MAF 2017 to 2018 methodology for small departments and agencies
On this page
Methodology Overview
The annual MAF assessment for small departments and agencies aims to improve oversight and management practices in departments as well as to support the Government of Canada’s strategic direction for management.
Small departments and agencies (SDAs) are included in the MAF assessment process on an annual basis. MAF 2017-18 will be the fourth annual MAF assessment for SDAs since the MAF process was renewed in 2013-14.
Small departments and agencies have a tailored methodology that includes specific indicators drawn from central systems. These areas will be assessed under management performance. Indicators do not duplicate areas included within Core Control Audits.
To support efforts towards implementing the new Policy on Results, there is no assessment for the Results Management Area of Management this year.
Benchmarking and comparability across small departments and agencies
The metrics and reporting format allow for comparison and benchmarking among same size organisations which provides an opportunity to share leading practices among small departments and agencies.
Questionnaire
Financial Management
Resource management
Outcome statement: Governance and oversight over financial management are effective and standardized and efficient financial management practices are in place.
Rationale pertaining to questions below: The effective management of public funds depends on the collection of reliable data and the availability of sound financial information for decision making. The MAF assessment in this area focuses on ensuring the management of public funds is supported by a sound governance structure and effective multi-year planning, budgeting, monitoring and reporting.
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Departments and agencies should identify and assess financial risks over a multi-year period (rolling three-year) as part of their approach to financial planning and budgeting. |
Policy on Financial Mgmt., 4.2.2.3 and 4.2.2.4 |
Department or agency to respond. Evidence (1 document): Multi-year financial plan covering 2017-18 fiscal year and onward (e.g., briefing note, presentation, or specific sections within an integrated business plan, that is presented to senior management summarizing multi-year data findings, recommendations, and action plan). |
|
|
Departments and agencies should identify and assess financial risks over a multi-year period (rolling three-year) as part of their approach to financial planning and budgeting. |
Policy on Financial Mgmt., 4.2.2.3 and 4.2.2.4 |
Department or agency to respond. No evidence required (TBS-OCG will use evidence submitted for Q1 to validate response). |
|
|
Departments and agencies should identify and assess financial risks over a multi-year period (rolling three-year) as part of their approach to financial planning and budgeting. |
Policy on Financial Mgmt., 4.2.2.3 and 4.2.2.4 |
Department or agency to respond. No evidence required (TBS-OCG will use evidence submitted for Q1 to validate response). |
|
|
Departments and agencies should identify and assess financial risks over a multi-year period (rolling three-year) as part of their approach to financial planning and budgeting. |
Policy on Financial Mgmt., 4.2.2.3 and 4.2.2.4 |
Department or agency to respond. No evidence required (TBS-OCG will use evidence submitted for Q1 to validate response). |
|
|
Departments and agencies should have a governance structure to routinely and proactively assess current and multi-year financial risks and funding pressures. |
Policy on Financial Mgmt., 4.2.2.4 |
Department or agency to respond. Evidence (4 documents) : Records of decision or minutes from routine ADM level governance committee meetings where the multi-year financial plan was discussed. |
|
Internal control management
Outcome statement: Internal controls over financial management are effective.
Rationale pertaining to questions below: Internal controls refer to a set of measures and activities that provide reasonable assurance of the effectiveness and efficiency of the financial management activities of the departments. The MAF assessment in this area focuses on the importance of ensuring there is ongoing monitoring of the effectiveness of the risk-based system of internal control over financial reporting, ensuring there are controls related to the management of salary expenditures, and assessing the efficiency of key financial management processes (i.e., delegation, timely payments to suppliers, and management of accounts receivable).
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Departments and agencies should ensure that salary expenditures are reconciled on a regular basis (at least quarterly). |
N/A |
Department or agency to respond. Evidence (4 documents): Document(s) outlining the department or agency process to reconcile actual salary expenditures in the financial system against salary forecasts (e.g., call letters to departmental managers, framework, etc.). Evidence submitted should align with the frequency identified in the response. |
|
Transfer payments
Note: Section applies only to departments and agencies with Transfer Payment programs - refer to Annex A for a list of departments and agencies to which this section is applicable.
Outcome statement: Transfer payments are managed in a way that is citizen and recipient focussed.
Rationale pertaining to the questions below: The MAF assessment in this area focuses on ensuring that applicants and recipients are engaged in support of continuous improvement and innovation.
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Departments and agencies are expected to establish reasonable and practical service standards for transfer payment programs. |
N/A |
Department or agency to respond. No evidence required (TBS-OCG will use evidence submitted for Q9 to validate response). |
|
|
Departments and agencies are expected to establish reasonable and practical service standards for transfer payment programs. |
N/A |
Department or agency to respond. No evidence required (TBS-OCG will use evidence submitted for Q9 to validate response). |
|
|
Departments and agencies are expected to establish reasonable and practical service standards for transfer payment programs. |
Policy on Transfer Payments 6.5.9 |
Department or agency to respond. Evidence (1 document): Document listing each transfer payment program along with the services standards established for each program. |
|
|
Departments and agencies should post service standards and results on a public website. |
N/A |
Department or agency to respond. No evidence required (TBS-OCG will use evidence submitted for Q12 to validate response). |
|
|
Departments and agencies should post service standards and results on a public website. |
N/A |
Department or agency to respond. No evidence required (TBS-OCG will use evidence submitted for Q12 to validate response). |
|
|
Departments and agencies should post service standards and results on a public website. |
N/A |
Department or agency to respond. Evidence (1 document): Link(s) to website(s) where service standards for transfer payment programs and results are posted. |
|
People Management
Workforce
Outcome statement: A public service that enables new and existing public servants to be in the right place, at the right time, doing the right things.
Talent and performance management, learning and development
Outcome statement: A skilled and agile workforce that has the competencies and flexibility to meet the needs of an evolving public service.
Rationale: A world class public service equipped to meet the challenges of the 21st century requires continuous learning, training and professional development for employees and executives. Organization’s commitment to various ways of learning is the foundation of employee development and performance improvement.
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Organizations should strive to have over 90% of employees with documentation setting performance objectives. |
Directive on Performance Management, 6.1.3 |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to have 100% of executives that have documentation setting performance expectations/objectives. |
Directive on the Performance Management Program for Executives, Appendix C, s.1 |
Executive Talent Management System No evidence is to be submitted for the measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to have over 90% of employees with documentation setting learning objectives. |
Directive on Performance Management, 6.1.3 |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to have 100% of executives that have documentation setting learning objectives (learning and development plan). |
Directive on the Performance Management Program for Executives - Appendix B, 2.4 |
Executive Talent Management System No evidence is to be submitted for the measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to have over 90% of employees that had mid-year conversations with their immediate supervisor to review performance. |
Directive on Performance Management, 6.1.3 |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to have 100% of executives that had mid-year conversations with their immediate supervisor to review performance. |
Directive on the Performance Management Program for Executives - Appendix C, 2.1 |
Executive Talent Management System No evidence is to be submitted for the measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to have over 90% of employees with completed annual written performance assessments. |
Directive on Performance Management, 6.1.3 |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to have 100% of executives with a completed annual written performance assessment. |
Directive on the Performance Management Program for Executives - Appendix C, 2.1 |
Executive Talent Management System No evidence is to be submitted for the measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Baseline year. |
Directive on Performance Management |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Baseline year. |
Directive on Performance Management |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Baseline year. |
Directive on Performance Management |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Baseline year. |
Directive on Performance Management |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Baseline year. |
Directive on Performance Management |
Public Service Performance Management Application No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
Structure and processes
Outcome statement: A public service with efficient and effective processes, tools, practices and organizational structures.
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Departments and agencies publish their executive level organizational charts. |
TBS Directive on Executive Group Organization and Classification, 5.5 |
Departmental Ask. Department to submit one (1) piece of evidence; e.g. link, screenshot of departmental website. |
|
|
Departments and agencies are expected to classify executive positions no more than three levels below the Deputy or Associate Deputy level. |
TBS Directive on Executive Group Organization and Classification Executive Group Position Evaluation Plan (Refer to EX Group Definition) |
Position Classification Information System No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. |
|
|
Baseline year |
N/A |
Incumbent file No evidence to be submitted for this measure. |
|
|
Improvement from the previous result (MAF 2016-17) Departments and agencies should maximize the use of generic and standardized job descriptions as they can assist in reducing the time/effort required to write, classify, and update work descriptions; simplify recruitment, staffing, career development, and learning efforts; facilitate mobility within an occupational group, etc. |
Policy on classification: 6.1.2.5, 6.1.2.6 |
Position Classification Information System No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit data for this measure. |
|
|
Baseline year |
Directive on classification: 6.2.2, Appendix H |
Position Classification Information System Plus No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit data for this measure. |
|
Workplace culture
Outcome statement: A public service that embodies a healthy workplace.
