provides the list of project management deliverables required for each project gate, according to the level of complexity and risk for each project.

The audit performed a comparison of the ECCC PMF against the requirements of the TB Policy on the Planning and Management of Investmentsand the TB Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes, to determine whether the ECCC PMF aligned with the requirements of the TB policy instruments.

The audit found that the ECCC PMF is adequately designed in compliance with the TB policy instruments and the PMF articulates well the key requirements. Three areas could benefit from more clarity: conducting independent reviews, governance requirements for joint and enterprise projects and provisions for outsourced real-property and infrastructure projects.

Independent reviews and governance requirements for joint and enterprise projects

As per the TB Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes, the project sponsor is responsible for conducting independent reviews in accordance with the project gating plan. For projects conducted jointly with other government departments, the project sponsor is also responsible for establishing a common governance framework and mechanisms and for ensuring that project gating, project approval, benefits management and transition plan from project to operations reflect a joint or enterprise perspective through a collaboration with participating departments.

The ECCC PMF does not include any provisions or requirements related to independent third party reviews set out in the previous paragraph, commensurate with the complexity and level of risk of the projects and programs. Notwithstanding the TB compliance requirement, conducting independent third party reviews at predefined points during a project’s or program’s lifecycle is a best practice, intended to uncover issues that may not be evident or effectively managed at the project or program level or are not being advanced sufficiently by the project and its stakeholders.

A governance framework and mechanisms for ECCC projects or programs that involve multiple internal and external stakeholders (for example, multiple Government of Canada departments) is required to clarify accountabilities and facilitate the decision-making process throughout the project lifecycle.

Provisions for outsourced real-property and infrastructure projects

Implementing the ECCC PMF supports a consistent approach for managing all projects and programs across the Department. While the PMF acknowledges that real-property projects are subject to the National Project Management System, the PMF does not clearly identify requirements for integration with these frameworks used for real-property ECCC projects, such as the Public Services and Procurement Canada’s National Project Management System and the Federal approach to contaminated sites.

Specifically, given that the management of these projects is mostly outsourced to Public Services and Procurement Canada as the real-estate service provider, the ECCC PMF does not clearly indicate which of its requirements apply in terms of roles and responsibilities, governance, gating, project monitoring and mandatory project deliverables for the outsourced real-property and infrastructure projects. This may negatively affect the Department’s ability to provide sufficient and adequate oversight over its entire portfolio of projects.

Recommendation 1

The Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services and Finance Branch, should:

1.1  Update the ECCC Project Management Framework to reflect Treasury Board policy requirements and to support an integrated approach to project management by including the provisions for independent reviews of projects and programs and the governance requirements for joint and enterprise projects

1.2   Determine, in collaboration with ECCC Real-property group, the key project deliverables, governance and monitoring provisions relevant to outsourced ECCC real-property projects, in line with the TBS policy suite for real-property projects and ECCC Project Management Framework requirements

Management response

Management agrees with the recommendation.

1.1  a) Independent reviews are identified in DPMO’s project reporting diagram showing the escalation flow but would benefit from being embedded in the ECCC Project Management Framework (PMF).

The ECCC PMF (last updated in October 2019) will be revised to include provisions for independent reviews of projects/programmes (a suite of related projects) to align with the February 2020 released TBS Guide on Independent Reviews.

The type of independent reviews - a workshop review, an abridged review, a full review, and a health check review – will be determined based on project requirements and the review timing will be built into the individual project gating plan as it evolves throughout the project life cycle.

1.1 b) Joint/enterprise projects represent a relatively small portion of the ECCC’s Project Portfolio. Provisions to articulate oversight mechanisms for joint/enterprise projects will be made to existing governance as the most effective way to support awareness and decision making for these types of projects.

