For additional copies, or more information, please contact:

Communications Branch

Temporary Location - Summer 2003
15 Eddy St., 10^th Floor (unless otherwise specified)
Gatineau, QC K1A 0M5

General departmental inquiries and information on publications:
(819) 997-0055
(866) 811-0055 (toll free)
(819) 997-3123 (TTY)

© Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada 2002
Catalogue No. CH4-52/2002
ISBN: 0-662-66288-1

Table of Contents

1. Purpose
2. The Place of Partnering in the Federal Government
3. Definitions
4. Policy
   Policy Intent
1. Objectives of Partnering and Sponsorship
2. Collaboration
3. Valuation
4. Visibility
5. Choice of Collaborating Party
5. Practices
1. Management of Risk
2. Coordination and Internal Communications
3. Monitoring and Evaluation
6. Appendices
   Appendix A -Specified Purpose Account
   Appendix B - Funding Mechanisms
   Appendix C - Recognition, Government of Canada Visibility

I Purpose

To provide policy direction on partnering.

To suggest general preferred practices with respect to establishing and managing partnering relationships.

To provide a framework for guidelines specific to particular programs.

II The Place of Partnering in the Federal Government

There is a long tradition of government organizations working with each other, with other levels of government, and non-government entities, to achieve public policy objectives.

In the past decade, demand has increased to find ways to create and operate public programs without expanding government infrastructure. As the pressure to limit budgets continues, the demand has been overwhelming. Partnering and collaboration have become far more prominent features of the Canadian federal government. Corporate sponsorship is now a normal feature of senior level trade missions and international meetings, and of cultural and social programming. For example, public-private partnerships carry out major public works such as the Northumberland Strait Crossing.

Partnering is all about leveraging — both resources and expertise. It can help build social cohesion and strengthen trust between citizens and government by providing opportunities to engage citizens and encourage participation. Working with partners who have a strong interest in seeing a specific goal achieved saves time, energy and resources.

In order to “get government right,” in order to “steer” more than “row,” the federal government has embraced the Alternative Service Delivery philosophy (ASD). The federal government is trying other ways to deliver services in the public interest — including increased public-private cooperation.

During the 1990s, the terminology of partnership became prominent in Speeches from the Throne. The 1997 Deputy Ministerial Task Forces found that partnerships between government and other sectors are a key horizontal issue.¹In 1999, the Office of the Auditor General argued that collaboration had to be more effective and accountable.²Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) issued its first guidance on collaboration in 1995.³Since then, TBS has brought out a study of impediments to partnership, and two other studies are underway: questions and answers on partnership, and a study of departmental capacity to manage collaboration. Both of these are intended as foundations for further guidance to departments. In addition, two new draft Treasury Board policies on Communications and on ASD deal significantly with collaboration.

Clearly, collaboration has become a prime strategy for the achievement of federal missions and goals. So long as associated risks can be managed, collaboration offers departments a way to reach new audiences in non-traditional ways, to build the capacity of others to carry out initiatives and required programs, and to leverage expertise, relationships and resources available from other parties.

¹As stated in the summary of the Deputy Ministerial Task Forces that reported to the Clerk of the Privy Council (December 1997) on strengthening policy capacity, improving service, public service values and principles, etc. David Holdsworth, now VP for International Partnerships at CCMD, was the author of the summary.

²Note chapters 5 and 23 of the 1999 Auditor General’s Report, on accountability for collaborative arrangements.

3 “The Federal Government as ‘Partner’: Six Steps to Successful Collaboration,” Stretching the Tax Dollar Series, TBS, October 1995.

III Definitions

Background: Canadian Heritage and its Portfolio Agencies traditionally work with others outside the department to achieve program results. These outside parties have included other federal government departments and agencies; provincial/territorial and municipal government organizations; voluntary organizations; incorporated not-for-profit organizations; professional associations; the education sector; and others. Partnering and sponsorship are forms of alliance with outside entities like these, and with private-sector individual corporations and industry associations.

The terms “partnering” and “sponsorship” have other meanings in other contexts. In this framework, the following definitions apply:

Partnering or Collaborative Arrangements between two or more parties are based upon mutual interest and a clear understanding, agreement or contract that sets out the objectives and terms of the arrangement. “Collaborative arrangements” or “partnering” are more convenient and non-legal terms than “partnership” because each party operates within its own administrative framework for liability purposes. It is not a true legal partnership where actions committed by each party are binding on the other.

