|
Version: April 18, 2000
For more information contact:
Nola Juraitis
Treasury Board Secretariat of Canada
Planning Performance and Reporting Sector
(613) 957-7044 (fax)
Juraitis.Nola@tbs-sct.gc.ca
(telephone) (613) 957-7182
Introduction
Accountability is a relationship based on the obligation to demonstrate and take
responsibility for performance in light of agreed expectations.
This document provides some general expectations and practical steps from an
accountability perspective on results-based management. The intent is for this paper to
evolve over time with the addition of trends, lessons learned and best practices. Links to
documents, which contain more detailed information, are provided.
The federal government's approach to results-based management and accountability
consists of a three-step strategy: 1) identify key results, 2) measure performance, learn
and improve, and 3) report to Parliament and Canadians on what was achieved in a
balanced and credible way. This strategy is based on a definition of
accountability that includes a much greater emphasis on learning and improvement, rather
than on compliance or blame. Within this framework, more detailed, tailor-made approaches
can be developed.
One of the more common approaches to managing accountability expectations is to develop
a comprehensive results-based framework, often in collaboration with partners. This
approach has been used in a number of federal departmental and interdepartmental
initiatives, and in some intergovernmental agreements. These
frameworks come under a variety of names, such as accountability, performance or
management frameworks, but are similarly structured to articulate key results and outline
measurement and reporting strategies.
Expectations and Approaches
While there is no definitive recipe for effective accountability mechanisms, some
common trends and approaches have been identified, along with some practical steps that
may be used. These are outlined in the following chart, and are based on the current
federal approach to accountability and results-based management (identify key results,
measure and report). Some elements have been identified through the practical experiences
of federal departments and agencies, while others are drawn from the Social Union
Framework Agreement, work by the Auditor-General and the Treasury Board Secretariat, and
research undertaken by think tanks and external organizations.
Though this is not an exhaustive survey (nor it is intended to be a checklist), it is
hoped that the information below can provide a useful starting point and identify some
further issues for developing accountability mechanisms. These issues may be explored
within the context of specific alternative delivery initiatives.
1. Identifying Key Results
| Participants understand and agree on: |
Participants should: |
| overall objectives and key results commitments 1, 2, 3, 4 |
- define key results commitments, clearly state what they are and show links to objectives5, 6, 7, 8
- publish results, eligibility criteria and service level commitments 7
|
| strategic priorities and goals 2 |
- focus on outcomes (rather than on process, activities and outputs) 2,9
|
| roles and responsibilities 2, 6 , 12
|
- define what is expected to occur to achieve the outcomes 2, 4
- publicly recognize and explain the roles and contributions of participants 7
- identify and assess potential risks 4, 12
- respect public sector values and conflict of interest issues 2, 4, 7
|
| a balanced approach to performance expectations 2, 6, 12 |
- clearly link performance expectations to the capacities (authorities, skills, knowledge
and resources) of each participant to ensure that expectations are realistic 4, 6, 7, 10,11, 12
|
|
1. From
Controlling to Collaborating: When Governments Want to be Partners, Institute of
Public Administration of Canada (IPAC), January 1999, p.32, 43: http://www.ipac.ca/research/index.html
2. Chapter 5: Collaborative Arrangements:
Issues for the Federal Government, Report of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG),
April 1999, Section 41 to 62: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9905ce.html
3. Chapter 6: Human Resources Development Canada -
Accountability for Shared Social Programs, Report of the Auditor General of Canada,
April 1999: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9906ce.html
4. Chapter 23: Involving Others in
Governing, Accountability at Risk, Report of the Auditor General of Canada, April
1999, Sections 64 to 118: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9923ce.html
5. The Alternative Network, The
Institute of Public Administration of Canada, Volume 2.3, p. 2.
6. Chapter 24: The Canadian Adaptation and Rural
Development Fund - An Example of Involving Others in Government, Report of the Auditor
General of Canada, April 1999: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9924ce.html
7. Social Union Framework Agreement (SUFA),
February 4 1999, Section 3: http://socialunion.gc.ca/news/020499_e.html
8. The Alternative NetworkThe Alternative Network, page 3.
9. The Alternative Network, page 5.
10. Modernizing Accountability Practices in the Public
Sector (MAPPS), Principles for Effective Accountability, OAG/TBS, January 1998: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/account/OAGTBS_E.html
11. The Alternative Network, page 6.
12. Managing Accountability in Intergovernmental
Partnerships, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1999, page 18:http://www.oecd.org/puma/ |
2. Measuring Performance
| Participants understand and agree on: |
Participants should: |
| a performance measurement strategy 1, 2
|
- identify appropriate review tools (e.g. indicators, evaluations, audits, etc.) 3
- use common databases where possible and share information 4
- factor in performance information from external sources (e.g. societal indicators, for
broader context) 5
- invest necessary resources into Information Management/ Information Technology systems
and technical solutions 4
|
| a set of indicators for short, medium and
long-term 1 |
- identify indicators to measure progress on objectives and results
("indicators" means specific quantitative measurement tools and evidence as well
as more general qualitative statements that demonstrate and judge success) 6
- develop comparable indicators where possible 5
- include societal indicators where possible to add a quality of life dimension and to
track broad trends in society 5
|
| dispute or conflict resolution mechanisms for
participant 7 |
- establish an approach in the event of non-performance or if responsibilities are not
fulfilled by participants involved 7, 8
|
| an appeals/complaints system for citizens 7 |
- make eligibility criteria and service commitments publicly available 7
- establish a mechanism for citizens to appeal unfair administrative practices and
complaints about access and service 7, 8
|
| 1. Modernizing
Accountability Practices in the Public Sector(MAPPS), Modernizing
Accountability Practices in the Public Sector(MAPPS), a joint paper by the Treasury
Board of Canada Secretariat and the Office of the Auditor-General of Canada, January 1998:
http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/account/OAGTBS_E.html
2. Performance Information on Collective
Results (PICR), Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, November 1999: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/communic/prr99/collect/collecte.html
3. Chapter 24: The Canadian Adaptation and
Rural Development Fund - An Example of Involving Others in Government, Report of the
Auditor General of Canada, April 1999:
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9924ce.html
4. From Controlling to
Collaborating: When Governments Want to be Partners, Institute of Public
Administration of Canada, January 1999, page 32-33, 39: http://www.ipac.ca/research/index.html
5. Managing for Results 1999 (MFR 99):
Annual Report to Parliament by the President of the Treasury Board of Canada, Volume 1: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/govrev/mfr99_e.html
6. Chapter 5: Collaborative Arrangements:
Issues for the Federal Government, Report of the Auditor General of Canada (OAG),
April 1999, Section 5.53: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9905ce.html
7. Social Union Framework Agreement (SUFA),
February 1999: http://socialunion.gc.ca/news/020499_e.html
8. Chapter 23: Involving Others in
Governing, Accountability at Risk, Report of the Auditor General of Canada, April
1999, Sections 64 to 118: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9923ce.html
|
3) Reporting
|
Participants understand and agree on: |
Participants should: |
| provisions for balanced public reporting 1, 2, 3, 4
|
- identify the reporting strategy early in the initiative 5
- consider incorporating performance information into existing reports (e.g. Departmental
Performance Reports) rather than creating new ones 6
- include adequate access to information provisions 5
- report publicly on citizen's appeals and complaints, ensuring that confidentiality
requirements are met 2, 5
|
| reporting will be transparent, open, credible and
timely 5, 7, 8 |
- use all forms of performance evidence to support reporting 5
- provide easy public access to information 7, 5, 8
- link costs to results where possible 4
- use independent assessments (e.g. external audits, third party assessment) 2, 7, 8
|
| sharing lessons learned and best practices 2 |
- track lessons learned and good practices and make them publicly available 2
- establish mechanisms for improvements and innovations 5, 7, 8
|
| 1. FromControlling to Collaborating: When Governments Want to be Partners, Institute of
Public Administration of Canada, January 1999: http://www.ipac.ca/index.html
2. Social Union Framework Agreement (SUFA), February
1999, Section 3,6: http://socialunion.gc.ca/news/020499_e.html
3. Chapter 24: The Canadian Adaptation and
Rural Development Fund - An Example of Involving Others in Government, Report of the
Auditor General of Canada, April 1999:
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9924ce.html
4. Chapter 2: Managing for Collective
Results - Managing for Results 1999 (MFR 99): Annual Report to Parliament by the
President of the Treasury Board of Canada, Volume 1: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/govrev/mfr99_e.html
5. Modernizing
Accountability Practices in the Public Sector(MAPPS), a joint paper by the Treasury Board
of Canada Secretariat and the Office of the Auditor-General of Canada, January 1998: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/account/OAGTBS_E.html
6. Managing for Results 1999 (MFR 99): Annual
Report to Parliament by the President of the Treasury Board of Canada, Volume 2: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/report/govrev/mfr99_e.html
7. Chapter 23: Involving Others in
Governing, Accountability at Risk, Report of the Auditor General of Canada, April
1999, Sections 64 to 118: http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.nsf/html/9923ce.html
8. Managing
Accountability in Intergovernmental Partnerships, Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development, 1999, page 18: http://www.oecd.org/puma/Organization for Economic
Co-operation and Development, 1999, page 18: http://www.oecd.org/puma/ |
Reporting to Parliament
The Government direction and policy is to provide members of Parliament and the public
with relevant, accurate, consolidated, and timely information on how tax dollars are being
spent and what Canadians receive as a result. The Government of Canada is committed not
only to measuring and reporting on results, but also to establishing clear standards
against which actual performance will be reported.
Three parliamentary instruments are crucial in working towards these objectives. The
government-wide report on performance, Managing for Results, tabled each fall as
part of the "Fall Reporting Package," summarizes the key results commitments of
all federal departments and agencies. Departmental Reports on Plans and Priorities
(RPP), which are tabled in the spring along with the government's Main Estimates,
report on the rationale for initiatives and establish the specific goals against which
actual performance will be measured. Departmental Performance Reports (DPR) are
Estimates documents, which are tabled in the fall. They report on results and achievements
against the key result commitments and outcomes that were established in the
government-wide report and the departmental RPP. These reports are tabled in Parliament by
the President of the Treasury Board and may be referred to the relevant Standing Committee
of the House of Common for further review.
Additional Resources:
The Results Measurement and Accountability division of the Treasury Board Secretariat
can provide additional advice and guidance on implementing results-based management and
developing performance frameworks and accountability mechanisms. Contact names are
provided at the end of this paper, or you may contact the relevant TB Program Analyst.
Some additional references are provided below:
From Controlling to
Collaborating: When Governments Want to be Partners, Institute of Public
Administration of Canada, January 1999.
|