1.2 The ECCC PMF currently states that ECCC’s real property projects must adhere to Public Services and Procurement Canada’s (PSPC) National Project Management System (NPMS). Although ECCC has a Real Property Management Framework in place, we are not recommending modifying it as this document is not intended to cover project management activities. On the other hand, we recommend updating the ECCC PMF to add a distinct section for real property projects.

4.2. Identification and tracking of projects

Findings: The DPMO has defined and implemented a process to track projects, allowing it to maintain and update the list of projects subject to the ECCC PMF. It is the responsibility of the project managers to update the information for their project every two months.

In addition, although the ECCC PMF uses the TBS definition of a project, the audit found that there is no common understanding across the Department regarding what constitutes a project. As such, some initiatives undertaken within the Department may not have been identified or reported as a project and not managed according to the ECCC PMF. Given that project managers may not be updating their information in a timely manner and that there is no common understanding of what constitutes a project, at the time of the audit, the list of ECCC projects was inaccurate and incomplete.

What we examined

The audit examined the processes in place to identify projects that are subject to the ECCC PMF. This included whether there is a clear and common understanding of what a project is across the Department. The audit also reviewed the list of projects in the DPMO’s database and the approach used to update this list, which is the basis for project tracking.

Why is this important?

A formally defined and consistent process to identify and track projects helps with the prioritization and integration of projects within the Department, and ensures that all activities identified as projects are delivered in accordance with departmental project management requirements.

What we found

List of ECCC projects subject to the ECCC PMF

At the time of the audit, the DPMO tracked ECCC projects for project reporting and oversight purposes by compiling information from various corporate documents and systems such as the Capital Plan, the Digital Plan, TB submissions, memorandums to Cabinet and the Branch Planning and Management Tool. The list of projects subject to the ECCC PMF is posted on the DPMO’s ECollab site (an internal website for ECCC employees). Project managers update the list upon request from the DPMO.

The DPMO team informed the auditors that despite their efforts, the list was incomplete because some initiatives undertaken within the Department may not have been identified or reported as projects. The various intake processes across the Department to identify business opportunities and investments as projects may also add to the challenge of compiling an accurate list of all ECCC projects.

Similarly, a review of the list in October 2019 revealed that the list was not accurate, and information was missing for some projects. For example, some projects on the list did not include information on project tier^{Footnote 1} , budget and starting date, or included incorrect information on project sponsor/manager names and project current phase. Others provided incorrect information about whether or not Real Property projects are managed by Public Services and Procurement Canada.

It should be noted that project managers are responsible for updating the information. Interviews with the DPMO and review of documentation determined that the DPMO makes continuous efforts to update the information by sending out call letters to project managers on a bi-monthly basis requesting information updates to their project.

Definition of project

The ECCC PMF has adopted the TBS definition of a project as follows:

• a temporary endeavour undertaken to create a unique product, service or result
• designed to produce defined outputs and realize specific outcomes in support of a departmental program objective (scope)
• has a clear schedule (defined start and end date)
• has a defined resource plan
• has a defined cost estimate and budget

Interviews with project sponsors and project managers revealed that there was no common understanding of what a project is across the Department. Some interviewees called projects some of their ongoing activities, other interviewees did not agree with their initiatives being called projects.

Specifically, three projects identified as projects by the DPMO at the beginning of the audit were subsequently classified by the project sponsors as ongoing activities. Following discussions with project teams and at the request of management, the DPMO removed them from the list of ECCC projects. As a result, these activities were no longer subject to project management requirements per the ECCC PMF.

Not having a standardized approach to identify all initiatives and activities subject to the ECCC PMF increases the risk that not all departmental initiatives and activities that should have been managed as projects, are managed with the rigor and proper oversight to ensure they are delivered on time, on budget and on scope.

Recommendation 2

The Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services and Finance Branch, should establish and communicate a common set of criteria to assess from the outset (at the Intake phase) whether a business opportunity or an initiative is a project and is subject to the ECCC Project Management Framework.

Management response

Management agrees with the recommendation.

