Public Services and Procurement Canada
Departmental Evaluation Plan, fiscal years 2021 to 2022 until 2025 to 2026

Mandate and priorities

PSPC fulfills its mandate through 5 CRs stated in the DRF:

• purchase of goods and services
• payments and accounting
• property and infrastructure
• government-wide support
• procurement Ombudsman^{Footnote 1}

The 5 CR and the program inventory are presented in a table in Appendix 1: Public Services and Procurement Canada Departmental Results Framework and Program inventory. The Office of the Procurement Ombudsman is an independent entity included in the DRF and was not considered in the development of the plan because it reports directly to Parliament through the Minister.

According to PSPC’s Departmental Plan for fiscal year 2021 to 2022, the gross budget expenditures forecast for the fiscal year total approximately $4.5 billion in programs, policies, initiatives and services.

3.1 Evaluation function: On the path to transformation and innovation

The mission of the OE is to conduct high-quality and timely evaluations to guide and support the decision-making process, improvements, innovation and accountability.

To fulfill its mandate, the OE has 4 priorities, while supporting the priorities of the department and those of the Government of Canada.

The OE applies the flexibility provided by the Policy on Results and offers various types of evaluations to meet the information needs of senior management. These evaluations take into account the lifecycle of a program, initiative or policy (design, implementation and others) and uses social science research methods that enable the neutral and systematic gathering and analysis of evidence.

In addition to conducting evaluations, the OE offers a variety of advisory services relating to evaluations, performance measurement, research and special studies intended to support the department in an effective and timely manner.

The OE also has resources dedicated to professional practices, the activities that strengthen the evaluation function. Apart from planning, reporting and internal liaison activities with federal institutions, the objective of the professional practices component is to develop tools to promote innovation and efficiency within the evaluation team.

3.2 Organizational structure and governance

The OE is part of the Evaluation and Integrated Risk Management Sector. In September 2020, following a reorganization, the sector joined the Office of the Chief Audit, Evaluation and Risk Executive to better meet the needs of the department.

The Chief Audit, Evaluation and Risk Executive assumes the role of Head of Evaluations at PSPC. His work is supported by the Director General of the Evaluation and Integrated Risk Management Sector , the Director of Evaluation, as well as the Evaluation Team.

The evaluation function is in turn supported by the following governance structure.

Figure 1: Office of the Chief Audit, Evaluation and Risk Executive Organization Chart

Text equivalent

Office of the Chief, Audit Evaluation and Risk Executive

• Audit
• Evaluation and Integrated Risk Management Sector
  • Risk
  • Evaluation

4.1 Background: Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020, PSPC played a key role in helping secure personal protective equipment, tests, and vaccines for Canadians. The pandemic has had significant repercussions on the work performed by the OE, which had to adapt to a rapidly evolving environment, while maintaining its activities to provide useful and relevant information in a timely manner.

The repercussions of the pandemic on the OE included:

• a change in how the evaluation team works, having to adapt to the reality of telework
• a slowdown in activities and delays in the finalization of some deliverables as a result of changing priorities
• a redefinition of the scope and time frame for the evaluation of a pilot project that could not be completed as planned, due to the repercussions of COVID-19 on the initiative

4.2 Plan implementation: On the path to transformation and innovation

In fiscal year 2020 to 2021, through evaluation projects, advisory services and professional practices, the OE supported the decision-making process at the department by providing evidence in a timely manner. The OE also initiated a series of measures aimed at transforming and innovating evaluation practices at PSPC in order to increase its usefulness. These transformation efforts will continue in fiscal year 2021 to 2022.

In fiscal year 2020 to 2021, the evaluation team worked on 5 evaluation projects, including participation in 2 horizontal evaluations managed by other departments. These projects included 1 evaluation that was approved in fiscal year 2020 to 2021, 3 evaluations that began in fiscal year 2020 to 2021 (including 2 horizontal evaluations), and 1 evaluation that was postponed until fiscal year 2021 to 2022 (the evaluation scope is being revised).

4.3 Evaluation function capacity and resources

The work involved in transforming the evaluation function also included a focus on enhancing its capacity. Considerable progress was made in fiscal year 2020 to 2021 to rebuild the team and promote professional development.

Various types of training have been provided to strengthen the internal capacity of the evaluation function.

Individual training sessions were held to help evaluators expand their current skills and acquire new knowledge of innovative methods and evaluation techniques. Training was also provided on the series of essential evaluation skills as well as training on data visualization and the creation of effective infographics to team members. The team also participated in discussion sessions on the lessons learned from COVID-19 regarding evaluation and performance measures offered by the Canadian Evaluation Society (CES). 9 employees are CES members and management will continue to support the membership of evaluators in the Society in fiscal year 2021 to 2022.

Various group training sessions were also held to introduce the team to department practices as well as the new work protocols resulting from the pandemic. The topics included information sessions on cybersecurity and the optimized use of GCdocs.

The OE also provided support for department mental health initiatives. In addition to encouraging the team to participate in various activities and presentations provided by the Office of the Ombudsman, the team also participated in sessions on resilience organized for employees by the Branch. A discussion space was also created in the form of informal weekly meetings where team members could get to know one another and discuss various topics other than work.

5.1 Approach and methodology overview

In accordance with TB requirements, an annual planning exercise was conducted to identify evaluation projects that will be carried out during the next 5-year evaluation cycle. See Appendix 2: Approach Used to Develop the Departmental Evaluation Plan for fiscal years starting in 2021 to 2022 and ending in 2025 to 2026 of this document for the main steps involved in this exercise.

This year, with the integration of the OE within the Office of the Chief Audit, Evaluation and Risk Executive, the evaluation and audit functions continued to adopt a more strategic approach to harmonize the planning exercises to the extent possible. The objective was not only to promote better synergy between the 2 functions, but also to reduce the burden of this exercise on the stakeholders. To achieve this, the following activities in the plan were carried out in collaboration with Audit:

• planning and engagement of joint consultations with the department's senior management
• alignment of the evaluation and audit schedules with respect to governance and development of common presentations to some committees
• identification of joint projects

5.2 Planned evaluation projects

Given that PSPC is an operational department, the evaluation team benefited from the flexibility provided by the Policy on Results to prioritize evaluation projects that meet the information needs and priorities of the department’s senior management.

Consequently, for the period covering fiscal years starting in 2021 to 2022 and ending in 2025 to 2026, the plan includes a total of 24 evaluation projects.

Of these evaluation projects, 11 are mandatory, including 5 horizontal evaluations lead by other departments, and 13 are discretionary, including 1 joint project with the Audit Team.

Appendix 3: Planned evaluation projects from 2021 to 2022 until 2025 to 2026, per fiscal year shows the detailed schedule of the evaluations planned over the next 5 years.

It is important to note that evaluation projects could be added to the schedule, depending on availability of additional resources and/or on evolving priorities and information needs. These potential additional projects could include:

• an evaluation with a cross-cutting theme, which might include a post-pandemic human resources (HR) theme (including the issue of diversity and inclusion) or a greening and sustainability theme
• a study of the lessons learned from a cross-cutting theme which could include topics such as innovation in procurement (Science and Parliamentary Infrastructure Branch), the impact of information technologies on operations as well as best practices for informing business continuity plans or Phase 2 of the lessons learned from COVID-19^{Footnote 2}
• a Real Property Services evaluation that could focus on the current context for the Government of Canada's real estate portfolio and the possibility of change given the new reality after COVID, which could impact real estate operations, including disposals^{Footnote 3}
• a specific evaluation and/or other products related to the evolution of work in a short term

The plan includes 14 of the 20 programs listed in the program inventory, excluding the Procurement Ombudsman, and covers approximatively 96% of departmental planned program spending or $3.6 billion of the $4.15 billion allocated to PSPC for 2021 to 2022 (this amount excludes external services and Procurement Ombudsman). See table 1: Fiscal year 2021 to 2022 gross budget expenditures forecast per core responsibility for more details.

6 programs, representing a total of 3.8% planned program spending, are excluded from the current evaluation plan. The details regarding these programs and the rationale for their exclusion are included in Appendix 4: Programs excluded from the Departmental Evaluation Plan for fiscal years starting in 2021 to 2022 and ending in 2025 to 2026 of this plan.

5.3 Planning of activities in support of the transformation of the evaluation function

The OE will continue to transform the evaluation function at PSPC in 2021 to 2022, by implementing innovative activities aimed at improving the quality of products and by offering relevant evaluation services in a timely manner. In addition to the innovative activities introduced in 2020 to 2021, Table 7 illustrates the innovative activities that will be introduced in 2021 to 2022.

5.4 Planning of current planning and reporting activities

In 2021 and 2022, the OE will continue to plan routine planning and reporting activities. Table 8 describes the main planning activities.

1. Review of the evaluation universe

The planning process for this exercise consisted of determining the evaluation universe, in other words, all evaluable mandatory and potential units at PSPC. The DRF and the PSPC Programs Inventory served as a starting point in this exercise since they describe the CR of PSPC.

2. Environmental scan

An environmental scan was then conducted to identify the priorities, risks, and information needs of the government and the department. This analysis included a review of various documents, including the PSPC Minister’s mandate letter and supplementary mandate letter, the PSPC departmental plan, the department risk profile and related products, the program information profiles, the 2019 to 2023 PSPC Risk-based Audit Plan as well as the previous PSPC audits and evaluations.

3. Consultations

22 consultations were held with PSPC senior management in the various branches and regional directorates in order to gather information on their needs and priorities, as well as the risks. Consultations were held with TBS representatives to discuss their questions and priorities for PSPC to be given consideration during the development of this 5-year evaluation plan.

4. Prioritization of evaluation projects

Various factors were taken into consideration in order to justify eliminating, maintaining or adding an evaluation, as well as the evaluation schedule. In addition to taking into account the priorities and information needs and risks identified during the environmental scan and consultations, there was also a need to review the risks associated with the evaluations. Various risk factors were evaluated, including the type of funding, the complexity of the evaluation, the materiality, the required skills and expertise, the availability of program data, and the program budget.

5. Approval of the Departmental Evaluation Plan

The draft of the plan was submitted to the Departmental Audit committee for information purposes, to the EAC for discussion and endorsement, to the PMERC members for recommendation for approval and to the Deputy Minister for final approval. It was be shared with the TBS and to be published externally on canada.ca.

Payments and collection of revenues

2.75% of departmental planned program spending in fiscal year 2021 to 2022

• The purpose of this program is to ensure the integrity of the Treasury for Canadians as well as to develop and maintain the Receiver General’s treasury systems. The Receiver General program was evaluated in fiscal year 2015 to 2016. Consequently, the priority for evaluating this program is low, unless there is a major change in the program’s design.

Government-wide accounting and reports

0.4% of departmental planned program spending in fiscal year 2021 to 2022

• This program helps to ensure maintenance of the accounts of Canada and the Chart of Accounts at the federal administration level as well as the production of the Public Accounts of Canada, including the audited consolidated annual financial statements and the Monthly Statements of Financial Operations for the Government of Canada. The Receiver General program was evaluated in fiscal year 2015 to 2016. Consequently, the priority for evaluating this program is low, unless there is a major change in the program’s design.

Communication services

0.4% of departmental planned program spending in fiscal year 2021 to 2022

• This program sector supports the services providing information to Canadians and government institutions on Government of Canada programs and publications. The activities of this program have not changed much over the years and remain relatively stable. However, the evaluation requirements will be reviewed at the appropriate time, given the communication modernization project underway.

Document imaging services

0.09% of departmental planned program spending in fiscal year 2021 to 2022

• This program offers efficient and quality document imaging and data entry services based on a cost recovery principle to federal organizations, using internal production capacity and private sector contractors. An evaluation of the document imaging services was conducted in May 2015. No major changes to the program are planned. The priority for evaluating this program is therefore low.

Asset disposal

0.1% of departmental planned program spending in fiscal year 2021 to 2022

• The asset disposal program includes GCSurplus (GCSurplus.ca, GCMil, GCTransfer and GCRecycle) and the management of seized goods. With the last evaluation dating back to fiscal year 2006 to 2007, the priority for evaluating this program is low, unless there is a major change in the program’s design.

Canadian General Standards Board

0.05% of departmental planned program spending in fiscal year 2021 to 2022

• The Canadian General Standards Board is a centre of expertise within the Government of Canada that develops and updates national standards and provides certifications for personnel, products and organizations. Since the last official evaluation dates back to 2008, the program conducted a validated self-evaluation in fiscal year 2016 to 2017. The priority for evaluating this program is low, unless there is a major change in the program’s design.