Language selection

Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada

Search

MAF 2015 to 2016 information management and information technology management methodology

Table of contents

Methodology overview

The Information Management and Information Technology (IM/IT) combined Area of Management:

  • Reflects that information and technology jointly enable program and service delivery and support decision-making;
  • Acknowledges current alignment of these functions in departments (two thirds of departments combine the role of Chief Information Officer (CIO) with the Information Management Senior Officer (IMSO)); and
  • Recognizes the shift towards a government-wide approach for data, information, and technology to deliver on priorities.

The MAF will provide Deputy Heads and TBS with an organizational and government-wide view of Information and Technology, allowing for the identification and sharing of leading practices.

Objectives: 

  • Provide an organizational and government-wide view of the state of Information Management (IM) and Information Technology (IT) Management.
  • Ensure appropriate stewardship of information and technology resources across the Government of Canada (GC).
  • Facilitate alignment of information and technology resources to GC programs and services
  • Assess progress against GC enterprise priority milestones.
  • Enable departments to strengthen IM/IT management capabilities.
  • Establish services performance measures
  • Identify and share leading practices to strengthen functional communities and promote continuous improvement.

Note: 

  • Sources of evidence submitted for the MAF process must be uploaded to the MAF Portal. Evidence cannot be submitted via email to TBS.
  • Sources of evidence submitted for the MAF process must be final. Draft documentation will not be accepted by TBS.

Questionnaire

IM stewardship

Outcome statements: Departments and agencies develop and implement strategies and plans to effectively manage information assets to deliver on programs, services and Government of Canada (GC) priority initiatives.

Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) Policy Reference Evidence Source and Document Limit Category

  1. Is the department’s or agency’s information management (IM) Plan, for fiscal year 2015-2016, approved by the Deputy Head (DH)?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Demonstrates that IM is integrated as part of business planning within the department or agency and direction complies with GC horizontal priorities and requirements.

Policy on Information Management, 6.1.8

IM Plan

Evidence of DH approval

Document Limit: 2

Practice

  1. What is the department or agency’s current level of recordkeeping maturity as identified through the Recordkeeping Assessment Tool (RKAT)?

    Calculation of measure: 

    Results of the self-assessment using the Recordkeeping Assessment Tool posted on the TBS TAP Portal.

    Rationale: 

    Provides an overview of the state of recordkeeping in the department or agency with the identification of progress, gaps and challenges in the implementation of the Directive on Recordkeeping.

Directive on Recordkeeping

Completed RKAT assessment

Document Limit: 1

Performance

  1. What percentage of planned disposition for paper information resources was completed in fiscal year 2014-2015?

    Rationale: 

    Illustrates the extent to which the department or agency is applying its delegated authorities for disposition reducing the paper information glut in the department or agency. Also provides insight into the level of access to information (ATI) and legal discovery risk the department or agency carries for disposition authorities not being applied.

    Calculation of measure: 

    Total number of paper IRBV that were disposed of between and

    (divided by)

    Number of paper IRBV whose retentions expired on or before and for which the organization had the authority to dispose

    Definitions: 

    Disposition Plan
    Internally approved documented business processes that outline the methodology for disposing of information resources of business value (IRBV ) in all formats. It may also include variations in rules and steps for specific information resources.
    Disposition Log/Activity Tracker
    Evidence which quantifies progress on the implementation of a department’s or agency’s documented disposition plan for IRBV with expired retention periods and for which the department or agency has the authority to dispose.

    Note: 

    If the department or agency does not have a formal documented disposition process for paper information resources applicable for 2014-2015, input zero (0) into the response. If a department or agency is unable to determine the number of paper IRBV for which retentions expired on or before and for which the organization had the authority to dispose, input zero (0) into the response. If a department or agency did not plan to undertake any formal paper disposition activities in 2014-2015, input zero (0) into the response. The disposition process document submitted as evidence for Question 3 will be used as evidence for Question 4.

Directive sur la tenue des documents, 6.1.3

Disposition Plan applicable for fiscal year 2014-2015

Disposition Log / Activity Tracker for fiscal year 2014-2015

Document Limit: 2

Performance

  1. What percentage of planned disposition for electronic information resources was completed in fiscal year 2014-2015?

    Rationale: 

    Provides the extent to which the department or agency is applying its delegated authorities for disposition reducing the electronic information glut in the department or agency. Also provides insight into the level of access to information (ATI) and legal discovery risk the department or agency carries for disposition authorities not being applied.

    Calculation of measure: 

    Total number of electronic IRBV that were disposed of between and

    (divided by)

    Number of electronic IRBV whose retentions expired on or before March 31, 2015 and for which the organization has the authority to dispose

    Definitions: 

    Disposition Plan
    Internally approved documented business processes that outline the methodology for disposing of information resources of business value (IRBV ) in all formats. It may also include variations in rules and steps for specific information resources.
    Disposition Log/Activity Tracker
    Evidence which quantifies progress on the implementation of a department’s or agency’s documented disposition plan for IRBV with expired retention periods and for which the department or agency has the authority to dispose.

    Note: 

    If the department or agency does not have a formal disposition plan for electronic information resources applicable for 2014-2015, input zero (0) into the response. If a department or agency is unable to determine the number of electronic IRBV for which retentions expired on or before and for which the organization had the authority to dispose, input zero (0) into the response. If a department or agency did not plan to undertake any formal electronic disposition activities in 2014-2015, input zero (0) into the response. The disposition process document submitted as evidence for Question 3 will be used as evidence for Question 4.

Directive on Recordkeeping, 6.1.3

Disposition Log / Activity Tracker for fiscal year 2014-2015

Document Limit: 1

Performance

IM program / service enablement

Outcome statements: Information resources are effectively leveraged to support the department’s or agency’s programs and services.

Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) Policy Reference Evidence Source and Document Limit Category

  1. Does the department or agency have an approved Open Government Implementation Plan (OGIP)?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Confirms that open government is integrated as part of business planning within the department or agency and direction complies with GC horizontal priorities and requirements.

    Calculation of measure: 

    OGIP received by TBS from a department or agency on or before .

Directive on Open Government 6.4

TBS to Provide Response

Document Limit: 0

Practice

  1. How many datasets has the department or agency released via open.canada.ca?

    Rationale: 

    Provides an overview of the progress of the department or agency in maximizing the release of GC data for Canadians.

    Calculation of measure: 

    Total number of datasets received by TBS to be posted by a department or agency to open.canada.ca, on or before October 31, 2015.

Directive on Open Government 6.1

TBS to Provide Response

Document Limit: 0

Performance

  1. Repositories:

    • 7.1

      Volume in gigabytes (GB) of all designated corporate repositories for unstructured electronic information resources (e.g. GCDOCS, RDIMS)

    • 7.2

      Volume in GB of all repositories for unstructured electronic information resources (e.g. GCDOCS, RDIMS, shared/network drives, departmental collaboration tools such as SharePoint, active email boxes and legacy email boxes etc)

    • 7.3

      What percentage of unstructured electronic information resources are maintained in designated corporate repositories (e.g. in an Electronic Documents and Records Management Solution (EDRMS))?

    Rationale: 

    Provides an overview of the implementation of a designated corporate repository, such as GCDOCS, which enables employees of a department or agency to effectively and efficiently create, retrieve, find, and share electronic records. Also provides insight into maturity of electronic recordkeeping practices.

    Calculation of measure: 

    Volume in gigabytes (GB) of all designated corporate repositories for unstructured electronic information resources

    (divided by)

    Total volume in GB of all repositories for unstructured electronic information resources

    Definitions: 

    Corporate Repository
    A designated corporate repository is one that is available to all employees and in which information resources of business value (IRBV ) are captured, preserved, and managed throughout the entire lifecycle (e.g. RDIMS, GCDOCS). SharePoint is a collaboration tool, not a corporate repository.
    Unstructured Information
    Digital information that is often created in free-form text using common desktop applications such as e-mail, word-processing, or presentation applications.

    Note: 

    The evidence submitted should include details of the size (e.g. GB) of each repository.

Directive on Recordkeeping, 6.1.3

Inventory of Repositories

Document Limit: 1

Performance

  1. What is the total volume, in gigabytes (GB), of email stored in personal storage files (.pst, .db, nfs) and/or email archives (e.g. E-vault and public folders)?

    Rationale: 

    Provides a consolidated view of information holdings, maturity of recordkeeping practices, and some insight into the level of ATI and legal discovery risk the department carries for disposition authorities not applied. Also, provides the state of compliance to the Standard on Email Management in advance of migration to ETI.

    Calculation of measure: 

    Volume, in gigabytes (GB) of all .pst / .db / .nfs files

    plus

    Volume of any holdings in email archives (i.e.: E-vault, public folders, or similar)

Standard on Email Management, 6.1.1

System Report

Document Limit: 1

Performance

  1. What is the total length, in linear meters, of paper information resources in records rooms and off-site storage facilities?

    Rationale: 

    Provides a consolidated view of the department’s or agency’s information footprint, maturity of recordkeeping practices, and insight into the level of ATI and legal discovery risk the department carries for disposition authorities not being applied.

    Calculation of measure: 

    Total number, in linear meters, of paper information resource holdings found in records rooms and in off-site record storage facilities.

    Note: 

    Evidence supplied for Question 7 will be leveraged for Question 9.

Directive on Recordkeeping, 6.1.3

Inventory of Repositories

Document Limit : 0

Performance

IT stewardship

Outcome statements: Departments and agencies develop and implement strategies and plans to effectively manage information and technology assets to deliver on programs, services and Government of Canada (GC) priority initiatives.

Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) Policy Reference Evidence Source and Document Limit Category

  1. Has the department’s or agency’s Information Technology (IT) Plan been submitted, as per TBS guidance?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Provides confirmation that IT is integrated as part of business planning within the department or agency; is aligned to GC Enterprise IT Modernization priorities; and is balancing enterprise and program-driven priorities.

Directive on the Management of IT, currently under revision as part of Policy Suite Renewal

TBS to Provide Response - IT Plan

Document Limit: 0

Practice

  1. Has the department’s or agency’s Information Technology (IT) Expenditures for the previous fiscal year been submitted, as per TBS guidance?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Provides a common and consistent indicator of IT expenditures across programs and internal services and is useful for benchmarking and investment decision planning.

Directive on the Management of IT, currently under revision as part of Policy Suite Renewal

TBS to Provide Response - IT Expenditures Report

Document Limit: 0

Practice

  1. For the current fiscal year, does the department or agency have an inventory of all applications, as per TBS guidance?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Provides insight into how the department or agency is managing its portfolio of IT applications, ensuring mission critical applications are adequately sustained, aging IT issues are identified, and remediation plans are in place.

Directive on the Management of IT, currently under revision as part of Policy Suite Renewal

TBS to Provide Response - Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

Practice

  1. For the current fiscal year, does the department or agency have a sustainability plan for all mission critical applications in the submitted IT Plan, as per TBS guidance?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Provides insight into how the department or agency is managing its portfolio of IT applications, ensuring mission critical applications are adequately sustained, aging IT issues are identified, and remediation plans are in place.

    Definitions: 

    Mission critical application
    Is a business application that is, or supports, a critical service.
    Critical service
    Is a service whose compromise in terms of availability or integrity would result in a high degree of injury to the health, safety, security or economic well-being of Canadians, or to the effective functioning of the government.

    Note: 

    This response should be aligned with the applications which have been identified as mission critical by departments or agencies when completing their submission for the TBS-CIOB Application Portfolio Management (APM) annual collection

Directive on the Management of IT, currently under revision as part of Policy Suite Renewal

TBS to Provide Response - IT Plan and Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

Practice

  1. For the current fiscal year, does the department or agency have a plan to retire end-of-life applications in the submitted IT Plan, as per TBS guidance?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Provides insight into how the department or agency is managing its portfolio of IT applications, ensuring that mission critical applications are adequately sustained, aging IT issues are identified, and remediation plans are in place.

Directive on the Management of IT, currently under revision as part of Policy Suite Renewal

TBS to Provide Response - IT Plan and Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

Practice

IT program / service enablement

Outcome statements: Technology resources are effectively leveraged to support the department’s or agency’s programs and services.

Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) Policy Reference Evidence Source and Document Limit Category
  • 15.1

    Does the department or agency regularly (e.g. quarterly) provide the assigned project sponsor or executive-level steering committee with the scope, schedule, and budget status of active IT-enabled projects to which the Standard for Project Complexity and Risk applies (total estimated cost exceeding $1M, including all applicable taxes)?

    • Yes
    • No
    • N/A (no projects > $1M)

    Rationale: 

    Demonstrates that the organization is regularly reporting the status of its portfolio of IT-enabled projects to appropriate internal governance bodies.

Policy on Management of Information Technology 6.1.4

Policy on the Management of Projects 6.1.1, 6.1.3, 6.2.1

Standard for Project Complexity and Risk 2.

Departments are to provide a quarterly departmental report (i.e., status of a portfolio of projects) to the assigned project sponsor or executive-level steering committee on the status of IT-enabled projects that includes (as a minimum) projects to which the Standard for Project Complexity and Risk applies. Where status for such IT-enabled projects is delivered in multiple reports, all reports for a given period should be submitted (up to a representative sample of 10 such reports).

Document Limit: 10

Practice
  • 15.2

    For all projects that require SSC services have the department and SSC agreed and reported the estimated SSC service costs, as per IT Plan guidance?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Provides confirmation that the organization is engaged with SSC as part of project planning and has a complete view of the project resources required.

Directive on the Management of IT, currently under revision as part of Policy Suite Renewal

TBS to Provide Response - IT Plan

Document Limit: 0

Practice

  1. With regard to acceptable use of GC electronic networks and devices, for which of the following items does the department or agency regularly inform authorized individuals:

    • Expectations for acceptable use
    • Electronic network monitoring practices being applied
    • Consequences for unacceptable use

    Rationale: 

    Provides information on the level of awareness of acceptable use of GC electronic networks and devices as an indicator of risk to the organization and departmental users.

Policy on Acceptable Network and Device Use (PANDU); Guideline on Acceptable Network and Device Use

Departmental Communications

Document Limit: 3

Performance

  1. Which of the following Intranet and Internet tools do authorized individuals in the department or agency have access to?