The project definition in the ECCC PMF will be maintained as it fully aligns with TBS project definition. The application of the ECCC PMF is reserved for focused, non-repetitive, time-limited activities which involve some degree of risk and are beyond the scope of normal operational activities.

The DPMO will collaborate with stakeholders involved in the Project Intake phase to make available from the outset a defined set of criteria to inform the determination process whether a business opportunity or initiative is a project.

The set of criteria will offer clarity as to what to consider as 1-project; 2-portfolio/program; 3‑operational activity; 4-maintenance activity; 5-other.

4.3. Governance

Findings: Project governance and oversight have been established to provide projects with structure and direction. The roles and responsibilities for project management have been clearly defined, documented and were generally well understood.

Some opportunities for improvement were identified with respect to the operating effectiveness of project steering committees and the oversight of the ECCC project portfolio. The audit also found some inconsistencies in the way that project sponsors carry out their roles and responsibilities and the understanding of stakeholders regarding the DPMO’s mandate.

What we examined

The audit assessed the governance structures in place to provide strategic direction and oversight to project management at the individual project level and for the overall ECCC portfolio of projects. For selected projects, the auditors examined the functioning of their project steering committee through agenda and meeting material. The auditors also reviewed the terms of reference of the oversight bodies and examined meeting agendas, meeting minutes and records of decisions for the period from September 2018 to October 2019, to determine whether the departmental committees had clear defined and documented roles and responsibilities pertaining to project management and carried out effective oversight.

Specifically, the audit assessed whether project management roles and responsibilities are clearly defined, documented, communicated and understood. This included an examination of the roles and responsibilities of project managers and project sponsors as described in the ECCC PMF, as well as the mandate of the DPMO. The audit team interviewed 10 project sponsors: one assistant deputy minister, seven directors general, two directors and 10 project managers. The interviews were designed to assess whether they were aware of their roles and responsibilities as set out in the ECCC PMF and how they carried out those roles and responsibilities. The audit also assessed the extent to which project team members and stakeholders fulfilled their roles and responsibilities and whether they understood the mandate of the DPMO.

Why is this important?

Sound governance and oversight of projects, as well as clear roles and responsibilities, enable collaboration of stakeholders, create opportunities to take corrective action proactively and ensure that projects meet performance expectations.

What we found

Governance of projects

The audit found that the ECCC PMF adequately enabled governance within individual projects by setting out specific governance requirements for each project, by project tier. As such, a project steering committee is to be formed, chaired by the project sponsor, at the following levels: Tier 1 - Director Level, Tier 2 - Director General Level and Tier 3 - Director General, Assistant Deputy Minister, Executive Management Committeeor TBS. A project steering committee is not required for Tier 0 projects.

Of the 30 projects selected for the audit, 17 projects were required to have a project steering committee, as per the ECCC PMF. A review of the 17 projects identified 13 projects that comply with this requirement. The audit found that the 13 projects had either a dedicated project steering committee or were managed through existing oversight committees within the branch. There was no evidence of a project steering committee for the four remaining projects.

A review of agendas and meeting materials for the 13 project steering committees showed that they functioned mostly on an ad hoc or informal basis. Meetings for 11 of the 13 project steering committees were not documented through minutes or records of decisions. The minutes and records of decisions available for two project steering committees documented discussions, decisions and follow-ups on budget, schedules and deliverables.

Oversight of individual projects

The Department established the Project Management Advisory Committee in 2018 to ensure independent project oversight and to provide a challenge function at each of the project gates. The desired outcome of each gating presentation to the Project Management Advisory Committee is a recommendation for the Chief Information Officer’s endorsement.

A review of Project Management Advisory Committee records of decisions during the period under scope showed that the Project Management Advisory Committee has been operating consistently since its implementation, in keeping with its mandate, roles and responsibilities set out in the Terms of reference. The audit team found that the Project Management Advisory Committee provided oversight through various gating presentations of projects underway every month since its implementation.

Four departmental committees also provided, in different capacities, oversight for the project management framework and for individual projects.

Table 1 outlines the roles and responsibilities pertaining to project management for each of the four oversight committees. The Terms of reference for each committee defined their roles and responsibilities regarding project management, with the exception of the Executive Management Committee.

Oversight of the overall ECCC project portfolio

The review of meeting minutes and records of decision for the four departmental committees listed in Table 1 for the period within scope revealed discussions on IM/IT projects and the IM/IT prioritized project list. At the time of the audit, there was no evidence that the departmental oversight committees discussed real-property projects.

The audit found that the DPMO sends the ECCC Project Portfolio Health View to all these committees, on a bimonthly basis. The document outlines the status of the top 30 projects. The audit did not find any evidence, during the period under review, that the Executive Management Committee discussed this document or provided strategic oversight for the overall portfolio of projects.

Roles and responsibilities

The audit also examined the roles and responsibilities of the following actors involved in project management:

• project sponsors
• project managers
• the Departmental Project Management Office

Project sponsors. The audit found that most of the project sponsors interviewed were aware of their roles, responsibilities and accountabilities in the general context of project management. They believed that it is their responsibility to ensure that projects were delivered on time, on budget and within scope.

However, not all project sponsors carried out their role of chairing the project steering committee on their project, as required by the ECCC PMF. A review of selected project steering committee materials showed that only three of the 13 project steering committee meetings were chaired by the project sponsors. Also, as mentioned before, four projects from the audit sample did not have a steering committee, as required by the ECCC PMF.

Project managers. From interviews and a review of documentation, the audit found that project managers assigned to in-house projects led by ECCC were generally well aware of the ECCC PMF, interacted with the DPMO and the Project Management Oversight Committee and applied project gating and monitoring requirements as appropriate.

For the real-property projects outsourced to Public Services and Procurement Canada, project managers played more of a liaison/coordinating role and had limited roles and responsibilities in terms of managing, monitoring and maintaining project documentation throughout all phases of the project lifecycle. This is consistent with the lack of clarity in the ECCC PMF as to the roles and responsibilities pertaining to outsourced real-property projects. A recommendation to clarify roles and responsibilities for real-property projects in the ECCC PMF is provided in section 4.1.

Departmental Project Management Office. ECCC established the DPMO in 2016, as a centre of expertise to support the Department with respect to the following key project management functions, including project oversight, reporting capabilities and capacity building. The DPMO is also responsible for developing and updating the PMF, along with providing guidance and tools for its effective implementation. Serving also as a resource centre, the DPMO offers project management training and networking opportunities to the ECCC project management practitioners.

The audit found that the DPMO’s mandate, roles and responsibilities were defined and disseminated through various communication channels, including its ECollab site and newsletters. However, they are not defined and included in the ECCC PMF.

Interviews with various project stakeholders indicated that the understanding of the DPMO’s mandate and role varied within the Department. Some project stakeholders saw the DPMO as a centre of expertise and as providing a challenge function. Others questioned the DPMO’s raison d’être, perceiving it as a form of unnecessary oversight or as creating an added administrative burden.

Without effective project governance and oversight mechanisms, there is an increased risk that challenge, approvals and decision making may not be exercised at the appropriate levels, which may in turn adversely impact project performance expectations.

Recommendation 3

The Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services and Finance Branch, should:

3.1  Include the mandate, scope and roles and responsibilities of the Departmental Project Management Office in the ECCC Project Management Framework

3.2  Remind senior management of their role as chair of the project steering committee for each of the projects they sponsor

3.3  Ensure that a horizontal overview of the ECCC projects portfolio is presented and discussed periodically at the senior management level

Management response

Management agrees with the recommendation.

