	2001-2002 Annual Report
-	Title Page
-	Table of Contents
-	Letter to the Minister
-	Message from the President
-	Executive Summary of our Results
1.0	Agency Overview
2.0	Agence Performance
3.0	Management Responsibility for Performance Reporting and the Auditor General's Assessment
4.0	Financial Performance
5.0	Appendices

About the CFIA > Reporting to Parliament > Annual Report > Annual Report 2001 - 2002

Management Responsibility for Performance Reporting and the Auditor General's Assessment (12 kilobytes)

3.0 MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERFORMANCE REPORTING AND THE AUDITOR GENERAL'S ASSESSMENT

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Management's Statement of Responsibility for Performance Information

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act requires that the CFIA table in Parliament an Annual Report containing information about the Agency’s performance. The performance information in this 200-02 Annual Report has been prepared and presented using Treasury Board guidelines on performance reporting to Parliament. In accordance with the Act, the CFIA’s Annual Report includes an assessment of the fairness and reliability of the performance information prepared by the Auditor General of Canada (AG). It is not the role of the AG to assess or comment on the CFIA’s actual performance.

CFIA management is responsible for the accuracy and completeness of the information presented in the Agency’s annual reports. To fulfill this responsibility, management maintains financial and management control systems and practices that provide reasonable assurance the information is accurate and complete. CFIA officials who have provided the performance information contained in the 2001-02 Annual Report have verified its completeness and accuracy

During the past year the CFIA continued its efforts to enhance its performance information and reporting capabilities. This work is being directed by an executive-level committee. Also, as part of Treasury Board’s Comptrollership Modernization Initiative, the firm of KPMG Consulting assessed the CFIA’s external reporting capabilities and identified areas for improvement. As a follow-up to this study, we have updated the performance management plan, which will result in an enhanced Annual Report in future years.

Finally, we are working with central agencies and other regulatory departments to share information on best practices in measuring and reporting performance in regulatory programs.

We are committed to ensuring that management has the information it needs to support planning, decision making, and reporting. We anticipate that through our sustained efforts, and using the feedback contained in the assessment prepared by the Office of the Auditor General, the CFIA’s performance information for Parliament and for Canadians will continue to improve.

Richard B. Fadden (1875 bytes)
Richard B. Fadden
President

AUDITOR GENERAL OF CANADA

Coat of Arms Canada (12 kilobytes)

VÉRIFICATEUR GÉNÉRAL DU CANADA

AUDITOR GENERAL’S ASSESSMENT
of Performance Information

To the President of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency
and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food

Purpose and Scope

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency Act requires the Auditor General to assess the fairness and reliability of the performance information in the Agency’s annual report with respect to the annual and overall objectives established in its corporate business plan.

The corporate business plan and the performance information in the annual report are the responsibility of Agency’s management. My responsibility is to provide an assessment of the fairness and reliability of the performance information in the Agency’s 2001-2002 Annual Report. To do so, I assessed the information against criteria described in Annex 1 for fairness and reliability that were discussed with the Agency. I conducted my assessment in accordance with the standards for assurance engagements established by the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. The assessment included an analysis of the information and an examination on a test basis of the evidence supporting that information. I conducted my assessment to obtain an audit level of assurance for the relevant, meaningful, attributable and balanced criteria. However, I conducted my assessment work to support a review level of assurance for the accuracy criterion. I did not assess or comment on the Agency’s actual performance.

My assessment relates only to Section 2.0 of the Annual Report and not to performance information that may be contained elsewhere in the report or to information referenced by Web site hyperlinks. However, I reviewed the other information in the Annual Report for consistency with Section 2.0.

Conclusion

In my opinion, there are significant weaknesses in the reported performance information and conclude that the information on the performance of the Agency’s programs and operations does not meet my expectations for fair and reliable reporting. The human resources performance information, however, reasonably meets my expectations for fair and reliable reporting.

The Agency has continually acknowledged the need for improved reporting of performance information, including the need to enhance its performance management and reporting capacity. The Agency has taken some measures to improve its capacity and has made some improvements in this year’s report including: more information explaining the Agency’s role and mandate and its relationships to key partners; increased discussion of external risks and challenges; improved performance information on human resources and in some instances, information on planned initiatives to address concerns where results are not satisfactory. However, these steps have not resulted in what I consider to be noteworthy improvements in the performance information overall.

Summary Assessment

Performance Information on the Agency’s Programs and Operations

This is the Agency’s fifth year of reporting performance information in its Annual Report. In all key respects, the extent and significance of the weaknesses of the performance information on the Agency’s programs and operations I have identified in my previous four annual assessments continue to exist. The following are several of the key weaknesses that I have noted again in this year’s annual report:

The performance information does not provide clear and concrete expectations against which performance is measured. For example, the Agency does not indicate the intermediate targets it intends to set in order to achieve its overall compliance goals. In addition, we noted that performance information is not reported against all of the objectives in the Agency’s corporate business plan. For example, there is no reporting on the Agency’s objectives for legislative modernization and regulations or on addressing biotechnology issues.
The significance of the information reported is not adequately explained. As a result, it is difficult for the reader to assess the Agency’s actual performance. For example, there are approximately eighty instances where compliance rates are used to describe performance. In those instances, rarely are explanations provided to interpret the significance of the compliance rates less than 100%.
There is insufficient information on the methods used to gather compliance rates and other reported performance information. As a result the reader is not in a position to interpret the information provided. For example, the absence of meaningful information on sampling variability makes it difficult for the reader to understand the significance of year to year changes in compliance rates. In addition, it is difficult to determine the extent to which the results are representative of overall industry compliance.
The relative strengths and/or limitations of the reported information are not disclosed. In addition, the nature and extent of the Agency’s verification of the accuracy of the information, including the lack of an adequate quality assurance program, is not reported.
There is a lack of reporting of financial and non financial performance information, including cost and revenue information related to results of operations. For example, there is no indication of the costs to the Agency of various challenges during the year including the September 11th crisis and initiatives related to on-farm food safety.

Performance information on the Agency’s human resources management

Human resources are a key input to the Agency in achieving its results. The Agency continues to exercise the flexibilities it was granted in managing its human resources. The Annual Report is the principal vehicle through which the Agency accounts for its use of these flexibilities. The Agency has improved its capacity to produce corporate reports on important human resources trends and is therefore better able to report in the Annual Report against corporate human resources objectives, with a focus on key risk areas.

Reporting on the results of training, and greater consistency in the reporting of precedent, actual and expected results for all areas would produce a more meaningful assessment of human resources management performance.

The Agency’s lack of progress in reporting performance information

The Agency’s progress over the past year in improving the performance information in its annual report has not met my expectations. I believe that continued and sustained senior leadership attention remains necessary to ensure that the Agency implements a strategy for improved reporting of performance information.

Sheila Fraser, FCA
Auditor General of Canada

Ottawa, Canada
September 27, 2002

ANNEX I

Criteria for the Assessment of Fairness and Reliability
Office of the Auditor General

The following criteria were developed to assess the fairness and reliability of the information about the Agency’s performance with respect to the objectives in its corporate business plan. Two major concerns were addressed: Has the Agency reported on its performance with respect to its objectives? Is that information fair and reliable? Performance information with respect to objectives is fair and reliable if it enables Parliament and the public to judge how well the entity or program in question is performing against the objectives it set out to accomplish.

Relevant
The performance information reports in context, tangible and important accomplishments against objectives and costs.

Meaningful
The performance information tells a clear performance story, describing expectations and benchmarks against which performance is compared.

Attributable
The performance information demonstrates, in a reasonable fashion, why the program has made a difference.

Accurate
The performance information adequately reflects the facts, to an appropriate level of accuracy.

Balanced
A representative yet clear picture of the full range of performance is presented, which does not mislead the reader.

More information on the criteria is available on our Web site at www.oag-bvg.gc.ca.

Top of Page

Important Notices