MAF 2017 to 2018 information management and information technology management methodology

From: Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat

On this page

Methodology Overview

The Information Management and Information Technology Area of Management (IM/IT AoM) is the key Government of Canada (GC) assessment tool to support oversight of the management of GC IM & IT. The IM/IT functions support and enable common GC outcomes; with the growing focus on Open and Digital, IM and IT are increasingly interconnected.

At a high level, this integration:

  • Demonstrates 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 overall objectives of the IM/IT 2017-18 MAF methodology are to:

  • Measure demonstrated activity aligned with government priorities, including mature data management and enabling a single digital policy;
  • Promote the  increasing alignment of IM/IT projects with business outcomes (IM/IT as a means rather than an end);
  • Foster cross-government collaboration to strengthen functional communities and promote continuous improvement; and,
  • Encourage innovation in the use of IM to support business decisions, and in the use of IT to support new ways of enabling information reuse.

The outcome statements and the rationale for the indicators are included as part of the MAF questionnaire.

The 2017-18 MAF results will provide the following to the three key audiences listed below:

Deputy Heads:

  • Indicate the overall maturity of key IM/IT activities, within departments and across the GC;
  • Report on effective stewardship of information, data and technical infrastructure;
  • Demonstrate the extent of integration of IM/IT with business functions within departments; and
  • Assess the level of departmental alignment with overall government priorities.

Functional Communities:

  • Provide opportunities to strengthen management capabilities and support Enterprise Transformation activities;
  • Encourage greater alignment with evolving government-wide priorities;
  • Highlight leading practices that strengthen functional communities and promote continuous improvement; and
  • Help redefine the role of IM/IT to work more holistically in service of business requirements.

TBS:

  • Provide information to assess departmental IM/IT maturity;
  • Give an overview of assets owned and managed across government (including datasets, applications);
  • Identify the state of IM/IT practices and performance across government, including systemic issues and challenges;
  • Provide additional contextual information used for analysis and reporting; and
  • Provide information related to Shared Services Canada.

The methodology was developed in consultation with the IM\IT community.

Questionnaire

IM Stewardship

Outcome statement: 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.

Rationale: To assess the extent to which departments/agencies are adopting enterprise solutions for information lifecycle management.

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. What percentage of unstructured electronic information resources are maintained in designated corporate repositories (e.g. in an Electronic Documents and Records Management Solution (EDRMS))?

    Calculation Method: The 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.

    Rationale: An indicator of the effectiveness of employees to create, retrieve, find and share electronic access to information for all employees of the organization which is linked to reducing duplication of work and improvements in productivity.

    Note: The focus of this question has shifted from past years. We are not looking at holdings in EDRMS/GCDOCS from a recordkeeping perspective, but as an indicator of readiness for Open by Default and support for transparency in the GC.

It is expected that organizations manage a growing amount of their unstructured electronic information resources in designated corporate repositories.

Directive on Recordkeeping, 6.1.3

Department to provide response.

A standard template to be provided by TBS

Document Limit: 1

  • Management Performance
    • Internal Services Measure

IM program / Service enablement

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

Rationale: To assess the extent to which IM programs are supporting data management and Open Government activities.

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. Does the department or agency have a documented governance structure in place for data management?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: Data management is a growing area of importance in IM and in GC programs more broadly. An established governance structure is a key first step to ensuring that organizations have effective data management process in place.

    Note: This question will not be scored by TBS.

Departments with data governance structure will ensure that

data is effectively managed, : protected, and reused.

Policy on Information Management 5.2

Directive on Open Government, Open Government Implementation Plan – appendix C

If yes, the document that supports this statement (in whatever form – plan, deck, etc.) may be shared with all departments via GCtools as a ‘best practice’ to support capacity building.

Document Limit: 2

  • Practice
  1. Has the department’s or agency’s data inventory been updated since ?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: Assess compliance with the policy requirements that departments develop and maintain an inventory of data holdings in support of initiatives on accountability, transparency, and informed decision-making.

    Calculation Method: An updated data inventory received by TBS between to .

An up-to-date data inventory describes the scope of data holdings, which

enables sound decision-making about data to release (prioritization, privacy considerations, clean-up requirements).

Directive on Open Government 6.3

TBS to Provide Response

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Practice
    • 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 Method: Total number of datasets posted by a department or agency to open.canada.ca on .

Departments are releasing new content to the open.canada.ca portal on an ongoing basis in support of GC transparency.