3.1  The DPMO’s mandate roles and responsibilities found on the DPMO’s intranet page, the DPMO’s newsletters and project training material will be embedded in the ECCC PMF. The ADM-CSFB will ensure that this information is communicated throughout the Department.

3.2  a) Following the evidence gathering period of the audit, over 40 ECCC executives have attended DPMO’s training sessions aiming to raise awareness of project sponsors’ obligations.

Enhanced communications on project sponsors’ roles and responsibilities will ensure that designated chairs of project steering committees remain engaged with their stakeholders. As such, a checklist of individual project governance expected practices will be shared at various stages during the roll-out of a project with the objective to ensure active project sponsorship, which can offer useful insights on early warning signs of project difficulties. b) In addition to internal resources promoting project sponsors’ responsibilities awareness, ECCC executives will be informed of an upcoming Canada School of Public Service (CSPS) Project Sponsor curriculum training.

3.3  ECCC project prioritization is already enabled by a portfolio-based approach where project teams benefit from strategic direction from senior management. Documentation providing a horizontal overview of the ECCC Project Portfolio is available for decision making. The ADM-CSFB will ensure that project portfolio oversight presentations, analysis and supporting material are tabled and discussed periodically before senior management committees.

4.4. Risk management

Findings: Risk management processes have been developed and implemented to support project teams in the management and monitoring of risks throughout their project’s lifecycle. Tools and templates were also made available on the DPMO’s internal website (ECollab site).

The DPMO has created a Departmental Project Risk Log intended to capture and monitor project‑related risks for all projects underway, including projects interdependencies. Key risks for highly visible and more complex projects were periodically reported to senior management.

However, processes are not always operating as intended. In particular, the audit found inconsistencies regarding the documentation of project risks.

What we examined

The audit sought to determine whether risks that may impede the successful delivery of projects are identified, documented, assessed, mitigated, monitored and reported throughout the project lifecycle. The auditors reviewed risk management processes and tools outlined in the ECCC PMF and associated guidance. They also interviewed project team members and examined risk logs and issue logs, to ensure that risks and issues are managed in compliance with the ECCC PMF and reported to senior management.

Why is this important?

Risk management is essential to project management practices. It predicts the uncertainties in the projects and minimizes the occurrence or impact of these uncertainties. Effective project risk management, as one of the key project management knowledge areas, enables the achievement of project objectives and an efficient use of resources.  

What we found

Processes

At the time of the audit, the DPMO had developed a risk and issue management process that applies throughout the project lifecycle, from the initiation phase to the close-out phase. The process includes the maintenance of comprehensive risk logs and mandatory reporting of projects risks through project dashboards and status reports. It requires an initial assessment of potential risks to be documented in the project charter and the project management plan. Starting at the Execution phase, project managers for Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects are required to monitor project risks and to complete a risk log and an issue log.

The audit also found various tools and templates to support project risk management activities, available on the DPMO’s ECollab site, such as risk log, issue log and the risk identification and documentation required at each gate.

Practices

The audit noted some inconsistencies regarding the documentation of project risks. Specifically, the audit looked at risk management documentation for the projects in scope that were at the execution phase and onwards. At the time of the audit, 11 in-house projects and 8 outsourced real-property projects out of the 30 sampled projects met this criterion. The audit found that three of the 11 sampled in-house projects and the eight sampled outsourced real‑property projects that were at the execution phase and onwards did not have comprehensive risk logs. Instead, they were tracking risks through project dashboards or project status reports. The key project risks presented in the dashboards were limited to scope, costs and timelines and to some extent, human resources.

The purpose of project dashboards and status reports is to report to senior management on the top three highest risks. As such, they do not support the thorough exercise of managing project risks and associated mitigations like the risk registers do. Rather, they should be used to supplement the risk registers. Therefore, it was unclear as to whether all project risks were identified, assessed, mitigated and escalated appropriately for the sampled projects.

Monitoring and follow-up on risks

The audit found that the DPMO created, maintained and monitored a Departmental Project Risk log to mitigate risks that are common across ECCC projects, such as the risk related to lack of identification of project interdependencies or the risk of not being able to deliver in a timely manner due to aggressive timelines. The audit team was informed that the DPMO is responsible for following up on the Risk Response Strategy developed by each risk owner. A review of Project Management Advisory Committee records of decisions showed that the first Departmental Project Risk Log has been discussed in October 2019.

Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects are highly visible and more complex projects. The audit found that risks and issues for all ECCC Tier 2 and Tier 3 projects were reported to the Executive Management Committee in the ECCC Project Portfolio Health View. As mentioned in section 3.3, this document is shared with the Executive Management Committee every two months. However, the audit team was unable to determine whether the information in the document was discussed at the committee or if the Executive Management Committee provided strategic direction on how these risks could be mitigated.

The lack of consistency in the management of project risks may undermine the Departmental risk response strategy and decrease the Department’s project management capacity.

Recommendation 4

The Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services and Finance Branch, should enhance the mandatory requirements in the ECCC Project Management Framework and the gating process with respect to the use of risks logs or other risk management tools at least as comprehensive as the risk logs, to ensure that risks are identified, managed, tracked, reassessed and monitored adequately at the individual project level throughout the project lifecycle.

Management response

Management agrees with the recommendation.

Noting that information on project risks is already reported and tracked through project reports, project dashboards and project risk registries, we recognize that there are opportunities to consistently apply the use of comprehensive project risk logs.

The ECCC PMF will be updated to emphasize the importance of project risk management from project initiation to closeout. The update will incorporate a requisite on formal tabling of project risk logs as part of the gating process.

The DPMO recognizes the importance of project risk management as part of strong project management and will make available a compliance report on Project Risk Log availabilities to Branch Heads to facilitate monitoring of their respective projects.

4.5. Compliance with ECCC Project Management Framework documentation requirements

Findings: A review of project documentation for a sample of in-house and outsourced ECCC projects revealed that the Department made progress over time in documenting projects, as indicated in the ECCC PMF. In-house projects that started after the ECCC PMF came into effect were generally more compliant than in-flight in-house projects for each PMF phase completed within the period under scope.

However, limited documentation was available for review for the outsourced real-property and infrastructure projects.

What we examined

The audit selected 30 projects out of 108 active projects as of October 2019 on a judgmental sampling basis, to examine whether, as of October 2019, deliverables were completed as indicated in the ECCC PMF. Following an initial review, the audit sample was reduced to 25 projects (16 in-house projects and nine outsourced real-property projects).

The audit reviewed all project documents available and assessed project documents against the version of the ECCC PMF in effect when the PMF phase was completed. No assessment was done on those phases that were completed before the implementation of the gating process. As such, the number of total assessments by phase is lower than the total number of projects assessed.

The results of the compliance review make a distinction between the nine real-property projects outsourced and managed by Public Services and Procurement Canada and the 16 projects managed in-house within ECCC.

Why is this important?

If the mandatory project deliverables for each gate are not completed as indicated in the ECCC PMF, it is difficult to ensure the project’s readiness to proceed or not to the next gate. The Project Management Advisory Committee and the DPMO may also be limited in the effective exercise of their respective oversight and challenge roles.

What we found

Results of the compliance review for the 16 selected in-house projects

Upon review of the mandatory documentation for each of the selected in-house project, the audit team noted that the Department made progress over time. Documentation for in-house projects that started after the ECCC PMF came into effect was generally more complete than the documentation for in-flight in-house projects. Of the 16 sampled in-house projects, 12 were fully compliant with ECCC PMF in terms of the mandatory project documentation required for each project phase completed, including:

• project initiation and planning through formal development and approval of project charters and project management plans
• execution and monitoring of projects through project dashboards
• documentation of changes in change logs
• projects closure review documentation in close-out reports
• lessons learned captured on the DPMO ECollab site

The remaining four projects had at least one missing artefact. Table 2 below provides a summary of the results.

Results of the compliance review for the nine ECCC real-property projects outsourced and managed by PSPC

A review of the nine real-property sample projects that are outsourced and managed by Public Services and Procurement Canada revealed a wide variation with respect to required ECCC PMF documentation to support gating decisions. Three projects did not contain any project documents and six projects included some evidence of compliance with ECCC PMF documentation requirements. Interviews with project stakeholders suggested that some did not consider the deliverables to be mandatory because they were following Public Services and Procurement Canada’s National Project Management System.

This is consistent with the lack of clarity in the ECCC PMF as to which project artefacts are required for ECCC outsourced real-property and infrastructure projects to provide sufficient and adequate oversight and enable effective decision-making. A recommendation to clarify documentation requirements for outsourced real-property projects in the ECCC PMF is provided in section 4.1

4.6. Communication, tools and training

Findings: The DPMO has adequately designed and implemented a series of communication and awareness tools to promote the deployment and use of the ECCC PMF. In addition to providing branches with project management expertise and advice from experienced resources, the DPMO has also developed a portfolio of training materials.

What we examined

The audit sought to determine whether ECCC's employees are aware of the ECCC PMF and are provided with the training and supporting tools related to project management needed to discharge their responsibilities and achieve expected results. The auditors reviewed the ECCC PMF 2.0 communication plan, the various communication tools related to project management and the DPMO’s training materials to assess how they support the employees involved in project management and help them to understand and discharge their roles and responsibilities.

Why is this important?

Effective communication, awareness and training contribute to a better understanding of a new approach and facilitate the change management process.

What we found

Communication

The DPMO established the ECCC Project Management Community of Practice to develop, enhance and maintain project management expertise throughout the organization. This initiative had two components: training and outreach.

Outreach activities included establishing a project management network to discuss best practices and issues and provide peer support. At the time of the audit, the Project Management Community of Practice had about 400 members, including project managers and project sponsors. Members received periodic emails regarding updates on new tools, processes and procedures related to project management.

The DPMO used a variety of communication mechanisms including publications and articles on the ECCC Intranet, an ECollab site (an internal ECCC website), the DPMO newsletters, articles in ECCC News and presentations on the ECCC PMF at senior management committees such as the Information Management Steering Committee, the Assistant Deputy Minister Operations Committee and the Executive Management Committee.

The audit also found that following the release of the new TB policy suite related to project management and the update of the ECCC PMF to version 2.0, the DPMO developed and implemented a formal communication plan to raise awareness and inform ECCC employees, including members of the Project Management Community of Practice and senior management.

Tools

A review of the DPMO’s ECollab site found that the site was well-organized and contained relevant information on project management. Two sections were dedicated to project management tools.

The first section included links to the ECCC PMF, the TBS policy suite, the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) guide and relevant lessons learned report related to project management. This section also describe project steps and project reporting processes.

Another section provided project teams with numerous project management templates for the each of the 6 phases of ECCC project lifecycle. The templates take into consideration the size of the project and can be customized.

Interviews and a review of documentation revealed that the DPMO provided branches with project management expertise and advice from experienced resources. For example, the DPMO hired consultants to help with high profile IM/IT projects.

Training

The second component of the ECCC Project Management Community of Practice initiative is to provide a training curriculum for project managers. The audit found that the DPMO has developed a portfolio of training materials that cover the fundamentals of project management. The portfolio is updated quarterly. The DPMO also developed and distributed a guide for Project Management Advisory Committee members, which sets out what is expected of them at committee meetings.

The audit team also found that at the time of the audit, the Department was contributing, in collaboration with the Government of Canada project management community, to TBS’s efforts in identifying a roadmap for improving project manager capabilities. The roadmap includes training and certification options, as well as guidance on project manager core competencies, to foster consistent use across all departments.