Environment Canada’s
Risk-Based Audit Plan for 2010-2013
and
Risk-Based Evaluation Plan 2010-2015

April, 2010

Previous page | ToC | Next page

10 Five-Year Evaluation Plan

10.2 2011-2012

Section 10 – Five-Year Evaluation Plan – 2011-2012
Project Scope and Calibrated Level of Effort25 PAA Program Rationale for Conduct Coverage – Direct Program Spending Aggregate Risk Ranking Resources Start Quarter End Quarter
PM $’000
26. Biodiversity Policy and Priorities

This evaluation will cover the Biodiversity Policy and Priorities Program. The evaluation will address issues of relevance and performance, with a focus on the department’s coordination of efforts by EC and other government jurisdictions in the implementation of the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy. The evaluation level of effort will be calibrated taking into account the small size and low complexity of this program.
Biodiversity Policy and Priorities (1.1.1) Although focusing on a medium risk program area, this evaluation will cover an area of the department that was never evaluated and will address a request by program managers to examine the effectiveness of EC federal/provincial coordination mechanisms. 0.27 M
(0.21 – 0.45)
       
14. Species at Risk

This evaluation was carried over from 2010–11.
Species at Risk (1.1.2) This evaluation is a Treasury Board requirement and will address a very high risk program area. 4.64% VH
(0.66 – 1.00)
       
27. Migratory Birds

This evaluation will cover the Migratory Birds Program. The evaluation will address issues of relevance and performance. The evaluation level of effort will be calibrated taking into account the large size and high complexity of this program.
Migratory Birds (1.1.3) This evaluation will address a high risk program area and program managers’ request for evaluation evidence to guide needed revisions to the program’s design. (2.06% – Carried-over to following year.) H
(0.46 – 0.65)
       
28. Northwest Territories Protected Areas Strategy

This evaluation will cover the Northwest Territories Protected Areas Strategy, a small component of the Protected Areas Program. The interdepartmental evaluation will be led by INAC and will address issues of relevance and performance. The evaluation level of effort will be calibrated taking into account the fact that this evaluation will be managed by another department.
Protected Areas (1.1.4.3) This evaluation is a Treasury Board requirement and will address a small component of a high risk program area. 0.20% H
(0.46 – 0.65)
       
29. Inuit Impact and Benefits Agreement Evaluation Plan

This project will consist of developing a plan for the evaluation of the Inuit Impact and Benefits Agreement. This project will be led by Environment Canada but consideration will be given to evaluating this agreement in concert with other departments evaluating similar agreements.
Protected Areas (1.1.4.3) This evaluation plan is a Treasury Board requirement. N/A H
(0.46 – 0.65)
       
30. Environmental Damages Fund

This evaluation will cover the Environmental Damages Fund Program. It will address issues of relevance and performance. The evaluation level of effort will be calibrated taking into account the small size, low complexity and low risk of this program.
Environmental Damages Fund (1.3.3.2) This evaluation is a Treasury Board requirement. (0.03% – Carried-over to following year.) L
(0.00 – 0.20)
       
15. Freshwater Initiatives (Action Plan on Clean Water – Lake Simcoe, Lake Winnipeg, Great Lakes sediment remediation)

This evaluation was carried over from 2010–11.
Great Lakes (1.3.4.1);
Lake Simcoe (1.3.4.3);
Lake Winnipeg (1.3.4.4)
This evaluation is a Treasury Board requirement and will address high to moderate risk program areas. 2.68% M
(0.21 – 0.45)
(avg)
       
17. Waste Reduction and Management

This evaluation was carried over from 2010–11.
Waste Reduction and Management (3.1.2.1) This evaluation will address a high risk program area and presents an opportunity for testing the feasibility of evaluating an entire PAA program. This test will inform possible future adjustments to this first five-year plan. 1.54% H
(0.46 – 0.65)
       
31. Regulation of Renewable Fuels Content in Gasoline, Diesel and Home Heating Fuel

This evaluation will cover the Regulation of Renewal Fuels Content in Gasoline Diesel and Home Heating Fuel, a small component of the Transportation Sector Emissions Program. It will address issues of relevance and performance. The evaluation level of effort will be calibrated taking into account the small size and low complexity of this program.
Transportation Sector Emissions (3.2.1.2) This evaluation is a Treasury Board requirement and will address a small component of a high risk program area. 0.30% H
(0.46 – 0.65)
       
32. Commission for Environmental Cooperation

This evaluation will cover the Commission for Environmental Cooperation, a small component of the International Climate Change and Clean Ari Partnerships Program. It will address issues of relevance and performance. The evaluation level of effort will be calibrated taking into account the small size and high complexity of this program.
International Climate Change and Clean Air Partnerships (3.2.2.3) This evaluation is a Treasury Board requirement and will address a small component of a very high risk program area. 0.20% VH
(0.66 – 1.00)
       
33. Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol

This evaluation will cover the Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol, a small component of the International Climate Change and Clean Ari Partnerships Program. It will address issues of relevance and performance. The evaluation level of effort will be calibrated taking into account the small size and low complexity of this program.
International Climate Change and Clean Air Partnerships (3.2.2.3) This evaluation is a Treasury Board requirement and will address a small component of a very high risk program area. 0.36% VH
(0.66 – 1.00)
       

 


25 Effort calibration was calculated based on the size of the evaluated component, its level of complexity in terms of number of distinct programs encompassed in a single evaluation, whether it includes a simple or horizontal governance structure, whether the evaluation is being primarily conducted in-house or by consultants, and whether the evaluation is being led by another department.

 

Previous page | ToC | Next page