Directive on Open Government 6.1

TBS to Provide Response

Document Limit: 0

  • Descriptive Statistic
  1. Does the department or agency have a schedule for updating datasets published on open.canada.ca?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: Ensuring that departments maximizing their contributions to the open.canada.ca portal in support of transparency.

Maintaining and adding to datasets on open.canada.ca

ensures the quality, reliability and timeliness of the content, in support of GC transparency.

Directive on Open Government 6.1

If yes, the document that supports this statement (in whatever form – plan, deck, etc.) may be shared with all departments via GCtools as a ‘best practice’ to support capacity building.

Document Limit: 1

  • Management Practice
    • Practice
  1. What percentage of departmental datasets available on open.canada.ca have an openness rating of 3 to 5?

    Rationale: Assessing the usability and share-ability of the datasets, based on technical configuration, provides view into the maturity of departmental data management and potential value for Canadians.

    Calculation Method: Number of departmental datasets rated 3, 4, and 5 divide by total number of departmental datasets as of .

    http://open.canada.ca/en/openness-rating provides a description of the star rating

    Note: The Open Canada Portal rates the quality (as defined by level of openness) of datasets on a scale of 1 – 5 with 1 being data available in any format up to 5, which is the most open, linkable and reusable.

Departments are more mature in their data management/ configuration capabilities and increase capacity of data usage by others.

Useable and shareable data ensures greater potential value, reuse, and transparency.

Datasets will be more useful.

Directive on Open Government 6.3

TBS to Provide Response

Document Limit: 0

  • Descriptive Statistic
  1. Has the department implemented service standards for responding to inquiries about content published on open.canada.ca?

    Rationale:  Departments are expected to respond to questions pertaining to the content they own on open.canada.ca.

Service standards manage expectations for consumers of open.canada.ca content, building trust and positive experiences for portal users.

A requirement for service levels is not codified in the Directive on Open Government, but is a good and important practice.

If yes, the document that supports this statement (in whatever form – plan, deck, etc.) may be shared with all departments via GCtools as a ‘best practice’ to support capacity building.

Document limit: 1

  • Management Practice
    • Practice

IM Internal Services Indicators

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. 2016-17 actual gross voted operating expenditures on Information Management Internal Services category as a percentage of 2016-17 actual gross voted operating expenditures.

    Rationale: An indicator of efficient use of financial resources in the form of overhead expenditures where the level of resources should be an appropriate proportion of the level of resources for the whole department. Measurement of overhead expenditures along with FTEs strengthens understanding of efficiency. The MAF results will inform Deputy Heads (oversight role), TBS-OCG (functional role), and TBS-EMS (internal services).

Departments and agencies deliver information management services and achieve results in an efficient manner.

N/A

TBS to provide response.

  • Internal Services Measure
  1. 2016-17 Information Management Internal Services category FTEs as a percentage of 2016-17 total department or agency FTEs.

    Rationale: An indicator of efficient use of human resources where the level of resources should be an appropriate proportion of the level of resources for the whole department. Measurement of FTEs along with overhead expenditures strengthens understanding of efficiency. The MAF results will inform Deputy Heads (oversight role), TBS-OCG (functional role), and TBS-EMS (internal services).

Departments and agencies deliver information management services and achieve results in an efficient manner.

N/A

TBS to provide response.

  • Internal Services Measure

IT Applications

Outcome statement: IT/Business applications and services meet the needs of the program managers and system users.

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. Does the department’s 2017-2020 IT Plan demonstrate a level of management practice maturity based on quality and completeness?

    • Low
    • Medium
    • High

    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.

IT investments are efficient, effective, and responsive to departmental priorities, program delivery, and business needs.

Policy on the Management of Information Technology 4.1.10

TBS to Provide Response - IT Plan

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. Has the department’s or agency’s IT Expenditure Report for the 2016-17 fiscal year been submitted to TBS, as per Appendix B of the Directive on Management of Information Technology?

    • 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.

    Calculation of Result : Based on a signed-off submission of the departmental 2016-17 IT expenditure report that contains complete and consistent financial information.

IT investments are efficient, effective and responsive to departmental priorities, program delivery and business needs.

Directive on Management of Information Technology

Appendix B

TBS to Provide Response - IT Expenditures Report

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. For the current fiscal year

    (2017-18), how complete is the department’s submitted inventory of all applications?

    • Low
    • Medium
    • High

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

    Calculation of Result: 2017 Application Portfolio Management submitted with particular focus on the completion of all assessments (aging and business value assessments for all server-based applications and identification of critical and essential services linked to mission critical applications).

The GC has a clear understanding of the existing risk and investment residing in the GC applications landscape and how technology is supporting business outcomes.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology 12.1.1

TBS to Provide Response - Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Performance
    • Performance Indicator
  1. For the current fiscal year (2017-18), does the department or agency have a sustainability plan for all mission critical applications in the submitted IT Plan?

    • Yes
    • No
    • N/A (no mission critical applications)

    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.

    Calculation of Result: Based on the 2017-18 IT Plan, Sustainability Plan section and the electronic IT Plan at mid-year refresh with particular focus on funded sustainability projects/activities identified for all mission critical applications assessed as Attention Required and Immediate Attention Required.

    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.

A funded remediation plan is in place, articulating the approach and planned resources to implement necessary processes and infrastructure to support mission critical applications with low maximum allowable downtime.

Policy on the Management of Information Technology 4.1.10

TBS to Provide Response - IT Plan and Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. What is the percentage of times mission critical applications were fully functional and available to users for fiscal year 2016-17?

    %: 

    Rationale: Indicates availability of crucial applications so that users across the organization can deliver program services and activities.

    Calculated as: (Agreed Service Time in fiscal year 2016-17 - Downtime in fiscal year 2016-17) divided by the agreed service time, for applications which have been identified as mission critical by departments when completing their submission for the TBS-CIOB Application Portfolio Management (APM) annual collection.

    Definitions

    Agreed Service Time
    is a synonym for service hours, commonly used in formal calculations of availability. Service hours are an agreed time period when a particular IT service should be available. For example, ’Monday-Friday 08:00 to 17:00 except public holidays’.
    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.
    Downtime
    is the time when an IT service or other configuration item is not available during its agreed service time.
    Mission critical application
    is a business application that is, or supports, a critical service.

Organizations should have a high system availability percentage for mission critical applications to ensure that critical services and programs for Canadians are not interrupted.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology

Department to provide response – showing derived calculation (numerators and denominator values)

Document Limit: 1

  • Management Performance
    • Internal Services Measure
  1. For the current fiscal year (2017-18), does the department or agency have a plan to retire end-of-life applications in the submitted IT Plan?

    • 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.

    Calculation of Result: Based on 2017-18 IT Plan document End-of-Life Application Retirement Plan section and the electronic IT Plan at mid- year refresh with particular focus on funded projects/activities identified for all server-based applications assessed as Migrate and Eliminate.

A funded remediation plan is in place articulating the approach and resources supporting the elimination of applications at the end of their lifecycle

Policy on the Management of Information Technology 4.1.10

TBS to Provide Response - IT Plan and Application Portfolio Management

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. What is the Application Portfolio Health Indicator (APHI) value for the department’s inventory of applications?

    %: 

    Rationale: Provides an overall indication of the health of the department’s or agency’s portfolio of applications which can be monitored over time and inform investment decisions.

    Calculation of Result: Evaluation based on risk level and criticality of all applications, i.e. (No Attention Required applications ₊ Minimal Attention Required applications) ÷ Total number of Application.

Departments and agencies take an enterprise approach to managing and evaluating the heath of their portfolio of applications on a continual process to determine opportunities for common, government-wide solutions, as well as retire aging and at-risk applications.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology 12.1.3

TBS to provide response - Applications Portfolio Management

Document limit: 0

  • Management Performance
    • Performance Indicator

IT Enterprise Architecture

Outcome statement: Departments and agencies make investments in IM/IT solutions that will further the ‘Whole of Government agenda as one Enterprise’.

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. Does the department have reference architecture materials that are used to make decisions on IT investments and business capability investments?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: Provides greater insight to the sources of information being used by Departments and Agencies to make investment decisions.

Departments and agencies have a structured approach to identify and describe business needs and the information, applications, and technology that are required to enable them.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology

TBS to Provide Response via evidence submitted by departments in response to CIOB survey.

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. Does the department’s reference architecture materials address Business, Information, Application, Technology, and Security domains?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: Provides insight to the sources of information being used by Departments and Agencies to make investment decisions.

Information Technology is fully aligned with business strategies and has a structured approach to identify and describe business needs the information, applications and technology that are required to enable them.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology

TBS to Provide Response via evidence submitted by departments in response to CIOB survey.

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance

IT Enterprise Priorities Alignment

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

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. Does the department have an interoperability Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) capability in use as a departmental standard?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: To assess overall progress toward: interoperability capability initiatives and strategies.

SOA capability will enable the ability to exchange data and information between enterprise systems, departments and governments.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology 5.1.2

Department to provide evidence: Departmental SOA standard (reference link or document)

Document Limit: 1

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. Does the department actively use Application Program Interfaces (APIs) to expose business capabilities in digital form?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: To assess overall progress towards digital access to government services through a standard set of APIs.

Interoperable APIs will enable the exchange of data and information between enterprise systems, departments, and governments.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology 5.1.2

Department to provide evidence: List of APIs and their high level descriptions

Document Limit: 1

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. Is the department-wide implementation of Enterprise GCDOCS complete?

    • Not participating
    • Participating
    • Users onboarded

    Rationale: Provides an understanding of the state of departmental progress on the GC 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.

Implementing integrated, standardized solutions across departments will facilitate the retrieval, use and sharing of information and data that can be leveraged to help departments achieve their business objectives.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology

TBS to Provide Response - GC Enterprise Priority lead – CIOB IM/SSC

Document Limit: 0

  • Management Milestones

IT Infrastructure and Operations

Outcome statement: Departments are proactive, gaining efficiencies and service quality, and are implementing technologies and processes that optimize costs and improve efficiencies.

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. For the current fiscal year (2017-2018), has the department established cloud candidates in the TBS Application Portfolio Management System?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale:  Cloud is a key enabler to realize the GC’s Digital and Innovation agendas. As per GC Cloud Adoption Strategy, it offers benefits that enable CIOs to make significant advances in Service Performance, Security, Innovation, Agility, and Elasticity.

The use of enabling technologies offers more innovative and responsive services to Canadians.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology 5.2.4

TBS to Provide Response - Application Portfolio Management

  • Management Practice
    • Policy Compliance
  1. Has the department conducted a cloud proof of concept/pilot in the last year?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale:  Cloud is a key enabler to realize the GC’s Digital and Innovation agendas. As per GC Cloud Adoption Strategy, it offers benefits that enable CIOs to make significant advances in Service Performance, Security, Innovation, Agility, and Elasticity.

Cloud pilot projects will test-drive requirements and determine the most suitable platform to meet government business, information, and security needs.

Directive on the Management of Information Technology 5.2.4

Department to provide evidence:

Service name; service type (based on NIST SP 500-292); and Lessons Learned

Document limit: 3

  • Descriptive Statistic
  1. Does the department have an inventory of all IT services (service catalogue) that is provided to:

    The department?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: Departments and agencies should have strong service management practices in place for the delivery of better services.

IT service portfolios and service catalogues clearly articulate service expectations for the services offered.

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.3

Departments to provide a Service catalogue as evidence

Document limit: 1

  • Management Practice
    • Practice
  1. Does the department have an inventory of all IT services (service catalogue) as a service provider providing services to another department/another jurisdiction or a cluster of departments?

    • Yes
    • No
    • N/A

    Rationale: Departments and agencies should have strong service management practices in place for the delivery of better services.

    Jurisdictions: Provincial, separate employers, etc.

    Clusters: Group of departments receiving services from another department.

IT service portfolios and service catalogues clearly articulate service expectations for the services offered.

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.3

Departments to provide a Service catalogue as evidence

Document limit: 1

  • Management Practice
    • Practice
  1. Does the department have an inventory of all IT services (service catalogue) as an Enterprise Business owner providing services to departments?

    • Yes
    • No
    • N/A

    Rationale: Departments and agencies should have strong service management practices in place for the delivery of better services.

    Enterprise Business Owner: A department providing services to all departments, e.g., My GCHR, GCDOCs, ETMS, PSPM, Phoenix, etc.

IT service portfolios and service catalogues clearly articulate service expectations for the services offered.

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.3

Departments to provide a Service catalogue as evidence

Document limit: 1

  • Management Practice
    • Practice
  1. Does the department have documented Service Level Agreements (SLAs)?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: To establish departments have developed and maintain efficient and effective departmental IT management practices and processes. A defined service level agreement sets the expectations for the level of service the IT team is expected to provide to internal customers.

Departments maintain efficient and effective departmental IT management practices and processes

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.3

Department to provide evidence: A list of all Service Level Agreements and 3 SLA documents

Document limit: 4

  • Management Performance
    • Performance Indicator
  1. Does the department have documented Service Level Agreements (SLAs) as a service provider providing services to another department/another jurisdiction or a cluster of departments?

    • Yes
    • No
    • N/A

    Rationale: To establish departments have developed and maintain efficient and effective departmental IT management practices and processes. A defined service level agreement sets the expectations for the level of service the IT team is expected to provide to internal customers.

    Jurisdictions: Provincial, separate employers, etc.

    Clusters: Group of departments receiving services from another department.

Departments maintain efficient and effective departmental IT management practices and processes

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.3

Department to provide evidence: A list of all Service Level Agreements and 3 SLA documents

Document limit: 4

  • Management Performance
    • Performance Indicator
  1. Does the department have documented Service Level Agreements (SLAs) as an Enterprise Business owner providing services to departments?

    • Yes
    • No
    • N/A

    Rationale: To establish departments have developed and maintain efficient and effective departmental IT management practices and processes. A defined service level agreement sets the expectations for the level of service the IT team is expected to provide to internal customers

    Enterprise Business Owner: A department providing services to all departments, e.g., My GCHR, GCDOCs, ETMS, PSPM, Phoenix, etc.

Departments maintain efficient and effective departmental IT management practices and processes

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.3

Department to provide evidence: A list of all Service Level Agreements and 3 SLA documents

Document limit: 4

  • Management Performance
    • Performance Indicator
  1. Does the department regularly measure and report against the documented Service Level agreements?

    • Yes
    • No

    Rationale: regular reporting increases the visibility of service levels and provides the ability to take action when target SLAs are not met.

Departments maintain efficient and effective departmental IT management practices and processes

Directive on Management of Information Technology , 6.1.1, 6.1.3

Department to provide evidence: Signed SLA by business owner

Document limit: 3

  • Management Performance
    • Performance Indicator
  1. What is the department’s mean time to resolve (MTTR) for workplace technology device (WTD) related incidents?

    hours: 

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

    Calculation of Result: Total elapsed time to resolve WTD incidents (business hours) /Total number of WTD incidents

    Note: The calculation should include all WTD incidents received within the time period of the past year.

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

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.1

Department to provide evidence: A fiscal year Incident Report as evidence (2016-17)

Document Limit: 1

  • Management Performance
    • Performance Indicator
  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.

    Calculation of Result: Total WTD incidents resolved by 1st level support/ number of WTD incidents

Higher resolution rates by 1st level support leads to shorter issue resolution times and lowers overall support costs.

Directive on Management of Information Technology 6.1.1

Department to provide evidence: A fiscal year Incident Report as evidence (2016-17)

Document Limit: 1

  • Management Performance
    • Internal Services Measure

IT Internal Services Indicators

Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) Expected result Policy reference Evidence source and document limit Category
  1. 2016-17 actual gross voted operating expenditures on Information Technology Management Internal Services category as a percentage of 2016-17 actual gross voted operating expenditures.

    Rationale: An indicator of efficient use of financial resources in the form of overhead expenditures where the level of resources should be an appropriate proportion of the level of resources for the whole department. Measurement of overhead expenditures along with FTEs strengthens understanding of efficiency. The MAF results will inform Deputy Heads (oversight role), TBS-OCG (functional role), and TBS-EMS (internal services).

Departments and agencies deliver information technology management services and achieve results in an efficient manner.

N/A

TBS to provide response.

  • Management Performance
    • Internal Services Measure
  1. 2016-17 Information Technology Management Internal Services category FTEs as a percentage of 2016-17 total department or agency FTEs.

    Rationale: An indicator of efficient use of human resources where the level of resources should be an appropriate proportion of the level of resources for the whole department. Measurement of FTEs along with overhead expenditures strengthens understanding of efficiency. The MAF results will inform Deputy Heads (oversight role), TBS-OCG (functional role), and TBS-EMS (internal services).

Departments and agencies deliver information technology management services and achieve results in an efficient manner.

N/A

TBS to provide response.

  • Management Performance
    • Internal Services Measure

Acronyms

Acronyms Spelled Out
MAF Management Accountability Framework
EX Executive
ADM Assistant Deputy Minister
Report a problem or mistake on this page
Please select all that apply:

Thank you for your help!

You will not receive a reply. For enquiries, contact us.

Date modified: