2017-2018 Departmental Results Report

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, 2018.

This publication may be reproduced for personal or internal use without permission, provided the source is fully acknowledged. However, multiple copy reproduction of this publication in whole or in part for purposes of redistribution requires the prior written permission from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H3, or info@ceaa-acee.gc.ca.

Catalogue No.: En104-16E-PDF

ISSN: 2560-9564

This document has been issued in French under the title: Agence canadienne d’évaluation environnementale: Rapport sur les résultats ministériels 2017-2018.

Alternative formats may be requested by contacting: info@ceaa-acee.gc.ca.

Table of contents

Minister’s message

The Hon. Catherine McKenna, Minister of Environment and Climate Change and Minister Responsible for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

I am pleased to provide you with the 2017–18 Departmental Results Report for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency).

This report informs Canadians and members of Parliament about what the Agency achieved over the past year. In 2017–18, the Agency continued to support the Government of Canada’s commitment to protect the environment and grow the economy. This was a direct result from the execution of high-quality environmental assessments, taking into consideration the contribution of Canadians, including the public and Indigenous groups, and the use of evidence-based information to enable our government to make informed decisions about major projects.

The year culminated with the tabling in Parliament of Bill C–69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. The proposed legislation broadens the focus for project reviews from environmental assessments to impact assessments with a focus on sustainability. Under these broadened rules, decisions on projects would be guided by science, evidence and Indigenous traditional knowledge. Reviews would occur in partnership with Indigenous Peoples, as well as with provinces and territories, and communities will have their voices heard from the start. Additionally, companies would have more clarity about what is required of them, and review timelines would be more predictable. Project reviews would also be more rigorous and more efficient, with reduced legislated timelines and clearer requirements from the start.

This important milestone was informed by over 14 months of extensive public, stakeholder and Indigenous consultations, including Expert Panel reports and Parliamentary studies. During that time, the government also released a Discussion Paper that outlined the potential changes being put forward to strengthen Canada’s environmental assessment and regulatory processes. The public provided vital feedback which helped to inform the government’s decision making as it considered what policy, program and legislative changes to make to improve environmental assessment and regulatory systems.

Our government firmly believes that a clean environment and a strong economy go hand in hand. The proposed changes put forward in Bill C-69 would restore confidence that good projects can move forward in a responsible, timely and transparent way. It would respect Indigenous Peoples and protect the environment, while creating jobs and strengthening the economy.

Until the proposed legislative and program changes come into effect, existing laws and processes, including the Interim Approach and Principles announced in January 2016, will continue to apply to major projects undergoing an environmental assessment.

I encourage parliamentarians and Canadians to read the Departmental Results Report for 2017–18 and learn more about the Agency.


The Honourable Catherine McKenna, P.C., M.P.
Minister of Environment and Climate Change and
Minister Responsible for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

Institutional Head’s message

Ron Hallman, President, Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

As President of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency), I am pleased to present the Departmental Results Report, which outlines our achievements and results over the past year.

In 2017–18, the Agency’s team of highly qualified employees supported the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in carrying out her responsibilities to conduct environmental assessments (EAs) for major projects in a manner that protects the environment, fosters economic growth and jobs, supports sustainable development, and reflects expertise received from the public, Indigenous groups, and other stakeholders. Consultation is at the core of what we do and is a key measure of our success. In 2017–18, our employees conducted or managed 66 evidence-based EAs that took place across the country.

In addition to ensuring our operational activities were delivered successfully for, and on behalf of, all Canadians, the Agency continued to support the Minister in leading a national review of federal environmental assessment processes. In February 2018, these efforts reached a major milestone with the tabling of a new legislation in Parliament that proposes changes to the current Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012, including new rules for the review of major projects and an expanded role for the Agency.

The Agency will provide ongoing advice and support to the parliamentary process and prepare to implement the proposed new approach to impact assessment. We have put a transition team in place to ensure the identification and delivery of activities required to support the implementation of the proposed legislation. Regulatory and policy work, including public consultations, began following the February announcement. We have also launched tools and activities to ensure our employees are engaged and kept informed as we move through the next steps of the legislative process.

This year our team tackled many priorities and I am proud of the professionalism of our highly dedicated employees. I invite you to read this report and learn more about the important work that the Agency undertakes on behalf of Canadians.


Ron Hallman
President
Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

Results at a glance

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (the Agency) is a federal body reporting to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. The Agency provides high-quality environmental assessments (EAs)Footnote 1 that inform government decision making, in support of sustainable development. The Agency is the responsible authority for most federal environmental assessments.

In 2017–18, the Agency:

  • Supported the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in the review of environmental assessment processes, including the legislative process for Bill C–69, by providing analysis and advice;
  • Delivered high-quality EAs of major projects by considering the environmental effects of designated projects and identifying mitigation measures;
  • Engaged with Canadians, including the public, Indigenous groups, and stakeholders in order to gather evidence and seek the views of potentially affected communities;
  • Applied an efficient and effective whole-of-government approach to consultation with Indigenous groups potentially affected by projects under review;
  • Provided guidance, information and training to EA practitioners, stakeholders, Indigenous Peoples, and the public;
  • Disbursed a total of $1,435,550 in contribution funds to assist Indigenous groups, stakeholders and the public to participate in EA processes for projects under review;
  • Disbursed a total of $2,146,110 in contribution funds to support Indigenous participation in the review of EA processes;
  • Strengthened internal business processes to provide more efficient, timely and professional support in the delivery of the Agency’s key priorities; and
  • Spent $39,822,160 and used 271 full-time equivalents.

For more information on the Agency’s plans, priorities and results achieved, see the “Results: what we achieved” section of this report.

Raison d’être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do

Raison d’être

Environmental assessment contributes to informed decision-making in support of sustainable development.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency delivers high-quality EAs in support of government decisions about major projects.

Mandate and role

EAs inform government decision making and support sustainable development by identifying opportunities to eliminate, reduce or manage a project’s potential adverse impact on the environment before the project is undertaken, and by ensuring that mitigation measures are applied if a project is allowed to proceed.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 (CEAA 2012) and its accompanying regulations provide the legislative framework for EAs. EAs consider whether “designated projects” are likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects that fall within federal legislative authority. Assessments are conducted by one of three responsible authorities: the Agency, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission or the National Energy Board. CEAA 2012 requires that opportunities for public participation be provided during environmental assessments and that participant funding and a public registry, including an Internet site, be established. CEAA 2012 also defines the roles and responsibilities of the Agency, the other responsible authorities, decision makers and project proponentsFootnote 2.

When the Agency is the responsible authority, it determines whether an EA is required for a designated project and conducts the EA in accordance with the procedures and timelines set out in CEAA 2012. The Agency advises the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on establishing independent review panels to conduct EAs for certain projects. When an EA is referred to a review panel, the Agency provides support to the review panel. The Agency is also responsible for managing the EAs of most projects that continue to be assessed under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, in accordance with the transitional provisions of CEAA 2012.

The Agency advises the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in fulfilling her responsibilities under CEAA 2012, including exercising her power to designate a physical activity that is not prescribed by regulations, determining the significance of the effects of projects and issuing EA decision statements with legally binding and enforceable conditions at the conclusion of the EA process.

For designated projects for which it is the responsible authority, the Agency promotes compliance with CEAA 2012, and takes action as required to ensure proponents comply with the legislation’s requirements and the conditions included in a decision statement. Upon completion of an EA, a decision statement is issued that states whether the proposed project is likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects. It includes conditions, consisting of mitigation measures and a follow-up program that the proponent must fulfil should the project be allowed to proceed.

The Agency coordinates with provinces and territories to deliver timely and efficient EAs, and advises the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on requests to substitute the CEAA 2012 process with the EA process of another jurisdiction. Additionally, the Agency—independently and in collaboration with partners—conducts research to support high-quality EAs and develops effective EA policies and practices.

The Government of Canada takes a whole-of-government approach to Indigenous consultation in the context of EAs, to ensure that Indigenous groups are adequately consulted and, where appropriate, accommodated when the Crown (federal government) contemplates actions that may adversely impact potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights. The Agency serves as the Crown consultation coordinator to integrate the Government of Canada’s Indigenous consultation activities into the EA process, for EAs conducted by a review panel and for EAs for which the Agency is responsible.

The Agency leads federal project review activities under the environmental and social protection regimes set out in sections 22 and 23 of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and in the Northeastern Quebec Agreement. The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement are constitutionally protected comprehensive land claim agreements. The Agency supports its President who, as the Federal Administrator, must review and determine whether projects of a federal nature proposed under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement or Northeastern Quebec Agreement should proceed and, if so, under which conditions.

The Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals establishes a self-assessment process for federal departments and agencies to conduct a strategic EA of a policy, plan, or program proposal. The Agency supports the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in promoting the application of the Directive, and provides federal authorities with advice, training and guidance upon request.

For more information about the Agency, see the “Supplementary information” section of this report. For more information on the Agency’s organizational mandate letter commitments, see the Minister’s mandate letter.Endnote i

Operating context and key risks

Operating context

The Agency operates in a continuously changing environment impacted external factors such as market and the socio-economic climate affecting the type, timing, volume and distribution of projects requiring assessment.

Protecting the environment, while supporting economic growth and improving the quality of life of Canadians, is a priority of the Government of Canada. EA supports this priority by providing decision-makers with information that demonstrates how potential adverse impacts on the environment (within federal jurisdiction) can be eliminated, reduced or controlled through the application of mitigation measures.

As the area of environmental management is an area of shared responsibility between the federal and provincial governments, some projects may require both a federal and a provincial EA. EAs may be coordinated so that a single EA meets the legal requirements of both jurisdictions. A responsible authority may delegate any part of an EA it is required to conduct to another jurisdiction.

The federal Crown has a legal duty to consult and, where appropriate, accommodate Indigenous groups when it contemplates conduct that may adversely affect potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights. Indigenous consultation considerations are integrated into all EAs conducted by the Agency and by review panels. The EA process established under CEAA 2012 coexists with other impact assessment requirements established under some land claims agreements, such as the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, the Northeastern Quebec Agreement, the Nisga’a Final Agreement, and the Inuvialuit Final Agreement. This requires close collaboration to ensure efficient coordination of these processes.

Following commitments made in the Minister’s mandate letter Endnote ii, the Speech from the Throne Endnote iii and Budget 2016 Endnote iv, a comprehensive review of EA processes was undertaken. In June 2017, the government released a Discussion Paper outlining a series of changes it was considering to strengthen Canada’s environmental assessment and regulatory processes. Subsequently, in February 2018, the government tabled Bill C–69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts in Parliament.

Until changes are implemented, the Agency continues to carry out EAs in accordance with the CEAA 2012 and interim approach and principles for assessing major projects Endnote v. The Agency continues to support the Minister of Environment and Climate Change during this process while continuing to deliver on its current responsibilities in an efficient and effective manner.

Key risks

Key risks
Risks Mitigating strategy and effectiveness Link to the department’s Programs Link to mandate letter commitments or to government-wide and departmental priorities

Impacts of economic activity

The Agency operates in a continuously changing environment influenced by external factors. In particular, the economic climate of a region affects the type, timing, volume and distribution of projects requiring EAs.

The Agency maintains proactive relationships with proponents to forecast and plan its work to the extent possible.

The Agency reallocates resources, where possible, to address fluctuating workload distribution and develops strategies in collaboration with central agencies to meet its legislative responsibilities.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Take the lead in implementing the government’s plan for a clean environment and a sustainable economy.

Managing engagement challenges

The Agency manages Indigenous consultation activities with potentially affected Indigenous Peoples during the EAs of designated projects for which it is responsible, to fulfill the federal Crown's legal duty to consult. A lack of adequate consultation makes it difficult to ensure appropriate accommodation can be identified and implemented. A lack of adequate consultation may also be a source of regulatory uncertainty.

Each EA may give rise to the legal duty to consult. As such, the Agency integrates Indigenous consultation activities into the EA process to the extent possible, and identifies measures that can be included in a decision statement to address concerns, thereby supporting the federal Crown in meeting its legal duty to consult for the government actions associated with a project, and for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change or Government of Canada in exercising their EA related responsibilities.

When cooperative mechanisms such as substitution are undertaken with other jurisdictions, the Agency maintains responsibilities for the substantive aspects of consultation, but may delegate the procedural aspects of Indigenous consultation to the other jurisdiction.

The Indigenous component of the Participant Funding Program provides up to $3 million annually in financial assistance specifically for Indigenous groups to prepare for and participate in consultation activities associated with EAs undertaken by the Agency or by review panels.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Improve relationship with, and outcomes for Indigenous Peoples.

Managing non-compliance

Proponent non-compliance with CEAA 2012, including non-compliance with conditions identified in decision statements could harm the environment and/or undermine public confidence.

Decision statements contain clear and measurable conditions, including mitigation measures and follow-up program requirements.

The Agency's Compliance and Enforcement Program promotes and verifies compliance and determines an appropriate response to situations involving non-compliance.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Review Canada’s environmental assessment processes to regain public trust and help get resources to market and introduce new, fair processes that will, among other things, require project advocates to choose the best technologies available to reduce environmental impacts.

Managing shared responsibility

Shared federal and provincial responsibility for environmental management leads to risks of duplication between federal, provincial and territory EA processes.

This is an ongoing risk, as environmental management is an area of shared responsibility between the federal and provincial governments under the Constitution Act, 1982. As a result, some projects may require both a federal and a provincial EA.

The Agency seeks to strengthen cooperation with provinces and territories through better coordination and alignment of impact assessment timelines and processes.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Improved partnerships with provincial, territorial, and municipal governments are essential to deliver the real, positive change that we promised Canadians.

Restore robust oversight and thorough environmental assessments of areas under federal jurisdiction, while also working with provinces and territories to avoid duplication.

Managing IT priorities

The Agency is part of Shared Services Canada’s mandatory client base. The Agency shares the risks associated with the transformation of the IT infrastructure of the Government of Canada to a single consolidated infrastructure.

Ongoing active engagement with Shared Services Canada’s service delivery executives.

Inclusion of escalation process in all memoranda of understanding, service agreements and recovery agreements with Shared Services Canada.

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Internal Services

Not available

Results: what we achieved

Programs

Program 1.1: Environmental Assessment Policy Program

Description

The Environmental Assessment Policy Program develops and promotes robust policies and practices for high-quality EA in accordance with the CEAA 2012. This is achieved by building and reinforcing policies, procedures, and criteria for the conduct of federal EA, by promoting cooperation and coordinated action between the federal government and other jurisdictions, by promoting communication and cooperation with Indigenous Peoples, and by developing instruments and training for EA practitioners. EA Policy enables continuous improvement through research, monitoring, analysis, and advice. Recommendations inform the development of new regulatory and policy approaches, as well as the revision of guidance, training and knowledge-based instruments. The program also provides support for the conduct of EA through various means, such as federal-provincial agreements and policy criteria.

Results

The EA Policy Program is responsible for the legislative and policy frameworks that promote high-quality federal EA. It has played a key role in ensuring the Agency is seen as a leader in shaping the future of EA, both domestically and internationally, including supporting the government’s review of environmental and regulatory processes.

The Agency’s results for 2017–18, detailed below, support the Minister’s mandate letter commitments to review Canada’s environmental and regulatory processes to ensure public trust, protect the environment, and ensure resources get to market, while also introducing new evidence-based and inclusive processes. The Agency supported the Minister in the review of environmental and regulatory processes by contributing to the Discussion Paper released in June of 2017, continuing to support the work of the Multi-Interest Advisory Committee, and supporting the development of Bill C-69, which introduced the proposed Impact Assessment Act. The proposed Impact Assessment Act would introduce new rules where decisions on projects would be guided by science, evidence and Indigenous traditional knowledge. Reviews would occur in partnership with Indigenous Peoples, as well as with provinces and territories, and communities would have their voices heard from the start. Companies would have more clarity about what is required of them, and review timelines would be more predictable. Project reviews would be both more rigorous and more efficient, with reduced legislated timelines and clearer requirements from the start.

The Agency launched consultations to help inform the approach to developing two regulations to support the government’s proposed new Impact Assessment Act. Two consultation papers were developed and released in order to gather feedback from Canadians on the approach to revising the Regulations Designating Physical Activities (Project List) and for developing Information Requirements and Time Management Regulations.

The Agency worked in partnership with Indigenous Peoples to develop processes and approaches which reflect the objectives of reconciliation and Canada’s commitment to the principles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Specifically, the Agency actively engaged on policy issues raised by Indigenous groups, including working with Indigenous groups and provincial governments to implement the EA provisions of formal agreements (the Nisga'a Final Agreement, the Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement, the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement, and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement), and harmonizing their implementation with CEAA 2012. The Agency engaged in extensive dialogue with various Indigenous groups and organizations throughout the review of environmental and regulatory processes to ensure they had meaningful opportunities to contribute to the review of environmental assessment processes. The Agency is committed to building a system that protects the environment while advancing reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples by recognizing and respecting the rights, culture and interests of Indigenous Peoples, their deep connection to their lands, territories and resources, and their desire to participate as partners in the economic development of their territories.

The Agency continued to support the Multi-Interest Advisory Committee which is comprised of national Indigenous organizations, industry associations and environmental groups, and acted as Chair and Secretariat to the Committee. The Agency organized a total of five in-person MIAC meetings throughout the fiscal year, which helped inform ongoing work in the review of environmental and regulatory processes.

The Agency continued to provide support and advice to federal authorities with responsibilities under CEAA 2012, and coordinated annual reporting to Parliament of federal authorities' activities on federal lands with respect to CEAA 2012. The Agency coordinated and chaired meetings of the EA Administrators Committee consisting of federal, provincial and territorial representatives, as well as other interdepartmental and intergovernmental committees with the aim of facilitating the exchange of best practices in federal, provincial and territorial EAs.

The Agency supported the Minister in promoting the application of the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, including chairing the Strategic Environmental Assessment Community of Practice, providing advice and conducting training sessions for federal departments and employees.

The Agency delivered introductory training on EAs and strategic EAs to over 125 federal government employees, Agency staff, and members of the public. To support the implementation of CEAA 2012, the Agency published guidance on determining significance of adverse environmental effects, assessing cumulative environmental effects, and public participation. In addition, the Agency conducted internal research to inform the development of Bill C-69.

The Agency maintained a strong relationship with the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Council on Environmental Quality on EA issues of mutual interest, including by sharing information and providing opportunities to comment on the federal review of environmental and regulatory processes.

The Agency asserted Canada’s international leadership in EA by participating in international meetings, workshops and capacity building initiatives with officials from Chile, Peru, Argentina and Madagascar. The Agency also played a significant role in organizing and participating in the International Association of Impact Assessment’s 2017 annual conference held in Montréal, and contributed to discussions on climate change, Indigenous knowledge, and enforceable conditions, through presentations to and participation in the conference held in April 2017.

The Agency fostered the inclusion of EA provisions in international treaties by supporting Global Affairs Canada in the development of recommendations to the United Nations General Assembly on the environmental impact assessment element of a proposed treaty on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. It also supported Canada’s negotiating team in the development of an Environmental Impact Assessment article under the North American Free Trade Agreement. In addition, the Agency led the process for Canada’s ratification of two amendments to the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context.

Finally, the Agency collaborated with Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada on an Arctic Council initiative to advance environmental impact assessment implementation and public participation in the Arctic. It also worked with portfolio partners to address recommendations by the World Heritage Centre and International Union for Conservation of Nature reactive monitoring mission to Wood Buffalo National Park.

Results achieved
Expected results Performance indicators Target Date to achieve target 2017 –18 Actual results 2016 –17 Actual results 2015 –16 Actual results

High-quality EAs enabled through research, analysis and monitoring to produce effective policy instruments

Percentage of users of Agency policy instruments who indicated moderate to high satisfaction with these instruments

75 %

2017 -18

Insufficient information available to support a reliable and representative quantitative assessment of user satisfaction for 2017-18.

Insufficient information available to support a reliable and representative quantitative assessment of user satisfaction for 2016-17.

Insufficient information available to support a reliable and representative quantitative assessment of user satisfaction for 2015-16.

Note: This indicator has been replaced by new indicators developed through the Departmental Results Framework process and will no longer be reported in 2018-19.

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)
2017 –18 Main Estimates 2017 –18 Planned spending 2017 –18 Total authorities available for use 2017 –18 Actual spending (authorities used) 2017 –18 Difference (actual minus planned)

4,500,940

4,500,940

6,159,570

6,159,570

1,658,630

Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2017 –18 Planned 2017 –18 Actual 2017 –18 Difference (actual minus planned)

40

42

2

The difference between planned and actual spending of $1.7 million in 2017–18 is primarily a result of additional resources received through allotment adjustments and supplementary estimates.

Program 1.2: Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Description

This program ensures that high-quality EA of major projects are conducted and completed in a timely and predictable way, thereby supporting economic growth while preventing or reducing adverse environmental effects. The most appropriate means of avoiding duplication of assessment activities with other jurisdictions is applied, thereby increasing efficiency and providing certainty for all participants in the process. The Agency will promote, monitor, and facilitate compliance with CEAA 2012. The EA process provides for the meaningful participation of the public and Indigenous groups. Indigenous consultation obligations are integrated to the greatest extent possible with the federal EA process. As such, the Agency consults with Indigenous groups during the EA process to assess how the proposed project may adversely impact potential or established Aboriginal or treaty rights and related interests, and find ways to avoid or minimize these adverse impacts. This program uses funding from the following transfer payments: the Participant Funding Program, and the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement.

Results

The EA Delivery Program conducts high-quality EAs in a timely and predictable way in accordance with CEAA 2012. Agency results for 2017–18, as detailed below, support the Minister’s mandate letter commitments as well as the interim approach and principles for the conduct of EAs.

In 2017–18, the Agency played a central role in ensuring a robust and evidence-based federal review process that protects the environment, supports the resource industries and respects the rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Agency ensured that the EA process was administered in accordance with legislated time limits under CEAA 2012. The Agency also ensured that EAs were informed by public participation and consultation with Indigenous Peoples, with thorough consideration of the environmental effects of designated projects. The Agency ensured that, for projects that were allowed to proceed, the EA process lead to clear, measurable and enforceable conditions with which project proponents must comply, including mitigation measures and follow-up program requirements. Decision statements that have been issued, combined with compliance promotion, compliance verification and enforcement activities in relation to CEAA 2012 and its regulations are contributing to environmental protection and clean growth.

During 2017–18, the Agency conducted or managed EA processes for 66 projects subject to CEAA 2012. The Agency also managed 13 comprehensive studies and oversaw four screenings initiated under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, as per the transitional provisions of CEAA 2012. With regard to new assessments initiated:

  • the legislated 10-day review time limit was met for all project descriptions received (the final review of the project description took place for nine projects); and
  • the legislated time limit of 45 days to determine whether an EA is required was met for all projects (the determination was made for 12 projects, with eight requiring an EA).

During 2017–18, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change received four requests to designate a project as requiring an EA under CEAA 2012. The Agency provided analysis to inform the Minister’s decision on whether to designate these projects. Out of the four requests received, two projects were designated and an EA was commenced. In order to maintain efficiency and quality of advice, the Agency developed internal tools and procedures to assist employees in supporting the Minister in exercising her discretion to designate projects under CEAA 2012.

Supported by the Agency, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change made EA decisions on six projects within established legislated timelines. Decision statements along with enforceable conditions were issued for Scotian Basin Exploration Drilling Project in Nova-Scotia, Project 4 - All-Season Road Connecting Berens River to Poplar River First Nation in Manitoba, and Murray River Coal Project in British Columbia. A decision statement was also issued for the Sisson Brook Tungsten and Molybdenum Mine Project in New Brunswick under the Comprehensive Study process set out in the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. For the Ajax Mine Project in British Columbia, also a Comprehensive Study under the former Act, the Minister issued a significance determination decision and the project was referred to the Governor in Council to decide if the significant adverse effects are justified.

CEAA 2012 provides a range of tools to enable efficient and effective management of the EA process within the federal government and with provincial, territorial and Indigenous government partners, including through coordination, delegation and substitution of EA processes and joint reviews. For example, the Ajax Mine project, completed during 2017–18, was subject to a coordinated EA process where a Joint Federal Comprehensive Study / Provincial Assessment Report was prepared in order for the Government of British Columbia and the federal government to reach their respective EA decisions.

The Agency also worked with the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to prepare for a regional assessment related to offshore oil and gas exploration. The intent of the regional assessment is to create a framework to leverage existing knowledge in order to evaluate and manage more efficiently the potential environmental effects of offshore exploration drilling projects.

The Agency led interdepartmental and intergovernmental committees such as the Regional Director Environmental Assessment Committee (in Pacific-Yukon Region) and the Leaders in EA Facilitation Committee (in Ontario Region) to facilitate the exchange of best practices, and to develop and implement strategies to improve consistency and timeliness in federal EAs.

In conducting EAs, the Agency sought the views of expert federal departments, Indigenous groups and the public on the information provided by the proponent, the design of the proposed project, as well as the proponent’s project-related plans and activities, to ensure decisions were informed by the best available information and knowledge.

To address significant adverse cumulative effects on the current use of lands and resources by Indigenous groups – notably caribou hunting – which were identified through the EA for the Murray River Project in British Columbia, the Agency and Environment and Climate Change Canada officials worked with Indigenous groups and the BC government to develop and implement additional measures to promote caribou recovery. These measures lead to long-term investment in critical habitat protection and restoration, and specific conditions being included in the Decision Statement for the Murray River Project.

The Agency integrated consideration of the five principles, including assessing the direct and upstream greenhouse gas emissions of projects into the conduct of EAs, as part of the implementation of the interim approach and principles for EAs currently underway as announced by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in January 2016. For example, conditions in the Decision Statement for the Murray River Coal Project include specific measures to minimize adverse environmental effects related to greenhouse gases.

The Agency will continue to contend with cumulative effects, including those related to species at risk and climate change, in future projects and is expanding its expertise and capacity accordingly. One avenue for improved consideration of cumulative effects is through the conduct of regional and strategic assessments.

The Agency carried out Gender Based Analysis plus (GBA+) on projects that required a Governor-in-Council decision. GBA+ analysis allows for a better understanding of the impact of projects on communities and different groups of individuals. It is an important tool in fulfilling the government’s commitment to gender equality and to ensure inclusive outcomes for Canadians.

As the federal Crown consultation coordinator, the Agency worked with federal authorities, for federal EAs conducted by the Agency or by a review panel, to apply an efficient and effective whole-of-government approach to consultation with Indigenous groups potentially affected by those projects. The Agency has committed to consulting Indigenous Peoples and to take into consideration impacts on their rights. Where appropriate, accommodations will also be made.

In 2017–18, the Agency’s Funding Programs provided funding through contribution agreements to support participation, engagement and consultation activities through the Participant Funding Program and the new Policy Dialogue Program.

To support the public, Indigenous Peoples and stakeholders’ participation in the EA process, the Participant Funding Program disbursed a total of $1,435,550Footnote 3, including:

  • $140,666 provided to 22 recipients (disbursed through 26 contribution agreements) to facilitate public participation in the EAs of 12 projects; and
  • $1,294,884 provided to 47 recipients (disbursed through 61 contribution agreements) to enable Indigenous consultation and participation in the EAs of 21 projects.

In addition, the Policy Dialogue Program disbursed a total of $2,146,110Footnote 4 to support Indigenous participation in the review of environmental and regulatory processes with a total of 63 recipients. The Agency also administered contribution funds on behalf of Natural Resources Canada for Indigenous participation in EAs led by other responsible authorities such as the National Energy Board.

The Agency promoted compliance with CEAA 2012, including compliance with enforceable conditions contained in decision statements. This was achieved through a variety of touchpoints, including meetings with proponents, industry groups and associations, the delivery of training on CEAA 2012 to EA stakeholders, and the dissemination of information through various channels, including the Agency's website.

In addition to compliance verification of information submitted by proponents, the Agency conducted on-site inspections for five projects assessed under CEAA 2012. As a result of these inspections, three enforcement actions were taken against three proponents, including the issuance of one written warning and two orders under s.94 of CEAA 2012. The Agency also revised its Compliance and Enforcement Policy, and implemented two Directives and one Standard Operating Procedure regulating the conduct of compliance and enforcement activities.

The Agency continued to increase document availability on the Canadian Environmental Assessment Registry Internet Site (the Registry) providing comprehensive access for several projects undergoing an Agency-led assessment. In addition, all annual reports submitted in accordance with decision statement conditions have been posted on the Registry.

The Agency’s various communities of practice regularly carry out information sharing, learning and development sessions for staff to discuss common issues, share best practices and lessons learned, and develop recommendations to address issues requiring further direction or guidance to support effective implementation of CEAA 2012.

Statistical Summary of Environmental Assessments

The table below provides a statistical summary of EAs and outlines the total number of projects that underwent transitional EAs conducted under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act or that were assessed under CEAA 2012 between April 1, 2017 and March 31, 2018Footnote 5.

Type and Number of EA between April 1, 2017 and March 31, 2018 EA Decisions Taken between April 1, 2017 and March 31, 2018 EAs on March 31, 2018
EA Type Ongoing on April 1, 2017 Initiated Completed Terminated Ongoing

Transitional Screening

4

0

0

0

4

Transitional Comprehensive Study

13

0

1

0

12

Conducted by the Agency

37

10

3

4

40

Conducted by Review Panel

9

0

0

0

9

Substituted

10

0

0

3

10

Note: In accordance with the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the Agency fulfilled the duties of federal departments and agencies that were responsible authorities for comprehensive studies. The Agency was responsible for 13 transitional comprehensive studies, one of which was terminated after being designated by Ministerial Order as requiring an EA under CEAA 2012, one of which was completed in 2017–18.

Results achieved
Expected results Performance indicators Target Date to achieve target 2017 –18 Actual results 2016 –17 Actual results 2015 –16 Actual results

Deliver high-quality EAs

Percentage of projects undergoing follow-up and monitoring for which the Agency received a report during the reporting period that indicated that the mitigation measures set out in the EA decision statement would effectively address the environmental effects of the project

90 %

2017 –18

75 %Footnote 6

80 %Footnote 7

100 %Footnote 8

Deliver high-quality EAs

Where adaptive management measures set out in the EA decision statement were required as a result of a follow-up and monitoring report and a report was received by the Agency on the implementation of those measures during the reporting period, the percentage of projects where the adaptive management measures led to effectively addressing the environmental effects of the project

90 %

2017 –18

N/AFootnote 9

N/AFootnote 10

N/AFootnote 11

EA process provides meaningful participation of Indigenous groups and integrates Crown consultation to the greatest extent possible

Percentage of Indigenous groups with high or moderate potential for being affected by a project that provided comments on EA documents to the Agency

90 %

2017 –18

78 %Footnote 12

78 %

79 %

Deliver EAs within timelines established under CEAA 2012

Percentage of EAs conducted by the Agency that adhere to CEAA 2012 timelines

100 %

2017 –18

100 %

100 %

100 %

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)
2017 –18 Main Estimates 2017 –18 Planned spending 2017 –18 Total authorities available for use 2017 –18 Actual spending (authorities used) 2017 –18 Difference (Actual spending minus Planned spending)

24,159,057

24,159,057

27,202,589

26,941,479

2,782,422

Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2017 –18 Planned full-time equivalents 2017 –18 Actual full-time equivalents 2017 –18 Difference (Actual full-time equivalents minus Planned full-time equivalents)

150

184

34

The difference between planned and actual spending of $2.8 million in 2017–18 is a result of additional resources received through allotment adjustments and supplementary estimates.

The increase in full-time equivalents is mainly due to allocating internal services resources and costs directly attributable to Programs for such services as legal services, communications, translation costs and information management and information technology.

Supporting information on the Agency’s lower-level programs is available in the GC InfoBase.Endnote vi

Internal Services

Description

Internal Services are those groups of related activities and resources that the federal government considers to be services in support of programs and/or required to meet corporate obligations of an organization. Internal Services refers to the activities and resources of the 10 distinct service categories that support Program delivery in the organization, regardless of the Internal Services delivery model in a department. The 10 service categories are: Management and Oversight Services; Communications Services; Legal Services; Human Resources Management Services; Financial Management Services; Information Management Services; Information Technology Services; Real Property Services; Materiel Services; and Acquisition Services.

Results

Delivery of the Agency’s priorities, results and compliance with the Government of Canada policy framework requires the provision of internal services in a cost-effective and timely manner. In 2017–18 the Agency focused on the following initiatives as outlined below.

The Agency established and made progress on a number of strategies and plans to ensure the organization has the right structure, workplace and workforce to meet its current and future needs. The Agency also established a Transformation Steering Committee and staffed the new Chief Innovation and Transformation Officer position to ensure oversight and alignment of cross-sector functions in support of upcoming changes to the Agency.

Further, in line with the Agency’s Mental Health, Diversity and Inclusion plan and its employee survey action plan, efforts were deployed to increase awareness and promote tools to support well-being, respect, diversity and inclusion in the workplace. The results from the latest 2017 Public Service Employee Survey demonstrate strong and above average results in these areas for the Agency. In order to maintain strong results and support continuous improvement particularly in the context of legislative and organizational change, the Agency continues to foster a healthy workplace culture.

Significant efforts have been deployed to support employees experiencing difficulties as a result of the pay transformation initiative and to ensure data entry is accurate and timely to contribute to supporting government-wide efforts towards the stabilization of the pay and benefits system. The Agency has also collaborated with Public Services and Procurement Canada to implement a revised approach to better support its employees with pay challenges. Furthermore, the Agency has established strong collaboration with Environment and Climate Change Canada to better align its internal Human Resources systems and data on systems such as MyGCHR, Position and Classification Information System (PCIS) and PCIS+.

The Agency implemented the second phase of its three-year Social Media Strategy, which consisted of exploring the possibility of launching new social media channels. Twitter has been designated as our main social media platform, and the Agency manages an English and a French account as well as the bilingual account of the President. Compared to 2016–17, the Agency’s presence on Twitter increased considerably as the Agency created and published more content and visuals. The number of followers has increased, likely due to the rise in activity, from 2,554 followers in 2016–17 to 3,450 followers in 2017–18 (English and French accounts combined). This represents a 35.1% growth rate over the year. This growth also facilitated 34.6% more engagement from the public, which means our content was interacted with via ‘re-tweeting, favouring, or commenting’ 850 more times than last year. The Agency also looked at how many impressions we received this year compared to last. Impressions are the number of unique views our content yields. Our French account had 179,600 impressions this year, while our English account boasted 1,121,100. We can conclude that some of these higher numbers are directly linked to our increased activity and engagement with the public on Twitter.

In addition, the Agency continued to expand the range of information related to EA available online, including videos, diagrams and infographics as part of the overall approach of being digital by default. The Agency made extensive use of online platforms to support public engagement on the review of environmental and regulatory processes, such as the LetsTalkEA.ca website that the Agency administered on behalf of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change. More than 160 emails and correspondence, and over 1,150 comments from more than 500 registered users were received during the 30-day public comment period on the Expert Panel’s report.

The Agency continued to work towards the roll out of phase II of the Agency's new Environmental Assessment Management System. Significant progress was made towards a compliance and enforcement module and a communications and issues management module, both of which are planned to be deployed next fiscal year. In addition, enhancements were made, mainly centered around contact and group tracking optimization. Efforts were also made to review and integrate multiple regional contact databases.

The Agency migrated its legacy OpenText system to a new information management system server. The migration was completed in May 2017, enabling employees to begin using GCDOCS, the Government of Canada's shared Information Management System.

During fiscal year 2017–18, the Agency successfully implemented a new and more comprehensive Business Continuity Plan and Security Plan that incorporates all requirements of the Policy on Government Security. Furthermore, the Agency successfully redesigned, in a cost-effective way, in collaboration with Central Agencies and Public Services and Procurement, its headquarter office to a Workplace 2.0 environment.

The Agency is committed to ensure transparency in the conduct of its operations and currently maintains an extensive public registry of environmental assessment projects Endnote vii (the Registry). As such, the Agency continued to increase document availability on the Registry.

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)
2017 –18 Main Estimates 2017 –18 Planned spending 2017 –18 Total authorities available for use 2017 –18 Actual spending (authorities used) 2017 –18 Difference (Actual spending minus Planned spending)

5,433,237

5,433,237

6,721,111

6,721,111

1,287,874

Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2017 –18 Planned 2017 –18 Actual 2017 –18 Difference (actual minus planned)

72

45

(27)

The difference between planned and actual spending of $1.3 million in 2017–18 is primarily due to an increase in the Agency’s expenditures for transition to Workplace 2.0 office transformation at headquarters and the relocation of the Toronto regional office.

The decrease in full-time equivalents is mainly due to allocating internal services resources and costs directly attributable to Programs for such services as legal services, communications, translation costs and information management and information technology.

Analysis of trends in spending and human resources

Actual expenditures

Departmental spending trend graph

Departmental spending trend graph

Budgetary performance summary for Programs and Internal Services (dollars)
Programs and Internal Services 2017–18 Main Estimates 2017–18 Planned spending 2018 –19 Planned spending 2019 –20 Planned spending 2017–18 Total authorities available for use 2017–18 Actual spending (authorities used) 2016 –17 Actual spending (authorities used) 2015 –16 Actual spending (authorities used)

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

4,500,940

4,500,940

4,219,324

4,195,583

6,159,570

6,159,570

7,957,786

5,134,147

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

24,159,057

24,159,057

23,540,843

23,408,384

27,202,589

26,941,479

24,260,587

17,913,607

Subtotal

28,659,997

28,659,997

27,760,167

27,603,967

33,362,159

33,101,049

32,218,373

23,047,754

Internal Services

5,433,237

5,433,237

5,869,608

5,836,581

6,721,111

6,721,111

6,469,627

6,168,548

Total

34,093,234

34,093,234

33,629,775

33,440,548

40,083,270

39,822,160

38,688,000

29,216,302

The total authorities available for use includes all items approved through the Estimates processes for fiscal year 2017–18. The variances between Main Estimates, Planned Spending, Total Authorities and Actual Spending are largely attributable to the timing of key elements of the fiscal cycle. The Main Estimates, as approved in the spring by Parliament in the initial appropriations, are the first step in the fiscal cycle.

  • The expenditures (actual spending) indicated for 2015–16, 2016–17 and 2017–18 represent the actual expenditures as reported in the 2016, 2017 and 2018 Public Accounts, respectively.
  • For the period 2018–19 and 2019–20, planned spending reflects funding approved by the Treasury Board but do not include Budget 2018 initiatives.

The 2017–18 Total Authorities ($40.1 million) represent Main Estimates, plus in-year Supplementary Estimates, plus adjustments to authorities approved by the Treasury Board, such as Operational Budget Carry-Forward.

  • The $6.0 million difference between 2017–18 Total Authorities ($40.1 million) and 2017–18 Planned Spending or Main Estimates ($34.1 million) is primarily attributable to additional resources approved through supplementary estimates and allotment adjustments due to collective bargaining and carry forward.
  • The Agency spent $5.7 million more than reflected in Main Estimates due to activities deferred to 2017–18 from 2016–17 and salary increases for collective bargaining agreements.

The planned spending figures for future years shown above do not include cost-recoverable expenditures. The Agency has the authority to recover up to $8.0 million in costs annually, which is netted against the voted authority.

Actual human resources

Human resources summary for Programs and Internal Services (full-time equivalents)
Programs and Internal Services 2015–16 Actual full-time equivalents 2016–17 Actual full-time equivalents 2017–18 Planned full-time equivalents 2017–18 Actual full-time equivalents 2018–19 Planned full-time equivalents 2019–20 Planned full-time equivalents

Environmental Assessment Policy Program

41

59

40

42

42

42

Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

125

164

150

184

180

179

Subtotal

166

223

190

226

222

221

Internal Services

70

42

72

45

39

39

Total

236

265

262

271

261

260

Full-time equivalents (FTEs) are a measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person-year charge against a departmental budget. FTEs are calculated as a ratio of assigned hours of work to scheduled hours of work. Scheduled hours of work are set out in collective agreements.

  • The decrease in Internal Services full-time equivalents from 2017–18 planned and actual is mainly due to the attribution of direct Internal Services costs and resources to programs (EA Delivery and EA Policy).
  • Actual full-time equivalents have remained relatively stable between 2016–17 and 2017–18.
  • The Agency used 271 FTEs in 2017–18, a small increase over the planned level of 262 primarily a result of preparing for possible changes resulting from Bill C-69.
  • The Agency’s planned staffing levels remains relatively stable in future years but do not reflect future funding decisions.

Expenditures by vote

For information on the Agency’s organizational voted and statutory expenditures, consult the Public Accounts of Canada 2017–2018. Endnote viii

Government of Canada spending and activities

Information on the alignment of the Agency’s spending with the Government of Canada’s spending and activities is available in the GC InfoBase.Endnote ix

Financial statements and financial statements highlights

Financial statements

The Agency’s financial statements (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2018, are available on the Agency’s website.Endnote x

Financial statements highlights

Condensed Statement of Operations (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2017 (dollars)
Financial information 2017–18 Planned results 2017–18 Actual results 2016–17 Actual results Difference (2017–18 Actual results minus 2017–18 Planned results) Difference (2017–18 Actual results minus 2016–17 Actual results)

Total expenses

44,237,828

46,744,240

44,602,092

2,506,412

2,142,148

Total revenues

4,500,000

1,825,374

1,183,193

(2,674,626)

642,181

Net cost of operations before government funding and transfers

39,737,828

44,918,870

43,418,899

5,181,042

1,499,971

  • The $4.5 million in planned revenues for 2017–18 was forecasted cost-recoverable panel review activities with actual results of $1.8 million reflecting that the activities did not happen as quickly as planned.
  • The Agency's actual net financial position for 2017–18 was affected by an increase in total revenues and expenses in comparison to 2016–17.
  • The increase in the total expenses between 2016–17 and 2017–18 is primarily attributable to preparing for possible changes resulting from Bill C-69.
  • The $1.5 million difference in net cost of operations between 2017–18 and 2016–17 actuals was largely attributable to preparing for possible changes resulting from Bill C-69 and partially offset by an increase in revenue collection.

The Agency's workload is constantly affected by outside factors, such as the economy, that can vary the number, types and locations of projects requiring EAs. This impacts the Agency’s ability to accurately forecast the pace and levels of expenditures for EAs by the Agency and by review panels.

Condensed Statement of Financial Position (unaudited) as at March 31, 2018 (dollars)
Financial Information 2017 –18 2016 –17 Difference (2017–18 minus 2016–17)

Total net liabilities

6,342,192

7,328,470

(986,278)

Total net financial assets

6,686,698

7,418,004

(731,306)

Departmental net debt

(344,506)

(89,534)

(254,972)

Total non-financial assets

0

20,685

(20,685)

Departmental net financial position

(344,506)

110,219

(454,725)

The Agency's total net liabilities are comprised primarily of accounts payable and accruals for employee future benefits, vacation and compensatory leave. Liabilities decrease by approximately $1 million from fiscal year 2016–17 to 2017–18, primarily due to a decrease in accounts payable at year end due to the end of the review of environmental and regulatory processes.

The decrease in net financial assets from fiscal year 2016–17 to 2017–18, of $0.7 million, was due to an increase in Accounts Receivable ($0.15 million) and a decrease in amounts from the Consolidated Revenue Fund ($0.9 million). The Consolidated Revenue Fund is the account into which the government deposits taxes and revenue, and from which it withdraws in order to defray the costs of public services.

Supplementary information

Corporate information

Organizational profile

Appropriate minister: The Honourable Catherine McKenna, P.C., M.P., Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Institutional head: Ron Hallman, President

Ministerial portfolio: Environment

Enabling instrument(s): Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012Endnote xi

Year of incorporation / commencement: 1994

Other: CEAA 2012 is supported by three regulations: the Regulations Designating Physical Activities, the Prescribed Information for the Description of a Designated Project Regulations, and the Cost Recovery Regulations. The Agency supports its President who is also the Federal Administrator under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement.

Reporting framework

The Agency’s Strategic Outcome and Program Alignment Architecture of record for 2017–18 are shown below.

1. Strategic Outcome: High-quality and timely environmental assessments of major projects to protect the environment and support economic growth

1.1 Program: Environmental Assessment Policy Program

1.2 Program: Environmental Assessment Delivery Program

Internal Services

Supporting information on lower-level programs

Supporting information on lower-level programs is available on the GC InfoBaseEndnote xii.

Supplementary information tables

The following supplementary information tables are available on the Agency’s websiteEndnote xiii:

  • Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy
  • Evaluations
  • Fees
  • Internal audits
  • Response to parliamentary committees and external audits

Federal tax expenditures

The tax system can be used to achieve public policy objectives through the application of special measures such as low tax rates, exemptions, deductions, deferrals and credits. The Department of Finance Canada publishes cost estimates and projections for these measures each year in the Report on Federal Tax Expenditures.Endnote xiv This report also provides detailed background information on tax expenditures, including descriptions, objectives, historical information and references to related federal spending programs. The tax measures presented in this report are the responsibility of the Minister of Finance.

Organizational contact information

Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency

Place Bell Canada, 160 Elgin Street, 22nd Floor

Ottawa ON K1A 0H3

Canada

Telephone: 613-957-0700

Fax: 613-957-0946

E-mail: ceaa.information.acee@canada.ca

Website: https://www.canada.ca/ceaa

Appendix: definitions

appropriation (crédit)
Any authority of Parliament to pay money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
budgetary expenditures (dépenses budgétaires)
Operating and capital expenditures; transfer payments to other levels of government, organizations or individuals; and payments to Crown corporations.
Departmental Plan (plan ministériel)
A report on the plans and expected performance of an appropriated department over a three-year period. Departmental Plans are tabled in Parliament each spring.
Departmental Results Report (rapport sur les résultats ministériels)
A report on an appropriated department’s actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Departmental Plan.
evaluation (évaluation)
In the Government of Canada, the systematic and neutral collection and analysis of evidence to judge merit, worth or value. Evaluation informs decision making, improvements, innovation and accountability. Evaluations typically focus on programs, policies and priorities and examine questions related to relevance, effectiveness and efficiency. Depending on user needs, however, evaluations can also examine other units, themes and issues, including alternatives to existing interventions. Evaluations generally employ social science research methods.
experimentation (expérimentation)
Activities that seek to explore, test and compare the effects and impacts of policies, interventions and approaches, to inform evidence-based decision-making, by learning what works and what does not.
full-time equivalent (équivalent temps plein)
A measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person-year charge against a departmental budget. Full-time equivalents are calculated as a ratio of assigned hours of work to scheduled hours of work. Scheduled hours of work are set out in collective agreements.
gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) (analyse comparative entre les sexes plus [ACS+])
An analytical approach used to assess how diverse groups of women, men and gender-diverse people may experience policies, programs and initiatives. The “plus” in GBA+ acknowledges that the gender-based analysis goes beyond biological (sex) and socio-cultural (gender) differences. We all have multiple identity factors that intersect to make us who we are; GBA+ considers many other identity factors, such as race, ethnicity, religion, age, and mental or physical disability. Examples of GBA+ processes include using data disaggregated by sex, gender and other intersecting identity factors in performance analysis, and identifying any impacts of the program on diverse groups of people, with a view to adjusting these initiatives to make them more inclusive.
government-wide priorities (priorités pangouvernementales)
For the purpose of the 2017–18 Departmental Results Report, those high-level themes outlining the government’s agenda in the 2015 Speech from the Throne, namely: Growth for the Middle Class; Open and Transparent Government; A Clean Environment and a Strong Economy; Diversity is Canada’s Strength; and Security and Opportunity.
horizontal initiative (initiative horizontale)
An initiative where two or more departments are given funding to pursue a shared outcome, often linked to a government priority.
Management, Resources and Results Structure (structure de gestion, des ressources et des résultats)
A comprehensive framework that consists of an organization’s inventory of programs, resources, results, performance indicators and governance information. Programs and results are depicted in their hierarchical relationship to each other and to the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute. The Management, Resources and Results Structure is developed from the Program Alignment Architecture.
non-budgetary expenditures (dépenses non budgétaires)
Net outlays and receipts related to loans, investments and advances, which change the composition of the financial assets of the Government of Canada.
performance (rendement)
What an organization did with its resources to achieve its results, how well those results compare to what the organization intended to achieve, and how well lessons learned have been identified.
performance indicator (indicateur de rendement)
A qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging the performance of an organization, program, policy or initiative respecting expected results.
performance reporting (production de rapports sur le rendement)
The process of communicating evidence-based performance information. Performance reporting supports decision making, accountability and transparency.
plan (plan)
The articulation of strategic choices, which provides information on how an organization intends to achieve its priorities and associated results. Generally a plan will explain the logic behind the strategies chosen and tend to focus on actions that lead up to the expected result.
planned spending (dépenses prévues)

For Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports, planned spending refers to those amounts that receive Treasury Board approval by February 1. Therefore, planned spending may include amounts incremental to planned expenditures presented in the Main Estimates.

A department is expected to be aware of the authorities that it has sought and received. The determination of planned spending is a departmental responsibility, and departments must be able to defend the expenditure and accrual numbers presented in their Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports.

priority (priorité)
A plan or project that an organization has chosen to focus and report on during the planning period. Priorities represent the things that are most important or what must be done first to support the achievement of the desired Strategic Outcome(s) or Departmental Results.
program (programme)
A group of related resource inputs and activities that are managed to meet specific needs and to achieve intended results and that are treated as a budgetary unit.
Program Alignment Architecture (architecture d’alignement des programmes)
A structured inventory of an organization’s programs depicting the hierarchical relationship between programs and the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute.
result (résultat)
An external consequence attributed, in part, to an organization, policy, program or initiative. Results are not within the control of a single organization, policy, program or initiative; instead they are within the area of the organization’s influence.
statutory expenditures (dépenses législatives)
Expenditures that Parliament has approved through legislation other than appropriation acts. The legislation sets out the purpose of the expenditures and the terms and conditions under which they may be made.
Strategic Outcome (résultat stratégique)
A long-term and enduring benefit to Canadians that is linked to the organization’s mandate, vision and core functions.
sunset program (programme temporisé)
A time-limited program that does not have an ongoing funding and policy authority. When the program is set to expire, a decision must be made whether to continue the program. In the case of a renewal, the decision specifies the scope, funding level and duration.
target (cible)
A measurable performance or success level that an organization, program or initiative plans to achieve within a specified time period. Targets can be either quantitative or qualitative.
voted expenditures (dépenses votées)
Expenditures that Parliament approves annually through an Appropriation Act. The Vote wording becomes the governing conditions under which these expenditures may be made.

Page details

Date modified: