Management Accountability Framework (MAF) and the Way Forward

1. Management Accountability Framework (MAF) and the Way Forward Introduction – Module 1 Ruth Dantzer President, Canada School of Public Service November 2009

2. Three central agencies share responsibility for supporting the Government of Canada in its planning and objective setting • Treasury Board (TB) is the management board of government: • Management office • Budget office • Employer • Secretary to the Cabinet • Department of the Prime • Minister heads the • Public Service Responsible for MAF* • Develops fiscal policy • Overseas the fiscal • framework • Responsible for developing • the Budget *MAF: Management Accountability Framework

3. Management Accountability Framework (MAF) has evolved into one of the Treasury Board Secretariat’s (TBS’) key instruments for management oversight • TBS developed the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) in 2003 to better clarify expectations regarding a Deputy Minister ‘s leadership responsibilities and to assess the management capacity and performance of organizations on an annual basis. • Began as “framework for a conversation” between the Treasury Board Secretary and Deputy Ministers. • Used to comprehensively assess management capacity and performance in all departments and one-third of small agencies every year. • Direct impact on Deputy Ministers’ performance commitments and performance pay. • Iterative assessment process; information managed in a comprehensive Treasury Board database. • MAF assessments prepared by the Treasury Board Secretariat represent its ‘opinion’; summary of findings are made public. • Deputy Ministers increasingly using MAF results in their appearances before Parliamentary committees. • Assessments will be used as input to resource allocation decisions and to risk-manage departmental business with Treasury Board. Deputy Ministers are using MAF to improve their management practices

4. MAF is an information gathering and assessment system that makes informed judgements about the state of management in federal government organizations • MAF is intended to assess and evaluate management performance in key areas of management (AoMs) that impact on the overall performance of the organization. • All major federal departments and a third of the small agencies are now assessed by MAF on an annual basis – between 55 to 60 departments and agencies. • 19 areas of management and 65 lines of evidence underpin the assessment process. • Assessments are conducted by designated “Leads” within Treasury Board Secretariat that are each responsible for one Area of Management (AoM). • In September 2009, MAF launched its seventh round of assessments.

5. MAF distils the vision behind various management reforms into 10 expectations of each Deputy Minister

6. ‘Maturity’ of practice and capacity are assessed Strong • Uses outcome/result-based management • Continuous learning and improvement to achieve highest standards • Sets best practices • Derives greatest value from its management • Is a leader, proactive and sets an example to others In most areas of management, focus is on planning, growing capability, implementation and improved practice Acceptable • Robust corporate engagement • Compliant with Treasury Board policies • Effective plans and demonstrated accountability • Integration and implementation is in place Opportunity for Improvement • Aware of deficiencies and taking steps to redress • Plans/activities may be underway and accountabilities may be assigned • Corporate engagement not yet sustained • Plans are not yet fully integrated and implemented Attention Required • Little corporate attention • Gathers little information regarding its conditions • Little effort to understand vulnerability • Little done about key issues In areas where new Treasury Board policies are being phased in (e.g. audit, evaluation), focus is on progress towards full implementation

7. The MAF Assessment Process • The Secretary of the Treasury Board informs departments that they will be assessed by MAF. • Departments upload documents through the MAF Portal. • Documents are assessed by the Treasury Board Secretariat. • Preliminary reports are produced. • Reports are reviewed by departments for errors and/or misinterpretations. • Assessment reports are finalized, approved by TBS senior management. • The Secretary of the Treasury Board and respective Deputy Ministers have discussions on the results of the MAF report. • Assessments are forwarded to the Privy Council Office (PCO). • The Clerk of the Privy Council Office, in conjunction with a committee formed of Deputy Ministers, uses MAF in determination of Performance Pay and Performance Agreements with Deputy Ministers. • MAF Assessment Results are released on-line to the public.

8. Round VI overall performance trends continue to be positive… • % of Positive Ratings (Acceptable or Strong) have generally increased each year since • Round III. • There was a decline in ratings for Workforce (AoM #11) as a result of changes in the measures used. … indicating improved management performance remains a priority for departments and agencies. Note 1: LDA refers to Large Departments and Agencies.Small agencies and micro-agencies are not included in these calculations

9. Progress on Areas of Management identified as Priorities for 2008/09 (as of May 5, 2009) Areas of Management most often identified to organizations as priorities for 2008/09 % of LDAs rated as Acceptable or Strong 2007-08 2008-09 (in ranked order) Corporate Performance 64% 74% Framework Security and Business 54% 67% Continuity 63% Internal Audit 82% 82% Risk Management 95% 76% Asset Management 68% Financial Management 90% 92% and Control 73% Evaluation 86% Information 41% 46% Management 72% Quality of Analysis 80% Corporate Management 80% 82% Structure 47% Performance Reporting 79% Progress was made in the majority of the AoMs identified as priorities in the previous Round of MAF

10. Round VI assessments were positive with all Areas of Management (AoMs), except Information Management, receiving an average score of acceptable or higher… … providing evidence that the Government of Canada is well-managed. Note: LDA refers to Large Departments and Agencies as Small agencies and micro-agencies are not included in these calculations

11. An independent five-year evaluation of MAF was undertaken during Round VI In November 2008, TBS commissioned PricewaterhouseCoopers/ Interis to conduct an independent Five-year Evaluation of MAF. Objectives of the Evaluation: • Evaluate how TBS is assessing public sector management practices and performance within and across the Federal government (i.e., is MAF relevant, successful and cost-effective?); • Compare MAF as a tool for assessing public sector management practices and performance across jurisdictions; and • Identify and recommend areas for improvement to MAF as an assessment tool and its supporting reporting requirements, tools and methodologies. Key conclusion: “MAF is meeting its stated objectives.”

12. The Evaluation Recommendations and TBS’ Management Response will support the continued evolution of MAF as a performance enabler

13. Evaluation Recommendations (cont’d)

14. Moving forward with the Next Generationof MAF… • The MAF 5-Year Evaluation and the TBS Management Response will be posted on the Publiservice Website Fall-Winter 2009 • External Launch of Round VII took take place on September 29th - 30th • Round VI Assessments will be posted on PublicService Website during Fall 2009 • Implementation of MAF 5-Year Evaluation Recommendations will occur over Round VII and Round VIII (2009/10 - 2010/11) • Continue to engage stakeholders (e.g. using existing committees, newly formed working groups, and regular information sessions and bulletins) • The Second Annual Leading Management Practices Conference with departments/agencies to be held Winter 2010 • Round VII results will be released to departments/agencies April 30, 2010