The parties involved in a collaborative arrangement have shared or compatible objectives, contribute resources (financial or in-kind), share in the benefits and agree to a fair allocation of risk-taking.

Within collaborative arrangements, definitions have been developed by the Treasury Board Secretariat based on the intended goals in a particular situation. These definitions have no legal basis; they are simply descriptive. These arrangements include:

• consultative or advisory arrangements that seek stakeholder input on policies, strategies, program design and implementation;
• contributory or support-sharing arrangements that increase or leverage resources or share the resource burden among several parties;
• operational or work-sharing arrangements that share delivery of services; and
• collaborative or decision-making arrangements that share power, work, costs and benefits. (“The Federal Government as ‘Partner’: Six Steps to Successful Collaboration,” Stretching the Tax Dollars Series TBS, October 1995).

See Appendix B for Funding Mechanisms.

Sponsorship is a type of a collaborative arrangement. It is a business relationship in which two entities exchange things of value. This value can be financial, in-kind, or benefits related to visibility/exposure, publicity or market reach. It also involves a display of affiliation that stops short of product endorsement.

Example 1: In corporate sponsorship, a corporation provides financial or in-kind support to a property or activity in exchange for access to the commercially exploitable opportunity linked to that activity (usually publicity and marketing benefits); and the corporation and the activity's owner visibly associate their “good name” with each other.

Example 2: When sponsorship occurs within the government context, a sponsor department (agency etc.) provides financial or in-kind support to an activity or property managed by a government entity in exchange for visibility and for the benefit of increasing its performance results via an activity for which it has not had to pay the full cost.

In sponsorship parlance, a property is a unique, commercially exploitable entity such as an event, activity, product or social marketing campaign. It can have both online and offline application.

Examples: March 21 Anti-Racism Campaign; Virtual Museum of Canada; Celebrate Canada Poster Contest; The Great Canadian Adventure Game.

Sponsorship should not be confused with donation, in which the return for financial or in-kind support is strictly limited to minimal recognition and a tax receipt, but nothing else of a substantive nature.

Sponsorship should not be confused with advertising. Advertising is the direct promotion of a company, associate or other organization through space or air time normally bought for that specific purpose. Advertising is a quantitative medium, sold and evaluated in terms of cost-per-thousand. There is no association beyond the media buy.

Sponsorship, on the other hand, is a qualitative medium; it promotes an association with a property (e.g. Canada Day Poster Challenge). Sponsorship aims to establish a longer-term relationship between sponsor and property that is measured qualitatively, accounting for such factors as level of interest and borrowed imagery (e.g. the transfer of emotion from a proerty to the sponsoring brand).

Specified Purpose Account (SPA) is an account established to receive, control and disburse funds received for a specific activity from a party external to the federal government. It does not form part of any departmental appropriation and is not treated as general revenue to the Consolidated Revenue Fund. To protect the department and the external party, a written agreement stating the objectives of the project being funded and the contributions of both parties is essential. (See Appendix A)

Depending on the partner and the relationship, the documentation can consist of either a formal agreement, a memorandum of understanding or simple exchange of letters.

IV Policy

Policy Intent

It is the policy of the Department of Canadian Heritage:

• to enhance, extend and innovate its program delivery through collaboration with appropriate sponsors, others and partners outside the department;
• to engage in partnering and sponsorship arrangements that are beneficial both to the department and to its collaborators;
• to manage sponsorship and partnering as constructive long-term relationships that build capacity within and outside the department to meet its objectives and deliver on its mandate; this includes increasing the range of collaborating parties who are committed to the same societal goals as the department;
• to harmonize its collaboration with outside parties with similar efforts throughout the department.
• to manage partnering as shared accountability relationships for overall results:
• accountability among partners (vertical);
• accountability between each partner and its own governing body (internal); and
• accountability to the public, including the communities affected (horizontal).
• to ensure that the department can demonstrate:
• the extent to which the objectives and expected results of collaborative arrangements can be achieved;
• a reasonable assessment of the federal contribution to those accomplishments, namely, to what extent has it made a difference; and
• what has been learned through the arrangement.

1. Objectives of Partnering and Sponsorship

1. Canadian Heritage will undertake sponsorship and partnering to fulfil one or more of the following objectives:
• to secure additional financial resources for an activity;
• to secure in-kind resources for an activity, particularly of a sort that the department cannot supply or purchase economically;

Example: distribution networks that reach the population of interest to the activity

• to add enhancements to an activity; Example: adding an Internet component to a print-based activity
• to support an activity in a jurisdiction related to the mandate; Example: activities directed to the education sector
• to build capacity outside of Canadian Heritage in areas of its mission; this includes encouraging active citizen participation on the part of new players such as corporations;

Example: engaging a teacher's association in a human rights activity in order to have a longer-term effect on the education sector

2. The particular objective(s) for engaging in partnering or sponsorship are to be spelled out in business plans for the Program or activity in question.
3. Sponsorship revenues received as a result of the activities of a particular program and managed by means of a Specified Purpose Account will be allocated for use by that same program.

2. Collaboration

1. Collaboration with a sponsor, partner or other ally has essential characteristics.
• The degree to which collaboration must be formalized and the manner in which this should be accomplished are matters of judgment dependent on a wide variety of factors such as the dollar figure involved and complexity of the arrangement.
• The stage at which formalization is necessary may depend on the mechanism for formalizing the relationship. For instance, Canadian Heritage must follow a particular process in order to have a contract or a contribution agreement approved.
• It is vital for Canadian Heritage Program officials to consult with and involve representatives from departmental areas of expertise (e.g. communications, contracting, financial and legal services) as soon as possible in the process, even for pilot projects, to maximize benefiting from their advice and to ensure their support at the earliest opportunity, thereby reducing future approval delays and building on precedents of which Program officials may not be aware.
2. In any partnering activity, officials will consider the following factors and should be able to address them at all times:
• the shared or compatible objectives tied to a public policy objective;
• the identity “good fit” and “good character” of each proposed sponsor or partner; (see 5. “Choice of Collaborating Party”)
• the public environment, taking account of the views, concerns and preferences of citizens and stakeholders;
• protection of the public interest and the need to provide fair and equitable service;
• the public trust and confidence in the impartiality and integrity of the Public Service;
• the business analysis of costs, risks, and benefits of the collaboration;
• anticipated results and how they will be measured; (see 8. “Monitoring and Evaluation”)
• clear roles and responsibilities within the department, its representatives and other parties;
• the vehicles or mechanisms to define the relationship (e.g. formal agreement, memorandum of understanding, co-signed letter, etc.); (see Appendix B)
• the nature of the support to be provided by the sponsor or partner; (see 3. “Valuation”)
• visibility and publicity for each party; (see 4. “Visibility”)
• compliance to Treasury Board guidelines and requirements in regards to the Official Language Act and Accessibility guidelines;
• approval or verification of all communications products and activities;
• management arrangements for the activity, including communications between or among the parties, provisions for quality assurance, and time lines;
• limits on rights and on liabilities; and considerations with respect to termination of the agreement. (Note: Program officers should seek assistance from departmental legal and contract experts)

3. Valuation

1. The values set for non-monetary inputs in sponsorship and partnering arrangements shall be fair market values. Programs will exercise diligence to avoid:
• over-compensating for in-kind support, and/or
• under-valuing the benefits offered to partners and sponsors.
2. Canadian Heritage will strive for consistency in valuation. (Note: Just as the value of a house is affected by the sales of other houses close by, sponsorship and partnering valuation takes place in a marketplace. Individual programs have a responsibility to each other, to the rest of the department and to the rest of the federal government, to protect the “market value” of government-related opportunities)
3. The sponsorship fee charged by Canadian Heritage, for a particular activity or event, should be based upon the value our property can deliver to a sponsor, and not upon our costs.
   (Note: Valuation requires specialized knowledge. At their discretion, Program officers should seek assistance in valuation from the office of the partnering specialist in the Communications Branch)

⁴“Government of Canada Communications Policy”, Draft, October 2001, p. 19.

4. Visibility

1. In any arrangement involving the Government of Canada (GoC) with collaborators, it is important for the GoC’s role to be clear (through design, identifiers, etc) to the Canadian public.⁴Publicity aspects of sponsorship and partnering arrangements will give appropriate visibility to the GoC or the department, as stipulated by the Federal Identity Program and related central agency policies; and where they exist, by program, branch and departmental guidelines. This will be stipulated in the sponsorship agreement. (see Appendix C)
2. Visibility provided to other parties in sponsorship and partnering arrangements will respect the Federal Identity Program (FIP) and related central agency policies, and will be proportional to the relative contributions of the parties. (Note: In some instances, visibility is a primary motivation for a sponsor. Care must be taken to avoid commitments to publicity that might conflict with government policy)
3. The department must not give the impression that it is endorsing a commercial product or service, so as to avoid compromising the impartiality of the Government of Canada. (Note: Program officers should seek assistance from departmental communications and legal experts)

5. Choice of Collaborating Party

1. Canadian Heritage will not seek as sponsors or partners, any corporation or other person whose mission, policies or practices would possibly embarrass the government, department or the Minister. It is recognized that this is a calculated risk.
• Program officers will use appropriate techniques and services such as EthicScan to investigate the ethical standing of potential sponsors or partners (Note: EthicScan is a business ethics and consulting clearing-house that monitors the social and environmental performance of approximately 1500 companies in Canada)
• Program officers should keep a record of the methods used to check potential sponsors or partners and of the date or time period of their information.
2. Canadian Heritage must avoid conflict of interest and the giving of unfair advantage (real or apparent) in the choice of a collaborating party.
3. There is no strict fair-dealing requirement in establishing sponsorships. That is, one need not approach all cereal companies, or all banks. However, politically, one can anticipate questions from commercial organizations and other interested parties that feel they were unfairly left out of an opportunity. Therefore, a program may wish to adopt a request for expressions of interest approach or work through a neutral third party ( e.g. industry association or not-for-profit organization) especially if the intended sponsorship occasion is a particularly unusual, attractive event.

V PRACTICES

1. Management of Risk
1. The risks in partnering and sponsorship are best controlled by careful design of the arrangement, careful choice of other parties, clear understanding of roles and responsibilities and attentive management of the relationship. Staff with partnering or sponsorship responsibilities should:
• have the skills and tools to verify that all potential allies, and especially corporate sponsors or partners, are acceptable in terms of overall government policies;
• understand their responsibility to safeguard the public interest, and in particular the essential considerations for any collaborative arrangement;
• use the Registry of Corporate Sponsorships information appropriately and provide relevant information to it;
• be properly prepared, through training and progressive experience, and have the time and resources (including travel budgets as needed), to initiate and manage sponsorships and partnerships effectively.
2. The authority of officers and managers meeting with prospective sponsors and partners should be clarified, in order to maximize their ability to make commitments on behalf of the department. This requires a commitment, at all levels, to genuine delegation of authority and to time lines for approvals.
3. Reasonableness or proportionality in managing risk: the choice of legal or financial instrument (e.g. formal agreement, memorandum of understanding, or co-signed letter) and the detailed provisions of the instrument should reflect a reasonable judgment on what may probably occur in a relationship, rather than a general worst-case scenario. That is, risk management provisions should reflect the requirements of a joint activity, the known records of the party involved, and the Canadian Heritage's history of relationships with that party.
2. Coordination and Internal Communications
1. Canadian Heritage will establish clear sign-off requirements and delegations of authority for a formal collaborative relationship.
• In addition, endorsement by representatives of Contracting, Financial Sector, Legal Services and Communications will be required.
2. A Registry of Corporate Sponsorships will be established in the Communications Branch to serve Canadian Heritage to allow Programs to check on past involvements with particular sponsors or partners, and current or planned approaches to potential sponsors or partners.
• Program officers should use the Registry of Corporate Sponsorships to be aware of other approaches to the same parties. (Note: In some cases, it will be desirable to avoid duplication. In others, it will be opportune to offer several opportunities to the same party)
• Contractors and third parties seeking sponsors or partners on behalf of Canadian Heritage Programs will not have direct access to the Registry of Corporate Sponsorships.
3. Within the Communications Branch, an office of a partnering and sponsorship “champion” will be established and at the departmental level will have a mandate to:
• provide a focus and a consistent approach for partnering and sponsorship activity within Canadian Heritage;
• provide expert assistance and advice to officers, managers and executives concerning the design and management of collaborative arrangements;
• promote training and encourage sharing of experiences;
• advise on valuation and monitor for consistency in setting values throughout Canadian Heritage; and
• implement the Registry of Corporate Sponsorships.
4. Clear objectives and plans at the outset are critically important for successful partnering. Accordingly, when a Program is planning a joint activity, representatives of the Program and of corporate services should meet to scope the plans and examine alternative financial and legal mechanisms. (Note: This is especially important when contract instruments are to be used in the context of sponsorship and partnering. It could be that the intended relationship might have to be adapted given international trade agreements and practices of fair commercial competition)
3. Monitoring and Evaluation
1. Managers are expected to monitor compliance with this policy in order to safeguard the public interest; to identify the benefits of successful sponsorships and partnering; and to detect and correct behaviour that lacks the discipline and professionalism needed to maintain positive relationships with partners and sponsors.
2. Managers should consult with Corporate Review while developing a collaborative relationship on such issues as an evaluation framework; performance measurement (including indicators); management control and accountability framework; and monitoring systems.
3. The lessons learned from evaluation, audit or review of collaborative activities will be actively shared through the Registry of Corporate Sponsorships.

APPENDIX A. SPECIFIED PURPOSE ACCOUNT (SPA)

A Specified Purpose Account (SPA) is an account established to receive, control and disburse funds received for a specific activity from a party external to the federal government. The activity must be related to the Canadian Heritage mandate. It does not form part of any departmental appropriation, but can represent a significant source of incremental funding for a program.

Depending on the partner and relationship, the governing documentation can consist of either a formal collaborative or sponsorship agreement, a memoramdum of understanding or a simple exchange of letters. The document should describe the terms of the project, the relationship between the parties, the deliverables to be achieved, and the cash flow related to the agreement, including any amounts to be deposited to a SPA.

It is important to understand the distinction between funds received for re-spending under authority of a SPA, and funds received as revenue. Revenue must be deposited to the Consolidated Revenues Fund (CRF) and is not available for re-spending without authority from Parliament (Treasury Board). An example of CRF revenue would be funds received from the licensing of intellectual property or logos. Examples of SPA revenue would include funds received from corporate sponsorships and donations.

What distinguishes funds received as “revenue” from funds received for a specific purpose?

• SPA funds are not received as a result of the imposition of any regulatory fee or charge for a service or product provided by the department; and
• SPA funds are contributed voluntarily by an external party in support of delivery of a joint project from which both the department and the contributor derive benefit, contribute resources and exercise control.

Key points to remember on SPAs:

• The department retains control of funds in a Specified Purpose Account; they are not treated as general revenue to the Consolidated Revenue Fund, and can be spent by the department under the terms of the agreement established between the participating parties. Funds received are kept within the specific coding the department has assigned for the project.
• The department has SPA authority already - no new Treasury Board authority or Financial Administration Act changes/approvals are required.
• SPA funding is not fiscal year dependent; unused funds can be carried forward to the next FY, providing the specific agreement/governing document allows for it without a valid agreement.

Excerpts from “Fisheries and Oceans Canada Program Manager’s Guide to Partnering,” November 2001.

APPENDIX B. FUNDING MECHANISMS

The following is a list of some of the various types of funding mechanisms used in collaborative arrangements. Many are designed for particular types of activities. The definitions are descriptive and have no legal authority.

• Sustaining grants can ensure the continuity of organizations whose objectives are compatible with or necessary to government objectives (e.g. the Red Cross).
• Grants are quasi-legislative and require parliamentary authority.
• Contributions contain terms and conditions specifying outcomes for which the recipient is accountable.
• Loans and loan guarantees.
• Cost-sharing agreements allow the federal government to share in financing specified outcomes without participating in any other way (e.g. the Canada Assistance Plan).
• Cooperative agreements provide non-financial input by government into undertakings of mutual benefit to the federal government and another incorporated body without involving the government in day-to-day operations.
• A corporate sponsorship agreement covers a specific performance of work. The corporation provides resources (e.g. money, staff, products or services) and receives a benefit (e.g. specific image and marketing opportunities). This is a pragmatic exchange, not a charitable donation.
• Joint project agreements commit the federal government to share financing specified outcomes and to participate in other ways such as sharing non-monetary resources, and hiring personnel.
• A contract spells out one party’s expectations of another and the consideration that will be exchanged if the expectations are met. Besides the standard contracts to procure goods or services from commercial suppliers, federal departments can sign alliance contracts with commercial and non-profit interests.

(See “The Federal Government as ‘Partner’: Six Steps to Successful Collaboration,” Stretching the Tax Dollar Series, TBS, October 1995.)

APPENDIX C. RECOGNITION, GOVERNMENT OF CANADA VISIBILITY

Excerpts from the “Government of Canada Communications Policy,” Collaborative arrangements, section 24, Draft October 2001.

Key points:

1. Joint activities or initiatives involving another government, a company, an organization, a group or an individual must be communicated in a manner that is fair and equitable to all parties.
2. When informing the public or publishing information about partnering activities institutions must ensure that the contributions of all participants are fairly acknowledged and attributed. Corporate names and logos without promotional tag lines are appropriate identifiers for use in acknowledging the contributions of participants.
3. To ensure fair acknowledgement of contributors, the simple display of a corporate name or logo in communication materials does not constitute advertising.
4. Institutions must encourage all parties involved to acknowledge the GoC’s contribution in their own communications with the public.
5. In its communications with the public, whether on its Web sites or in any of its publications, a GoC institution must not advertise the commercial products or services of private sector participants. Information issued by an institution about a collaborative arrangement and its participants must be objective and factual, not promotional.

Recognition / Acknowledgements in Collaborative Arrangements

The level of visibility given to the GoC may vary according to the nature of the partnering. In all instances, the main question should be how does this look from the citizen’s perspective? Does, or (more importantly) should the citizen see the GoC in action when viewing this communications product?

If the GoC is playing a lead role or is principally responsible in the citizen’s eyes for the quality of the information, then the GoC’s identity should be highly visible. If the GoC is a minor partner, then its presence and visibility may be reduced, but not eliminated.

In order to determine visibility requirements in collaborative arrangements it is necessary to define the nature of the partnering arrangement. We need to look at the contribution and relationship of the GoC and others in the areas of funding, content, governance, liability, coordination, expertise and resources-in-kind. The GoC, for example, may be a major contributor in terms of funding, and for the most part bear the responsibility in respect to liability, however we need to recognize and weigh the major contribution of partners in terms of content as well as areas of shared contribution. Agreements governing collaborative arrangements establish the communication roles and responsibilities of the parties involved (See following examples).

Acknowledgement for Grants and Contributions

Acknowledgement of the Department of Canadian Heritage support, through grants, contributions and sponsorships should resemble the following examples. For more specific Treasury Board Guidelines and regulations, please consult the soon to be published document, Treasury Board Secretariat -Collaborative Arrangements Matrix.

Publications

Websites

If possible, the phrase “the Department of Canadian Heritage” should be hyperlinked to the Department of Canadian Heritage website and the “Canada” wordmark should be hyperlinked to the Canada Site.

Signs and banners used in conferences and public events, produced by event organiser

Posters or large banners

In this instance, the “Canada” wordmark must be used; however, it is important to ensure that the use of the “Canada” wordmark does not appear to be promoting the item as a Government of Canada product or endorsing a private company. Whenever possible, the “Canada” wordmark should appear with a funding acknowledgment phrase.

Audio/Visual products (e.g. film, video, etc.)

The “Canada” wordmark must appear in the production credits, usually at the end of the production. The “Canada” wordmark must appear onscreen for a minimum of 2.5 seconds, if the Government of Canada is the only funding organisation. In the event that there are other funding organisations, the “Canada” wordmark must figure prominently amongst the list of contributors in the production credits.

Corporate Sponsorship of a Canadian Heritage “property”

Like the acknowledgement for grants and contributions, corporate sponsorship of a Canadian Heritage “property” should resemble the following example. For more specific Treasury Board Guidelines and regulations, please consult the soon to be published document, “Treasury Board Secretariat - Collaborative Arrangements Matrix.”

It is important to distinguish between the Government of Canada and its corporate sponsors. The most commonly used technique, to achieve this distinction, is to place the departmental corporate signature and the “Canada” wordmark at the bottom of the text, below a line. In no instances should text, logos or images ever appear between the departmental signature and the “Canada” wordmark.

	Date modified: 2002-07-08	Important Notices