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Department and agencies are invited to discuss the survey findings with their employees, and to work with them and other stakeholders to come up with and put in place solutions to issues raised in the survey. |
N/A |
Departmental Ask Please provide up to three (3) pieces of evidence that demonstrate which priorities your department is focusing on, based on your PSEAS results. |
|
Mental health and wellness
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Assessment, control and prevention of psychological hazards is part of the overall hazard prevention program outlined in the Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Regulations. |
Canadian Occupational Health and Safety Regulation Part XIX Hazard Prevention Program Standard for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace Section 4.3.4 Assessment, Control and Prevention |
Departmental Ask One (1) piece of evidence is to be submitted for each selection. Maximum three (3) pieces of evidence. |
|
|
Departments and agencies are expected to promote positive mental health and prevent psychological harm due to workplace factors. |
Federal Public Service Mental Health Strategy |
Public Service Employee Survey |
|
|
Organizations should strive to maintain low sick leave rates. |
N/A |
Employee Leave Reporting System No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to maintain low sick leave rates. |
N/A |
Employee Leave Reporting System No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to maintain low sick leave rates. |
N/A |
Employee Leave Reporting System No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. Separate employers must submit all data elements for this measure. |
|
|
Organizations should strive to meet the three day timeline. This demonstrates an appropriate level of capacity in the area of disability management. |
Government Employees Compensation Act (GECA) |
National Injury Compensation System (NICS) No evidence is to be submitted for this measure. |
|
Diversity and inclusion
Diversity and inclusion
Indicators and calculation method (where applicable) | Expected result | Policy reference | Evidence source and document limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
Departments and agencies must take actions to create and sustain a diverse and inclusive workforce. |
In all Ministerial mandate letters. |
Departmental Ask Departments or agencies to submit evidence that best exemplify their selection. One (1) piece of evidence per selection. Maximum of five (5) pieces of evidence. |
|
|
Departments and agencies must take actions to create and sustain a diverse and inclusive workforce. |
In all Ministerial mandate letters. |
Public Service Employee Survey |
|
Information Management and Information Technology (IM/IT) Management
IM program/Service enablement
Outcome statement: Information resources are effectively leveraged to support the department’s or agency’s programs and services.
Indicators and Calculation Method (where applicable) | Expected Result | Policy Reference | Evidence Source and Document Limit | Category |
---|---|---|---|---|
|
That data will begin to be managed with the level of processes and systems that are in place for information. |
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.) will be shared with all departments via GCtools as a ‘best practice’ to support capacity building. Document Limit: 2 |
|
|
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). |
TBS to Provide Response Document Limit: 0 |
|
|
|
Departments are releasing new content to the open.canada.ca portal on an ongoing basis in support of GC transparency. |
TBS to Provide Response Document Limit: 0 |
|
|
|
Maintaining and adding to datasets on open.canada.ca ensures the quality, reliability and timeliness of the content, in support of GC transparency. |
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 |
|
|
|
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. |
TBS to Provide Response Document Limit: 0 |
|
Acronyms
Acronyms | Spelled Out |
---|---|
MAF | Management Accountability Framework |
ADM | Assistant Deputy Minister |
CFO | Chief Financial Officer |
FM | Financial Management |
DCFO | Deputy Chief Financial Officer |
CPA | Chartered Professional Accountant |
SEAFAP | Senior Executive Advanced Finance and Accounting Program |
EX | Executive |
Annex A: List of MAF-Assessed Organizations with Transfer Payments
Large Departments and Agencies:
- Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
- Canadian Food Inspection Agency
- Canadian Heritage
- Canadian Space Agency
- Correctional Service Canada
- Department of Finance Canada
- Department of Justice Canada
- Employment and Social Development Canada
- Environment and Climate Change Canada
- Fisheries and Oceans Canada
- Global Affairs Canada
- Health Canada
- Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
- Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada
- Infrastructure Canada
- Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
- National Defence
- National Research Council Canada
- Natural Resources Canada
- Parks Canada
- Public Health Agency of Canada
- Public Safety Canada
- Public Services and Procurement Canada
- Royal Canadian Mounted Police
- Statistics Canada
- Transport Canada
- Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
- Veterans Affairs Canada
Small Departments and Agencies:
- Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
- Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions
- Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
- Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario
- Library and Archives Canada
- National Energy Board
- Science and Engineering Research Canada
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Page details
- Date modified: