MAF 2021 to 2022 People Management Methodology
On this page
Methodology overview
Overall Objective
The 2021-22 people management methodology of the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) centres on departmental performance and management practices with respect to people management policies and priorities such as diversity and inclusion as well as departmental readiness for future of work.
The methodology is aligned with the strategic vision for people management – to build a skilled, diverse, and productive workforce, with an improved employee experience, a healthy and inclusive workplace and an agile organization of work that consistently delivers results for Canadians.
Areas of Focus
This methodology focuses on two themes: diversity and inclusion, and future of work. The questions are on organizational practices to increase diversity and inclusion and preparing for the future of work. Where applicable, organizational practices will be compared with employee perceptions on these topics from the Public Service Employee Survey as well as workforce data in the analysis.
Diversity and Inclusion
Questions in this theme focus on government priorities to foster greater diversity, inclusion, and accessibility in the public service. More specifically, they centre on organizational efforts to address representation gaps among Employment Equity groups, benchmarking diversity, addressing systemic barriers, and increasing diversity in senior ranks. Where applicable, results from the Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) and other statistics on diversity and inclusion will be used as context in the analysis.
Future of Work
Questions in this theme focus on the progress of organizations in readying themselves for the trends shaping the future of work. Currently this includes only select questions of interest under a future of work lens. As the future of work evolves, this theme will become more fulsome. The current questions focus on progress towards an agile and equipped workforce and workplace. The questions include organizational efforts to ensure that employees are able to work in the official language of their choice, organizational environments and culture that are healthy and the modernization of classification. Where applicable, results from the Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) and progress on classification conversions will be used as context in the analysis.
New for 2021-22: Data Collection
Questions related to workplace accommodations, accessibility plans, recruitment activities and approaches to facilitating flexibility in the workplace/workforce have been included for data collection purposes only. These questions will not be assessed.
Use of MAF Results
The 2021-22 MAF results will provide the following information to the three key stakeholder groups listed below:
Deputy Heads:
- Identify the strengths and potential risks in their organizations in relation to corporate commitments, and key people management policy areas,
- Provide information to track and communicate on the Government of Canada’s people management priorities; and
- Point to emerging policy areas of importance in people management such as promoting diversity and inclusion.
People Management Functional Community:
- Measure the effectiveness of human resources management.
- Identify areas of strong performance and gaps in policy compliance.
- Provide a preliminary assessment of the state of readiness for revised or emerging priority areas in people management.
- Support the Heads of Human Resources to model behavior to meet expectations with respect to management practices and policy compliance.
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat:
- Enable policy centres to monitor trends and identify gaps in policy compliance across departments relating to government priorities as well as readiness for revised or emerging people management priorities.
- Support the TBS program sectors and departments with evidence-based analysis of departmental people management performance and practices.
- Provide insights to TBS on organizational approaches to carry out these priorities in the context of the pandemic and lessons learned for the Future of Work.
This methodology was developed in consultation with the following stakeholders:
Internal: Policy Centres within the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer (OCHRO) responsible for the following areas: Executive Leadership & Development; Classification & Labour Relations; Occupational Health and Safety; Official Languages; Employment Equity; the Centre for Diversity & Inclusion; the Centre of Expertise on Mental Health in the Workplace; Workplace Policies, Programs, Engagement and Ethics; Research, Planning and Renewal (People Management AoM, PSES survey and administrative data teams); the Office of Public Service Accessibility and MAF Division within Priorities and Planning Sector (P&P).
External: The Public Service Commission and departments and agencies participating in the People Management area of management of MAF (through the review of the People Management Methodology).
Period of assessment
- April 1, 2020-March 31, 2021 (unless indicated otherwise)
- Where applicable, departmental results may be compared to other data such as the 2020 Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) results, Internal Time to Staff, and Classification Conversion, departmental progress on the implementation of the Clerk’ Call to Action on Anti-Racism, Equity and Inclusion, to identify potential gaps between organizational practices and employee perceptions.
Impact on Departments
| People Management | 2020-21 | 2021-22 |
|---|---|---|
| Total number of questions | 15 | 12 |
| Total number of questions which require the submission of evidence | 9 plus one interview question | 12 |
- To avoid duplication of data already published elsewhere, data already published by TBS, such as the representation of Employment Equity groups and the results of the Public Service Employee Survey, will be used to contextualize the analysis instead of standalone questions.
- Of the 12 questions, all are department to answer.
Overall outcomes
This methodology will generate insight into a department or agency’s planning and management practices that contribute to a diverse, inclusive, healthy, and agile public service. It complements other monitoring and reporting, as well as research activities in the public service to provide a holistic picture on people management.
MAF 2021-22 People Management Questionnaire
Question #1 New
Does your departmental employment equity or human resources (HR) plan have targets for the following EE groups? (Select all that apply)
- a. Women
- b. Indigenous peoples
- c. Visible Minorities
- d. Persons with Disabilities
- e. None of the above
Rationale
The prioritization of diversity and inclusion by central agencies reflects a desire and determination to take concrete actions to address, identify, and remove any systemic barriers that may exist for employment equity group members in the federal public service.
Recent positioning and recommendations have drawn the urgency to engage to reduce barriers. The 2020 Speech from the Throne, the Clerk’s Call to Action on Anti-Racism, Equity and Inclusion, the Audit on Employment Equity Representation in Recruitment, all incite the Public Service to make measurable changes on creating a diverse and inclusive workplace at all levels.
Determining whether departments are including targets in their HR or EE plan allows TBS to acquire baseline information on departmental progress towards these goals. Additionally, without targets included in these plans a department cannot hold a targeted staffing process, which can aid in recruiting Employment Equity designated group members.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence:
EE/HR plans must include EE goals at specific levels (including leadership), timelines to achieve objectives and person(s) accountable (level) for achieving objectives in the EE/HR Plan.
Examples of actions:
- Action plans or strategies that show how identified gaps in organizational representation for employment equity groups (as well as promotions and separation, if available) are addressed and/or workforce planning documents.
- Outreach to post-secondary institutions, Indigenous post-secondary institutions, and trade schools.
- Regular emails to update management on representation levels of the department or agency, and presentations on the state of employment equity, diversity, and inclusion to executive committees.
Document limit: Maximum of two documents.
Period of assessment: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
- Call to Action on Anti-Racism, Equity, and Inclusion in the Federal Public Service
- Diversity and inclusion in the public service
- 2020/2021 Deputy Minister Commitments on Diversity and Inclusion
- Building a Diverse and Inclusive Public Service: Final Report of the Joint Union/Management Task Force on Diversity and Inclusion
- Many Voices One Mind: A Pathway to Reconciliation
- Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy
- Audit of Employment Equity Representation in Recruitment
- 2020 Speech from the Throne
- Nothing without us: An Accessibility Strategy for the Government of Canada
Question #2 New
What activities were undertaken to promote and institute diversity and inclusion in hiring practices?
- a. Encourage and/or monitor diversity on selection boards/committees (beyond binary representation)
- b. Provide training to executives, managers, and supervisors in order to address unconscious bias
- c. Other initiatives to promote and institute diversity and inclusion in hiring practices
- d. No activities were undertaken
Rationale
The relevance of this question is nested in the Government of Canada’s priorities on diversity and inclusion, comprised of the Clerk’s Call to Action on Racism, Equity and Inclusion, the President of the Treasury Board’s Priorities on Diversity and Inclusion as well as the Deputy Minister’s Commitments on Diversity and Inclusion.
All three address the critical need for better representation of Black, Indigenous, Persons with a Disability and Racialized employees across various levels in the public service. An important mechanism for facilitating this progress is the diversification of selection boards.
This information will also provide a baseline for the Centre on Diversity and Inclusion.
The Audit on Employment Equity Representation in Recruitment made clear that further work is needed to make hiring more inclusive. In response, the Public Service Commission set out a series of concrete actions that it will take to immediately address the Audit results. These actions include requiring training on unconscious bias in recruitment and advancing diverse interview boards. This question measures departmental performance in advancing these actions.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence:
Answer A: Activities being undertaken or communications made to promote or institute diversity & inclusion in selection boards/committees. Provide a summary of the activity or communication as well as the target audience. If diversity within selection boards is being measured, please describe. Provide data if applicable.
Examples may include:
- Emails, guides to encourage diversity in selection boards
- % of persons from Employment Equity designated/equity seeking groups on staffing selection boards
- Description of actions being taken to address gaps
- Answer B: List of training related to diversity and inclusion in the context of recruitment. Provide a brief summary of the training content, type of training (mandatory/recommended, in house/service provider, etc.) and audiences (e.g., managers, HR professionals, employees). Provide data if possible.
Answer C: Describe any other initiatives (e.g., pilot) put in place to increase diversity and inclusiveness in hiring practices. Provide a summary of the goals and objectives and lessons learned/outcomes, if available. Provide data if applicable.
Other activities could include but are not limited to specific outreach using inclusiveness lens, recruitment review committee (e.g., planning phase, merit criteria, assessment tools, etc.). If possible, provide details including information ono who (target audiences), how, when and why.
Document limit: One document (1) containing a summary of all the activities undertaken where each activity should be clearly identified by a header indicating which answer option has been chosen.
Period of assessment: April 1, 2020 to August 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
- Call to Action on Anti-Racism, Equity, and Inclusion in the Federal Public Service
- Diversity and inclusion in the public service
- 2020/2021 Deputy Minister Commitments on Diversity and Inclusion
- Building a Diverse and Inclusive Public Service: Final Report of the Joint Union/Management Task Force on Diversity and Inclusion
- Many Voices One Mind: A Pathway to Reconciliation
- Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy
- Audit of Employment Equity Representation in Recruitment
- 2020 Speech from the Throne
- Nothing without us: An Accessibility Strategy for the Government of Canada
Question #3 New
In your organization, are mentorship, sponsorship, and/or leadership development opportunities offered specifically for one or more of the 4 EE groups and/or equity seeking groups?
- Offered
- Not offered
- In Progress
Rationale
The relevance of this question is nested in the Government of Canada’s priorities on diversity and inclusion, comprised of the Clerk’s Call To Action on Racism, Equity and Inclusion, the President of the Treasury Board’s Priorities on Diversity and Inclusion as well as the Deputy Minister’s Commitments on Diversity and Inclusion.
This question pinpoints whether departments have diagnosed, assessed, and addressed barriers to career development within their organization and through which development mechanisms.
This information will also provide a baseline for the Centre on Diversity and Inclusion.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence must include:
- Brief description of Mentorship, sponsorship or Leadership program (offered specifically for one or more of the 4 EE groups and equity seeking groups) as implemented within your department/agency
- Number of Protégé/Sponsor and/or Mentee/Mentor relationships that have been established (that include a mentee or protégé from an EE group and/or equity seeking group).
- Number of participants in the leadership program
- Timing of implementation (i.e., Date of launch)
Document limit: One document containing all the evidence where each answer should be clearly identified by a header indicating which answer option has been chosen.
Departments are encouraged to use the template provided.
Period of assessment: As of August 31, 2021.
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Question #4 New
What is your department doing to foster a diverse and inclusive workplace?
Please check all that apply:
- a. Employment Equity designated/equity seeking group networks and/or Bargaining Agents are actively and routinely engaged to collaborate on development of Employment Equity (EE) Plan or EE goals in a staffing plan
- b. Employment Equity designated/equity seeking group networks and/or Bargaining Agents are actively and routinely engaged to collaborate on designing and implementing actions to address systemic racism, discrimination, and barriers to inclusion
- c. The department took action to create an inclusive workplace where employees feel safe to report cases of wrongdoing without fear of reprisal
- d. None of the above
Rationale
The relevance of this question is nested in the Government of Canada’s priorities on diversity and inclusion, comprised of the Clerk’s Call To Action on Racism, Equity and Inclusion, the President of the Treasury Board’s Priorities on Diversity and Inclusion as well as the Deputy Minister’s Commitments on Diversity and Inclusion.
All three documents address the vital importance of departments reducing systemic barriers facing Black, Indigenous, Persons with a Disability and racialized employees through the collaboration of grassroots employee networks. In addition to engaging these internal networks, it is also important to engage the Bargaining Agents. This question measures the strength of that engagement.
This information will also provide a baseline for the Centre on Diversity and Inclusion.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence:
- Calendar of events (total number + frequency), emails, meeting-notes that demonstrate routine engagement with Employment Equity designated/equity seeking group networks and Bargaining Agents on the EE Plan and/or EE goals in the staffing plan.
- Outcomes of engagement: please provide a summary of any developments of new products and/or changes to reports, policies, programs, etc that address systemic racism, discrimination, and barriers to inclusion
Note: If you are an SDA and these EE departmental networks do not exist, please elaborate on ways that you engage communities or Bargaining Agents.
- For Answer C, please provide evidence of activities that establish a workplace where employees feel safe to report cases of significant wrongdoing without fear of reprisal.
Document limit: Maximum of three (3) documents.
Departments are encouraged to use the template provided.
Period of assessment:
- Answer options A and B: April 1, 2020 to August 31, 2021
- Answer option C: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Question #5 New
Did you have a plan in place to implement changes in response to new requirements in light of the new Work Place Harassment and Violence Prevention Regulations that came into force on January 1, 2021?
- Yes
- No
Rationale
The Federal Public Service is committed to creating a safe and respectful workplace, free from harassment and violence. To achieve this, it is important to ensure proper preventive measures are in place, such as identifying and addressing workplace hazards that may lead to harassment and violence.
This indicator will provide organizations with an indication of their progress in implementing the new regulations for preventing workplace harassment and violence as well as identify gaps in the health and safety management system.
This information will also provide TBS with an overview of the implementation across the organizations assessed in MAF and the opportunity to share best practices across the public service.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence:
If you have indicated “Yes”, please provide a work plan, project plan or documentation demonstrating the organization’s plan to implement changes in response to new requirements.
The documentation provided should at least include a timeline of the different changes/actions to be taken and the people involved /who was or will be involved in the planning of their implementation (i.e. position or classification group. For example, LR, OHS, NOHS PC, Senior Executives, etc.)
If you have indicated “No”, please explain why.
Document limit: Maximum one (1) document.
Period of assessment: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Question #6 New
What actions have you taken to improve the use of both official languages in the workplace?
- a. When sharing working documents beyond their immediate teams, supervisors and managers have been asked to do so in both official languages.
- b. Employees have been encouraged to request that IT install software and other computer tools in the language of their choice.
- c. Corporate emails are to be sent and postings on the intranet site are posted simultaneously and in equal quality in both official languages.
- d. Senior management has committed to systematically engage employees in the official language of their choice and to use both languages when communicating orally or in writing with groups that include anglophones and francophones.
- e. Messaging has been distributed to all supervisors and managers messages to actively promote the use of both official languages in meetings, whether virtual or in person.
- f. None of the above.
Rationale
Communications from the Government of Canada to Canadians must always comply with the Official Languages Act. Employees of federal departments, agencies and Crown corporations must take steps or establish processes to ensure that the right to work in the official language of their choice is respected in regions designated bilingual. The indicator will allow the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat to determine whether departments and agencies have taken steps or established improvement procedures to ensure that employees’ rights are respected at all times in regions designated as bilingual.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence: Departments and agencies can provide examples of emails from senior management, excerpts from internal policy documents or intranet pages, or brief explanations to support their response choices. The responses will be cross-referenced with the department’s or agency’s PSES 2020 results.
Document limit: Up to a maximum of five (5) documents. Up to one document for each answer option chosen.
Departments are encouraged to use the template provided.
Period of assessment: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
- Policy on Official Languages, 6.3
- Directive on Official Languages for Communications and Services, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6
Question #7 New
Does your organization have a departmental mental health action plan or strategy?
- Yes
- No
Rationale
Workplace change is a key force affecting psychological health and safety and, given the significant workplace and workforce shifts that will occur as organizations adapt to a post-pandemic reality, it is important to determine whether organizations have a solid foundation to build upon moving forward.
The health and wellness of public servants is vital to each organization’s success. Having the right workplace conditions to support mental health and wellness generates higher levels of employee engagement and increases employee productivity.
The National Standard of Canada on Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace (the Standard) indicates that effectively managing psychological health and safety in the workplace leads to improved risk mitigation; cost effectiveness; recruitment and retention; and organizational excellence and sustainability. The Federal Public Service Workplace Mental Health Strategy (the Strategy) was released in 2016 to support organizations in integrating psychological health, safety and well-being into all aspects of the federal workplace.
The Strategy stipulates that federal organizations are required to develop tailored mental health action plans that address, at minimum, nine objectives across three pillars of focus: changing the culture, building capacity and measuring, reporting, and continuously improving. Further support for implementing the Strategy objectives was provided via the third report of the Joint Task Force in 2018.
The assessment of this indicator will allow departments to gain insights on strengths and gaps with respect to adapting and operationalizing the Strategy for their workplaces and to receive recommendations for moving forward. Results will provide TBS with insights on how to support organizations in achieving the objectives of their mental health action plan and/or strategy.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence:
If departments respond in the affirmative, they must submit their most recent departmental mental health action plan and/or strategy.
If departments respond in the negative, they may submit an explanation.
Additionally, departments are asked to provide an update on the status of the implementation of the organization-specific objectives of the Federal Public Service Workplace Mental Health Strategy.
Document limit: One (1) document.
Departments are encouraged to use the template provided.
Period of assessment: As of March 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
- Federal Public Service Workplace Mental Health Strategy
- The National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace (the Standard)
- Building Success: A Guide to Establishing and Maintaining a Psychological Health and Safety Management System in the Federal Public Service (third report of the Joint Task Force on mental health)
Question #8 New
Has your organization started taking action to ensure that you are ready for the upcoming Program and Administrative Services (PA) conversion currently planned for October 2022?
- Yes
- No
Rationale
Conversions are government-wide modernization initiatives that support Deputy Heads to attract, recruit, and retain a skilled workforce, needed to deliver their mandates in an increasingly competitive labour market. Some of the classification standards currently in use are now more than 50 years old. Reliance on outdated tools is inefficient and jeopardizes organizations’ ability to create and organize modern work structures, and to ensure fair compensation. Increasing flexibility and agility with respect to organizing work is essential to ensure that the Public Service (PS) can anticipate and respond to changes in workforce trends (i.e., Future of Work drivers).
Ensuring organizational readiness for the upcoming PA conversion is critical given the size of the PA occupational group. There are more than 150,000 PA positions, representing roughly 40% of the PS. The PA occupational group is also predominantly female. Timely conversion of these positions is will support Pay Equity implementation.
This indicator provides organizations with an early sign of their progress toward PA conversion and will help them identify if they are at risk while there is still time to put in place mitigation strategies.
The conversion effective date cannot take place until both organizations and systems are ready. Deputy Heads are therefore responsible to ensure that their organization is prepared.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
For organizations to identify what steps they have and have not taken to ensure that they will be prepared for PA conversion as per the established conversion deadline
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence:
(TBS to upload template onto MAF portal to be completed)
- If ‘Yes’ – completion of a template. Key activities for conversion readiness will be provided in a table and organizations will be asked to indicate how much progress they have made (i.e., not started, in progress, complete). Organizations will also have the opportunity to identify any other strategies they are using.
- If ‘No’ – short report (point form, 1 page maximum) explaining why they have been unable to begin preparing for PA conversion.
Document limit: One document
If ‘Yes’ – the template and any additional comments
If ‘No’ – a 1-page summary
Period of assessment: April 1st, 2020 – Sept 30th, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Question #9 New – data collection only
What workplace accommodation data do you track? (select all that apply)
- a. Number of requests
- b. Rejected/Refused requests (i.e., not approved)
- c. Accommodation type (e.g., IT hardware/software, workspace, environment related, personal support services)
- d. Formal assessments by medical doctor or specialist
- e. Cost
- f. Days from request to full implementation of accommodation
- g. None of the above
Rationale
Workplace accommodation has been identified as a recurring barrier that persons with disabilities face in their organizations. By tracking data related to the accommodation process, departments and agencies are better equipped to identify gaps and measure progress. Understanding how departments and agencies deal with data related to the accommodation process will allow for the identification of best practices and gaps.
This question will not be used for assessment purposes. It is for information gathering only.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence: One document that includes a description for each of the categories chosen. In your explanation, please provide a description of the approach used to track the data.
Document limit: One document
Period of assessment: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Question #10 New – data collection only
Has your organization developed an accessibility plan?
- Yes
- No
Rationale
The Accessible Canada Act (ACA) mandates every federally regulated organization to develop an accessibility plan. The federal public service is expected to lead by example in accessibility and as such, will be expected to be first in meeting the requirements stipulated in the regulations, to lead the way for other federally regulated organizations. While final ACA regulations will only come into effect at the end of this calendar year (Dec 2021), many departments and agencies have already prepared an accessibility plan and will thus be in a better position to comply with the requirements of the ACA. This information will support OPSA’s mandate to help prepare the public service to lead by example in meeting the requirements of the ACA.
This question will not be used for assessment purposes. It is for information gathering only.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence: Accessibility Plan
Document limit: One document
Period of assessment: As of October 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Question #11 New – data collection only
As part of your post-pandemic planning, which of the following has your organization developed (e.g., plans, reviews/assessments, approaches) to increase flexibility/agility in people management?
Governance
- a. Created new cross-functional structures e.g., governance (committees/tiger teams) or organization structures to drive post pandemic planning
Post pandemic Planning
- b. Conducted GBA+ analysis as part of the organization’s post pandemic planning
- c. Developed a Departmental Post Pandemic Plan (please include reference if co-developed with other departments)
- d. Developed new metrics to assess progress in the organization’s post pandemic plan
Change Management
- e. Developed a Change Management Strategy/Approach
- f. Provided Change Management training for Leaders
Specific Actions:
- g. New approaches to workforce planning
- h. New talent mobility platforms created to increase agility within organizations in the post pandemic period
- i. Review of employee skills/development of employee skill profiles for future of work
- j. Developed criteria and process to assess flexibility of positions for hybrid workforce
- k. None of the above
Rationale
TBS in exploring the future of work is interested in collecting information from departments on the readiness for alternate work arrangements.
This question will not be used for assessment purposes. It is for information gathering only.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Not Applicable
Calculation method (where applicable)
Not Applicable
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: Departmental Files
Date of data extraction: September 1, 2021
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence: For each item checked, please submit the supporting document(s), including drafts. If available, please include lessons learned or impact assessments from these actions. There is no requirement to provide TBS with any summaries or undertake additional work that has not already been completed.
Document limit: Please fill in the template provided.
Period of assessment: As of August 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Not Applicable
Question #12 New – data collection only
Have you implemented organization-wide staffing/recruitment activities and/or initiatives to reduce your median internal time to staff?
- Yes
- No
Rationale
This question is used to benchmark efficiency in staffing, and the internal time to staff is used to evaluate the staffing efficiency and agility in organizations. This question is also looking for examples that show that organizations have taken steps in making their staffing process more responsive.
The time to staff indicator provides the central tendency of the duration to staff an indeterminate position through an internal hiring process using the Public Service Recruitment System (PSRS). Since it is the middle value of the duration to staff vacant internal positions, it provides an indication about the efficiency, responsiveness, and agility of the staffing system. The internal time to staff indicates whether organizations are using their discretion and whether they are planning and conducting their staffing processes in such a way that candidates do not have to wait a long time between poster advertisement and appointment.
This question will not be used for assessment purposes. It is for information gathering only.
Category
- Policy compliance
- Performance
- Other
Target
Improvements in the median internal time to staff
Calculation method (where applicable)
For reference only.
Note: Not applicable for departments.
Results of internal time to staff will be used as context and no calculations from departments are required.
As provided in departmental results: The middle value of the number of calendar days between the date when the poster was advertised and when the Notification of Appointment or Proposed Appointment (only the first appointment from an internal advertised appointment process is calculated in the time to staff) was posted across selection processes.
In order to calculate the median, the data (number of calendar days for each internal selection process) must first be ranked in ascending order and then the middle value selected.
Median = the middle value of a set of ordered data.
Note: Calculation includes hiring from within the Public Service for organizations that are assessed under People Management in the MAF and that are subject to the Public Service Employment Act.
Sample: To be assessed on time to staff, organizations must have completed at least 20 internal advertised appointment processes, regardless of the size of the organization.
Evidence source and document limit
TBS to answer
Department or agency to Answer
This question applies to the following organizations:
- Large departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Large departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
- Small departments and Agencies – Core Public Administration
- Small departments and Agencies – Separate Agencies
Data source: PSC Public Service Resourcing System (PSRS) and Departmental files
Date of data extraction: Not Applicable
Data collection method: Documentary evidence (MAF portal)
Evidence:
Please provide brief explanatory paragraphs that:
- Describe examples of activity(ies) of how you, as an organization, have adapted a staffing approach or leveraged flexibilities of the appointment policy or other to meet critical staffing needs or to be more responsive.
- Describe how this/ese activity/ies has/have impacted the overall staffing process and/or the TTS results- if such information is available.
- If your organization did not leverage any flexibility in the appointment process or did not conduct any staffing during the assessment period, please indicate by responding NO to the question and explain what is being planned.
Document limit: One (1) document
The document should provide 1 or 2 explanatory paragraphs for each activity or example provided and how this/these activity/ies have impacted overall process efficiencies and/or time to staff results.
Organisations should not provide more than one document. No additional information (e.g., deck, full description of initiative) is required.
Period of assessment: April 1, 2020 to March 31, 2021
Reference materials
Treasury Board policy reference or Government of Canada priority
Glossary of Select Terms
(For additional clarifications regarding the questions/evidence requested, please see the FAQ)
- Employment equity groups:
The Employment Equity Act identifies four employment equity designated groups: women, Indigenous peoples (aboriginal persons for the purposes of the Act), persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities.
- Equity seeking groups:
- A group of persons who are disadvantaged on the basis of one or more prohibited grounds of discrimination within the meaning of the Canadian Human Rights Act. (Source: Public Service Employment Act (PSEA))
- Diversity:
- A workforce that comprises individuals who have an array of identities, abilities, backgrounds, cultures, skills, perspectives, and experiences that are representative of Canada’s current and evolving population. This includes but is not limited to differences in ethnicity or race, culture, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, educational background, region, and marital or parental status.
- Inclusion:
- Refers to creating a workplace that is fair, equitable, supportive, welcoming and respectful of all. It recognizes, values and leverages differences in identities, abilities, backgrounds, cultures, skills, experiences, and perspectives that support and reinforce Canada’s evolving human rights framework.
- Mentorship:
- Mentorship is a well established means of supporting all federal public service employees who want to progress in their careers, including to the role of executive. It provides an opportunity for anyone to learn from an experienced person who can help them determine their career aspirations and strategies for advancement.
- Sponsorship:
In a sponsorship program, a senior leader will advocate actively on behalf of their protégé, being an active participant in their career development. This is especially important for those employees who might lack access to certain networks (both formal and informal), helping them acquire the skills and competencies for progression to the executive cadre.
Sponsorship differs from talent management in that it operates outside of the Performance Management Agreement process.
- Collaborate:
The Employment Equity Act states that consultation and collaboration between employers and employee representatives is required. Departments must provide information, seek opinions and advice in order to better implement employment equity activities in their organization.
Areas covered by this consultation are communication to employees of matters relating to employment equity, preparation, implementation, and revision of employment equity plans and implementation of employment equity.
Employee representatives (from a bargaining agent) must participate in consultation, collaborate in the preparation, implementation, and revision of the employment equity plan.
- Employee networks:
- Employee networks are a way to connect employees who share demographic factors such as gender, race, ethnicity, or other common backgrounds or interests.
- Bargaining agents:
- Employee organizations that represent the interests of employees in collective bargaining and participate in the resolution of workplace issues and rights disputes.
- Wrongdoing:
This is defined under the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act as one of the following
- A contravention of any Act of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, or of any regulations made under any such Act
- A misuse of public funds or a public asset;
- A gross mismanagement in the public sector;
- An act or omission that creates a substantial and specific danger to the life, health or safety of persons, or to the environment, other than a danger that is inherent in the performance of the duties or functions of a public servant;
- A serious breach of a code of conduct; and
- Knowingly directing or counselling a person to commit a wrongdoing
Wrongdoing is an act that could seriously impact the public’s confidence in the integrity of the public service.
Wrongdoing does not cover all ethical breaches or include complaints or grievances that are already addressed under existing recourse mechanisms provided for under other statutes such as the Canada Labour Code and its Regulations, the Canadian Human Rights Act, the Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act, and the Privacy Act.
- Classification Conversion:
A classification conversion occurs when there is a change in the way work in an occupational group is evaluated. A classification conversion could result from the introduction of a new job evaluation standard, a change in the structure of the occupational groups or a change in the existing job evaluation standard. The process involves evaluating job descriptions using a new or modified job evaluation standard approved by the Treasury Board as part of a classification renewal exercise. Pay rates for the new or updated group are determined through collective bargaining.
A similar renewal process, called “renaming,” occurs when there is a change to the name of an occupational group or sub-group, but no change to the existing job evaluation standard, other than to the group or sub-group name. For greater certainty, renaming does not involve a new classification decision, and it is not considered a classification conversion. So, changes to job descriptions and job evaluation work is not required in preparation for the renaming.
The Treasury Board Secretariat determines if a change is considered to be a classification conversion or a renaming.
- PA – Program and administrative services:
- The Program and Administrative Services Group comprises positions that are primarily involved in the planning, development, delivery or management of administrative and federal government policies, programs, services, or other activities directed to the public or to the Public Service. It is currently comprised of 10 sub-groups. There will be 5 new sub-groups following conversion.
- Future of work:
- FoW is about redefining the workforce, the workplace and the organization of work to meet organization’s future needs.
- Cross-functional structures:
- Cross-functional structures are groups where people from different areas of expertise work together to accomplish a shared goal.
- Talent management platforms:
- Talent management platforms are mobility system or processes to ensure that people are matched to the right job for their skills, competencies, and career plans.
- Hybrid workforce:
- In a hybrid workforce, on any given day, some employees are working on-site, and some are working off-site. This includes a mix of employees who work on-site full-time, employees who work off-site part-time, and employees who work off-site full-time.
Page details
- Date modified: