| No. | Project Name | Board | Alignment to Strategic Outcomes |
Rationale | Scope & Objectives | Required Resources | Risk Rating | Priority Rating | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM | $’000 | L/M/H | L/M/H *man-dated | ||||||
| 15. | Classification | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | Classification was identified as a risk by management in 2008-2009 and has not been recently audited;
the project was postponed from 2008-2009 to 2010-2011 because a new approach to classification was recently developed. The Round V MAF assessment rated Environment Canada’s Classification Program as an “Opportunity for Improvement”. The recommendations were to establish measures to ensure appropriate management and control of the departmental classification system through annual monitoring and corrective action. |
The objective of this project will be to audit the controls in place to support an effective and
efficient classification process. The scope of the audit will emphasize compliance to policies, as well as to assess consistency across
the department. This project will address the following core management controls: People (PPL-1, PPL-7). |
M | H | ||
| 16. | Values and Ethics | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | Values and Ethics was identified as a risk by management in 2008-2009. Specifically, the risk of
not respecting the organization’s integrity and ethical values was highlighted, as were the risks associated with employees having a
low sense of ethics. While Environment Canada’s Round V MAF assessment rating was “Strong”, this audit will support the holistic opinion and directly supports the oversight requirements of the Audit Committee, which encompasses the monitoring of the department’s values and ethics strategies. |
The objective of this project will be to assess the controls in place to support an effective
Values and Ethics program. This project will address the following core management controls: Public Service Values (PSV-1, PSV-2, PSV-3, PSV-4, PSV-5). |
M | M | ||
| 17. | Financial Audits | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | The Deputy Minister has made improvement of financial management at Environment Canada a priority, and an action plan was developed in 2008-2009 in response to the Financial Readiness Assessment. In addition, various challenges with financial management and controls in the Department were noted by the 2009-2010 AE Risk Assessment and management consultations. | The objective of this project is to conduct various financial audit activities to provide
assurance that the implementation of the action plan to improve financial management in the Department is producing the expected results. This project will address the following core management controls: Stewardship (ST-5, ST-6, ST-7, ST-10, ST-11, ST-12). |
H | H* | ||
| 18. | Governance Framework/ Operational Panning and Reporting | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | EC’s Governance Framework and Operational Planning and Reporting processes were
identified as areas of risk in the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 AEB Risk Assessments and management consultations. Specifically, risks
associated with lack of clarity related to new organizational changes and a lack of a clear, effective, and well documented organizational
structure were highlighted. Unclear understanding of roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities under the new governance structure may
further contribute to organizational confusion. Changes in governance and reporting structures may also create a decreased understanding
of the Department’s direction, which may negatively impact overall performance and efficiency. The Department also faces risks
associated with an inability to respond to external trends (e.g. political, economic, legal, etc). Change management was identified as a
risk in the 2008 corporate risk profile. Round V of the MAF assessment recommended that the Department clarify governance and reporting structures, in particular the linkages between the Results Management Structure and the Organization Structure. It was also recommended that planning documents at the branch level should be more comprehensive and have clearer links to priorities. |
The objective of this project will be to assess the controls in place to support effective governance
and operational planning and reporting. An emphasis will be placed on providing assurance in relation to roles, responsibilities and accountabilities
for the new governance structure and planning framework (PAA) and to assess the effectiveness of the changes to the PAA planning framework. This project will address the following core management controls: Governance and Strategic Directions (G-2, G-4), Risk Management (RM-7), Stewardship (ST-1), and Accountability (AC-1, AC-2, AC-3). |
M | M | ||
| 19. | Assets and Inventory | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | The 2008-2009 Financial Readiness Assessment identified challenges associated with EC’s asset
accounting and inventory processes. In addition, Assets and Inventory was identified as a risk in the 2009-2010 AEB risk assessment and management
consultations. This area has very high materiality and no previous audits have been conducted. Inventory issues such as a lack of inventory
substantiation (existence and completeness) at year-end and a lack of clear segregation between capital assets, inventory or expenses have been
identified. In addition, a new Integrated Investment Planning Process (IIPP)/LTCP has been in place for several years. The OCG has planned several audits for assets management in 2009/10 – IT assets, real property (LCM). |
The objective of this project will be to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of assets accounting,
as well as the new Integrated Investment Planning Process (IIPP) and Long-Term Capital Plan (LTCP). This project will address the following core management controls: Stewardship (ST-8, ST-9). |
H | H | ||
| 20. | Business Continuity | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | Business Continuity was identified as a risk in the 2009-2010 AE Risk Assessment and management
consultations. Specifically, a lack of clear business continuity planning across the nation and insufficient measures in place to provide for
the continuity of critical business operations and services were highlighted. Business Continuity was also identified as a corporate risk in
the 2008 corporate risk profile for the Department. In Round V of the MAF assessments, the Department received an “Opportunity for Improvement” rating for Effective Management of Security and Business Continuity. It is suggested that the Department should focus on all aspects of business continuity planning, including: completing the Business Impact Analysis (BIA) to identify and prioritize the organization’s critical services and assets; establishing business continuity plans and arrangements; and establishing a maintenance cycle to review, test and audit business continuity plans. |
The objective of this project will be to assess the compliance of the new business continuity
program with government security polices and regulations and to evaluate the controls in place to support program performance. This project will address the following core management controls: Risk Management (RM-2, RM-3, RM-5, RM-7). |
H | H | ||
| 21. | Greening Initiatives/ Sustainability | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | Environment Canada’s greening and sustainability initiatives were identified in the 2008-2009
and 2009-2010 AE Risk Assessments because of challenges in demonstrating how efforts contribute to the Sustainable Development Strategy,
affecting the clear articulation of direction and priorities. A CESD audit on the Federal Sustainable Development strategy and selected
departmental commitments is expected in November 2009. As indicated in the 2008-2009 Report on Plans and Priorities, DMS priorities include work to support the greening of federal government operations. Specific priorities include the integration of environmental performance drivers, especially with respect to the management of Environment Canada’s contaminated sites, green procurement, vehicle fleet, greening of IT assets, and reduction of GHG emissions. In addition, it is a priority to develop new approaches to assets management and capital planning in line with government-wide directions and greening government initiatives. Environment Canada is one of the co-champions for the greening of operations goal of the Government of Canada. The CESD follow-up to Management Tools and Government Commitments—Greening of Government Operations reported that the government's progress toward providing departments preparing sustainable development strategies with guidance on greening their operations was unsatisfactory. |
The objective of this project will be to assess compliance with the new Sustainable Development
Strategy (SDS) and Sustainable Development Act and to evaluate the controls in place to support meeting greening government initiatives,
e.g. green procurement, assets management/capital planning, and fleet management. This project will address the following core management controls: Governance and Strategic Directions (G-1, G-2), Accountability (AC-1), and Risk Management (RM-2, RM-3, RM-4, RM-5, RM-6, RM-7). Note: See the same topic listed under Evaluation Projects planned for 2010-2011. It is still to be determined whether this project will be conducted as an audit or evaluation; this is potentially a joint project. |
M | M | ||
| 22. | IMIT Project (TBD) | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | A specific audit project will be identified as a result of the annual IMIT risk assessment. The rationale for this project will de developed when the project is identified. | The scope and objectives of this project will be determined when the project is identified. | H | H | ||
| 23. | Official Languages Policy | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | The Official Languages Policy has been identified as a risk area by EC management in 2008-2009.
This project was originally planned for 2008-2009 and was postponed to 2009-2010 to allow sufficient time for the implementation of the
departmental official languages action plan. The audit engagement was in last year’s plan and was deferred to 2010-2011 because it
is considered to be a medium priority. Non-compliance with the legislation puts the department at risk of not providing an inclusive and supportive workplace to its staff. The area is moreover one of high visibility and could affect EC’s reputation. Commissioner of Official Languages (OCOL) Audit of Automated Bilingual Weather and Environmental information in 2008-2009 and follow-up 2010-2011 (scope very narrow and only limited to this service). OCOL report card on compliance with Official Languages requirements in 2009-2010. |
The objective of this project will be to audit compliance with Treasury Board policy on Official
Languages, focussing particularly on the language of work, communication and service to the public in other areas than the Automated Bilingual
Weather and Environmental information. As previous audits have highlighted shortcomings in this area (e.g. OCOL audit on service) this audit could not only survey departmental compliance with policy, but also survey the state of implementation of recommendations that the department has previously received. This project will address the following core management controls: People (PPL-4, PPL-7). |
H | M | ||
| 24. | Water Management (joint audit-evaluation – collaborative approach) | ES | Canada's natural capital is restored, conserved, and enhanced | Water management was identified as a risk in the 2009-2010 AE Risk Assessment and management consultations.
Water Management is a highly visible and complex program with many different activities throughout the Department that contribute to the achievement
of its mandate. Because of the complexity of the program, the Department is exposed to risks associated with the misalignment of activities, priorities
and financial resources and risks associated with inappropriate or inadequate business processes. The Program also requires a high level of scientific knowledge. Water Management is subject to a moderate level of compliance, characterized by various legal commitments that include domestic Water Boards, Binational / IJC Boards, International River Improvements Act (IRIA), Canadian Water Act (CWA). This exposes the Department to risks associated with violation of laws, regulations, international treaties/agreements and policies. The Program also has many dependencies with other programs, relies on collaboration with sub-activities, other federal departments, private and non-profit sector organizations. Due to the high degree of dependencies, there are risks associated with the failure on the part of third parties on which the Department depends. In addition, bilateral partners are developing their own water plans and asking about the federal position. The 2005 CESD audit of Drinking Water observed that the current status of the federal water Framework was unclear and its future uncertain. In 2008, the CESD found that EC has made unsatisfactory progress on issues raised in the 2001 Water audit. While the department has recently clarified some responsibilities, it still has not clearly specified who is responsible for carrying out all the required remedial actions, who will pay for those efforts, and within what timelines the actions will be taken. In addition, no formal policy or performance framework exists for this program, though a federal Water Strategy review is currently underway. Overall, there is a risk that Environment Canada will not be able to sustain a leadership and management capacity with the right competencies and knowledge to meet its requirements. |
The objective of this project will be to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of risk management, control,
and governance processes for water management across the Department. This is a joint audit and evaluation project. This project will address the following core management controls: Policy and Programs (PP-1, PP-2, PP-3). |
H | H | ||
| 25. | Stakeholders and Partnership Management (joint audit-evaluation – collaborative approach) | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | Environment Canada has a high dependence on partners and stakeholders for program delivery and financial
support. Lack of formal agreements can lead to further erosion of public confidence in the Department’s information and services. As such,
Stakeholder and Partnership Management was identified as a risk in the 2008 Corporate Risk Profile (legal, financial, loss of programs/services). Stakeholder and partnership management was also identified as a risk in 2008-09 and 2009-2010 AEB risk assessments, which highlighted the complexity of partnership arrangements and agreements. There is a risk of fragmented efforts and decreased cooperation and consensus. Performance in this area has been affected by a recent departmental transformation. Specific risks are associated with G&C process and it is recognized that there are inconsistencies in departmental approach. No audits or evaluations have been conducted in this area. |
The objective of this project will be to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of risk management, control,
governance processes, information sharing, and consultation process for stakeholder partnership management across the department. This is a joint audit and evaluation project. The audit will address bilateral and multi-lateral (e.g. academic, scientific) and federal-provincial relationships/agreements. This project will address the following core management controls: Policy and Programs (PP-1, PP-2, PP-3); Citizen-Focused Service (CFS-1, CFS-2, CFS-3). |
H | H | ||
| 26. | Management of Additional Funding Received - Mackenzie Gas Pipeline (MGP) Project: | EP IS |
Canadians and their environment are protected from the effects of pollution and waste Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives |
The 2009 Economic Action Plan includes several spending measures to be implemented by departments.
It will be important that departments, including Environment Canada, exercise sound stewardship and due diligence in delivering on those measures.
In this context, an audit of the Management of Additional Funding Received is necessary to the department. Canada’s Economic Action Plan for 2009 provides $37.6 million in 2009–2010 to departments and agencies in support of environmental assessments, regulatory coordination, science, and Aboriginal consultations related to the Mackenzie Gas Project. This funding was allocated to INAC, NRCan, DFO, CEAA, and EC. According to program sources, the EA/regulatory process has now been delayed by 2 years and the project is now expected to be completed by 2010-2011. The existing MC resources expire on March 31, 2009 and EC is seeking additional funding through a new MC process. The program is complex and involves a multitude of science projects, environmental assessments and regulatory approvals. This includes the Joint Review Panel (JRP) and other regulatory bodies and oversight authorities. This project presents risks associated with misalignment of financial resources – resources not aligned with operational priorities to achieve specific goals, risks associated with public opinion, including communication with stakeholders, risks associated with maintaining a sufficient and representative workforce with appropriate experience and skill, legal and compliance risks, as well as significant hazard risks associated with natural and human actions. This project will be completed between Q1 and Q4. |
The objective of this project is to advise managers on the adequate controls to implement to deliver their
new or expanded programs in a relevant and timely fashion. This project will address the following core management controls: Governance and Strategic Directions (C-1, C-2, C-3, C-4, C-5), Policy and Programs (PP-1, PP-3), People (PPL-1, PPL-2, PPL-4), Risk Management (RM-2, RM-3, RM-4, RM-5, RM-7), Stewardship (ST-1, ST-5, ST-7, ST-10, ST-11, ST-16, ST-17), Accountability (AC-1), Learning, Innovation and Change Management (LICM-1, LICM-2, LICM-3), and Results and Performance (RP-2, RP-3). |
H | H | ||
| 27. | Performance Information in Strategic Planning and Reporting Documents (joint audit-evaluation – collaborative approach) | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | According to RPP 2009-2010, Environment Canada is undertaking action that supports the Government’s Budget 2009
commitment to improve its annual reporting on key environmental indicators such as clean air, clean water, and greenhouse gas emissions. Environment Canada is
now midway through a two-year process of revising its PMF. When complete in 2010–2011, the revised PMF will support greater use of objective, evidence-based
performance reporting for Parliament and the public on achieved results and outcomes; greater transparency with central agencies concerning planned and actual
results of departmental programs; and improved program management within the department. Meeting significant expectations on performance measurement and reporting aspects of a government-wide management framework for the environmental agenda was also one of the 2008-2009 DMS Board priorities. As well, Round V of the MAF assessment had assigned an “acceptable” rating to both the Quality of Reporting to Parliament and the Effectiveness of the Corporate Management Structure (AOM #7) at EC. Yet, the assessment had also recommended that the planning documents at the branch level at EC should be more comprehensive and have clearer links to priorities. Risks to strategic planning and performance reporting processes have been identified as a high risk in both the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 AE Risk Assessments, underlining the importance of an audit of these areas. The risk that strategic directions and objectives are not communicated and aligned with the mandate and operational plans, and the risk associated with the changing governmental governance approach were noted in particular. While risks related to performance reporting have been reduced due to the mapping of the result structure against the PAA, potential control issues around performance information (accuracy, relevance, usefulness) are possible, making an audit of the DPR and RPP needed. Finally, it should be noted that integrated planning (HR, finance, admin) is a priority for the Clerk of the Privy Council and makes this a higher inherent risk for EC. The report will be completed in Q1 of 2010. |
The objective of this project will be to assess the accuracy, consistency, timeliness, and relevance of
performance information for corporate planning and reporting. The focus of this audit may include systems and processes. This is a joint audit and evaluation project. This project will address the following core management controls: Governance and Strategic Directions (G-3, G-4) and Stewardship (ST-18, ST-19, ST-20). |
M | H | ||
| 28. | Greenhouse Gas Data Collection, Management and Reporting (joint audit-evaluation – collaborative approach) | EP | Canadians and their environment are protected from the effects of pollution and waste | Greenhouse gas data collection, management, and reporting was identified as a risk in the 2009-2010 AE Risk
Assessment and management consultations. This Program is subject to many legislative and compliance requirements with specific international reporting
obligations under both the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto Protocol. An evaluation in this area is
particularly timely and relevant in the context of the upcoming Climate Conference scheduled for December 2009 in Copenhagen. Authorities under Canadian Environmental Protection Act 1999 (CEPA) also require the collection of facility level greenhouse gas data for those facilities that emit more than 100 kilotonnes annually of carbon dioxide or equivalents. Regulatory reporting requirements for greenhouse gases under Clean Air Regulatory Agenda (CARA) are also included. As such, Environment Canada is exposed to risks associated with non-compliance. There is also a high level of scientific knowledge required for this Program, meaning the Department is exposed to risks associated with the recruitment and retention of human resources. Information gathered by this program is also used for OAG performance audits; a CESD audit of the Kyoto Protocol Implementation Act is planned for Spring 2011. |
The objective of this project is to determine the adequacy of controls for greenhouse gas data collection,
management and reporting. This is a joint audit and evaluation project. This project will address the following core management controls: Governance and Strategic Directions (G-3, G-4), Policy and Programs (PP-1, PP-3), Citizen-focused Service (CFS-3, CFS-4), Risk Management (RM-2, RM-8), Accountability (AC-1), and Results and Performance (RP-1, RP-2, RP-3). |
H | H | ||
| 29. | Financial Audit – Continuous Auditing | IS | Integration and Enabling Services contribute to achieving departmental strategic objectives | Part of an ongoing validation process, to provide management assurance on the implementation of the new CARR (Corporate Accountability and Administration Renewal) strategy, to support continuous improvement of effective financial management in the department. | The objective of this project is to asses the adequacy and effectiveness of controls, processes, systems
and procedures for the new CARR strategy. This project will address the following core management controls: Stewardship (ST-1-22); Learning, Innovation and Change Management (LICM-1, LICM-2, LICM- 3). |
H | H | ||
| 30. | CAE Holistic Opinion | IS | The CAE Holistic Opinion is required by the Internal Audit policy. | To meet the Internal Audit Policy requirements, various audit activities will be conducted in support of the holistic opinion on elements of the MAF, which will be determined. | * | ||||