    • GCconnex
    • GCpedia
    • Facebook
    • Google+
    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • YouTube

    Rationale: 

    Provides information about employee access to intranet and internet tools in support of enhanced communication and collaboration, as per Blueprint 2020.

Policy on Acceptable Network and Device Use (PANDU); Guideline on Acceptable Network and Device Use

Departmental Communications

Document Limit: 3

Performance

Enterprise priorities alignment

Outcome statements: Information and Technology organizations are aligned and actively engaged in collaborative delivery of GC Enterprise priority initiatives.

Rationale pertaining to questions below: Provides an understanding of the state of departmental progress on the GC IM/IT Enterprise IT Modernization priorities. Modernization priorities aim to increase efficiency and effectiveness of IT solutions in support of program and service delivery while reducing IT implementation and operations costs.

Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) Policy Reference Evidence Source and Document Limit Category

  1. What percentage of the applications part of the department’s or agency’s Workload Migration program targeted to move to an enterprise data centre have been moved?

    %:

N/A

TBS to Provide Response – Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

Milestones

  1. How many applications are running on Windows Server 2003?

N/A

TBS to Provide Response – Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

Milestones

  1. Is the department-wide implementation of the common email solution (ETI) complete?

    • Not involved
    • Yes
    • No

Standard on Email Management, 6.1.3

TBS to Provide Response - GC Enterprise Priority lead

Submitted evidence

Document Limit: 0

Milestones

  1. Is the department-wide implementation of my GCHR complete?

    • Not involved
    • Yes
    • No

N/A

TBS to Provide Response - GC Enterprise Priority lead

Document Limit: 0

Milestones

  1. Is the department-wide implementation of Enterprise GCDOCS complete?

    • Not involved
    • Yes
    • No

N/A

TBS to Provide Response - GC Enterprise Priority lead

Document Limit: 0

Milestones

IM/IT leadership and workforce capacity

Outcome statements: Information Management and Technology organizations have the leadership capacity to achieve GC enterprise transformation objectives and address departmental priorities.

Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) Policy Reference Evidence Source and Document Limit Category

  1. What percent of the department or agency’s executive cadre completed the IM/IT Talent Management sub-questionnaire?

    • 23.1

      % Overall Executive:

    • 23.2

      % IM/IT Executive:

    • 23.3

      CIO Completed

      • Yes
      • No
    • 23.4

      Number of IM/IT executives in place as of , not the number of IM/IT boxes available in the organizational chart (descriptive statistic).

    Rationale: 

    The data from the OCHRO executive talent management system enables CIO and IM/IT executive talent and ensures IM/IT leadership and workforce capacity through enterprise succession planning activities.

    ETMS Questionnaire: 

    The IM/IT sub-questionnaire is completed if respondents:

    • identify as a member of the functional community; or,
    • are interested in gaining experience in the functional community. Note that this reflects a change in the sub-questionnaire from the previous year.

N/A

23.1 – 23.3

TBS to provide response - OCHRO Executive Talent Management System (ETMS ) data

Document Limit: 0

Performance

  1. Does your department or agency have a strategic succession plan in place for the position of Chief Information Officer?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: 

    Sustained capacity is required to ensure continuity and an adequate supply of qualified individuals with the right skills and experience to enable GC enterprise transformation objectives.

N/A

TBS to provide response - OCHRO Executive Talent Management System (ETMS ) data

ETMS Questionnaire: “Do you have a longer term succession plan in place for this position?”

Document Limit: 0

Performance

Service performance

Outcome statements: Achieve excellence in IT services to ensure they are client-centred and efficient.

Rationale pertaining to questions below: Measurement of service performance is essential for maintaining efficient and effective client-centred services that support achievement of program delivery objectives.

Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) Policy Reference Evidence Source and Document Limit Category

  1. What is the department’s mean time to repair (MTTR ) for workplace technology device related incidents?

    hours:

    Rationale: 

    Shorter resolution times lead to increased workforce productivity to deliver on programs and services.

    Definitions: 

    Mean time to repair (MTTR )
    Is the average time taken to repair an IT service or other configuration item after a failure. MTTR is measured from when the configuration item fails until it is repaired (reference: ITIL glossary and abbreviations).

N/A

TBS to provide response - SSC Workplace Technology Devices (WTD )

Enterprise Current State Assessment Questionnaire response

Document Limit: 0

Performance

  1. What is the department’s % of incidents resolved by 1st level support for workplace technology device related incidents?

    %:

    Rationale: 

    Higher resolution rates by 1st level support can lead to shorter issue resolution times and lower overall support costs.

N/A

TBS to provide response - SSC Workplace Technology Devices (WTD )

Enterprise Current State Assessment Questionnaire response

Document Limit: 0

Performance

Page details

Date modified: