Audit of External Reporting on Performance: chapter 3

2. Objective and Scope

Objective

The overall objective of the audit was to determine whether the Department’s external reporting on performance, in selected areas, is of acceptable quality,^Footnote2 through the implementation of appropriate governance and other relevant processes and procedures.

Annex 1 of this audit report summarizes the audit methodology and criteria.

Scope

The audit mainly focussed on Environment and Climate Change Canada’s Report on Plans and Priorities (RPP) and DPR for the 2012-2013 fiscal-year and selected Canadian Environmental Sustainability Indicators (CESI) related to the FSDS and DSDS indicators. The AEB reviewed the 2013-2014 DPR for any significant changes which could affect the audit conclusion.

The intent of the audit was not to compare CESI and DPR information, as the nature of the two frameworks and types of information are substantially different.

Because the audit objective is aimed at performance reporting, the audit work and conclusions relating to the DPR were based on the reporting in the DPR of details on actual results to the sub-program level.

The audit included:

• Only the non-financial aspects of program performance reporting; and
• Governance and relevant processes and procedures for performance reporting at ECCC/selected branches: Finance Branch (FB), Science and Technology Branch (STB), Environmental Stewardship Branch (ESB), Meteorological Service of Canada (MSC), Strategic Policy Branch (SPB) and Enforcement Branch (EB).

The audit focussed on CESI, which are published on the web, as well as the RPP/DPR, which are the most widely-used public reports relating to departmental performance. Various other Environment and Climate Change Canada performance reports are reviewed or assessed by third parties (e.g., reports under international agreements, MAF assessments or human resources management reports) and accordingly were not considered as part of this audit.

Statement of Conformance

This audit conforms with the Internal Auditing Standards for the Government of Canada as supported by the results of the quality assurance and improvement program.

In our professional judgement, sufficient and appropriate audit procedures have been conducted and evidence gathered to support the accuracy of the conclusions reached and contained in this report. The conclusions were based on a comparison of the situations as they existed at the end of the fieldwork in November 2014 against the audit criteria.