THE PEOPLE COMPONENT OF THE 
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK
(PCMAF)

Prepared by Human Resources Planning, Accountability and Diversity Branch, Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada 
in collaboration with the DM Sub-Committee on Accountability, Performance Management and Reporting.

 
THE PCMAF IMPLEMENTATION
GUIDE
July 2005

TABLE OF CONTENTS

IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE TO THE PEOPLE COMPONENT OF THE 
MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY FRAMEWORK 
(PCMAF IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE)

1.	The People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF)
2.	An Introduction to the People Component of Management Accountability Framework 
3.	Indicators—People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF)
4.	Central Agency Accountability and Indicators
5.	An Integrated Approach to Reporting and Annual Report to Parliament
6.	The Management Accountability Framework

Tab 1

The People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF)

Tab 2

An Introduction to the
People Component Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF)

An Introduction
to the
People Component Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF)

The Management Accountability Framework (MAF) of the Government of Canada states that the main accountability in the People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF) is that 
“Departments and agencies have the people, work environment and focus on building capacity and leadership to assure success and a confident future for the Public Service of Canada.”
The PCMAF is a single-page statement that sets out expectations of good people management, defined by seven workforce and workplace outcomes.
A workplace that is:	A workforce that is:	
Fair	Productive	
Enabling	Principled	
Healthy and safe	Sustainable	
	Adaptable	

The PCMAF defines these outcomes and outlines key elements that are critical to achieving them. Elements presented include the key success factors; supporting infrastructure of policies, instruments and information; accountabilities of key stakeholders and the reporting and accountability mechanisms. It has been developed within the overall vision of the MAF and there are strong links with other components, especially Learning, Innovation and Change Management as well as Values and Ethics. 
The integration of human resources planning with business planning will also provide a critical foundation for identifying needs and key actions that will contribute to the outcomes. Similarly, the rigorous application of the Performance Management Program, with attendant commitments to human resources management, will be important factors in success.
In order to assess progress, a set of suggested indicators has been developed for each of the seven outcomes. These indicators are based on information from existing administrative data sources or from questions derived from the Public Service Employee Survey that will be updated on a regular basis. It is recognized that the indicators have limitations. There will be a need to refine, update and develop new indicators over time as new data sources become available. Departments are encouraged to 
(i)	use their own sources of information to supplement the indicators;  
(ii)	assess what actions and practices contribute to success or need to be improved;    
(iii)	share their experiences with one another. 
Depending on the circumstances, departments and agencies will place different emphasis on different indicators and outcomes. Performance against the outcomes may also provide a context for establishing the human resources management priorities of each department. 
Most importantly, it needs to be understood that the indicators point to success in achieving the outcome, but should not be confused with the outcome itself. The indicators need to be analyzed in light of the context or particular situation of each department or agency and of trends over time as well as external factors that may affect the outcomes. They will need to be assessed also in the context of the processes and practices of each department and the capacity that exists to affect key outcomes. This assessment will assist senior managers to determine what is working well and where improvements should be made. 
The PCMAF assessment using the outcomes and related context and trends could shape the human resources component of the bilateral MAF dialogue between the Treasury Board Portfolio and deputy heads of departments and agencies. In addition, the PCMAF can serve as a basis for the new Annual Report on Human Resources Management to be tabled in Parliament under the Public Service Modernization Act (PSMA). 
Central agencies also have accountabilities with respect to the outcomes defined in the PCMAF, as well as other responsibilities as the employer. These roles include responsibilities to lead policy reform, develop instruments that facilitate the achievement of outcomes by the Public Service as a whole, develop a harmonized and efficient reporting process, and provide effective and timely support to departments and agencies. Recommended indicators of how central agencies provide this supporting infrastructure and indicators of their contribution to the PCMAF outcomes have also been developed.
The PCMAF is a work in progress that establishes a solid basis for the improvement of human resources management in the Public Service. Over time, we will build a sound and practical accountability regime of good human resources management that achieves the Government’s goals of a modern and accountable public service that provides quality service to Canadians. 
For additional information contact:
Director, Accountability and Results Directorate 
HR Planning, Accountability and Diversity Branch
PSHRMAC
E-mail: DirectorPCMAF-DirecteurCCRGP@hrma-agrh.gc.ca

Tab 3

Indicators—People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF) 

Indicators 	
The People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF)	
	
July 2005	

The Management Accountability Framework (MAF) sets expectations of good management. The People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF) sets out the expectations for good people management and accountability for the seven major human resources outcomes. The seven outcomes defined in the PCMAF are:  under Workplace: fair, enabling, healthy and safe and under Workforce:  productive, principled, sustainable and adaptable. 
This document contains suggested indicators for each outcome of the PCMAF. These indicators are designed to help deputy heads, central agencies, managers and human resources professionals assess the achievement of the desired human resources management outcomes and meet the goals of an effective workforce in a successful workplace.
Departments and agencies are encouraged to supplement their analysis through the use and analysis of other data, which may be available to them, collected via internal surveys and/or administrative processes. They may wish to do further analysis and refine assessments and identify how improved internal procedures and best practices can contribute to improved outcomes.
Development of the indicators has been guided by the need to minimize new or additional reporting requirements, and this has sometimes led to using an indicator which may not be the ideal choice.  	Over time, the indicators will be refined as new sources of information are developed and the reliance on indicators which are based on the Public Service Employee Survey is reduced.
The PCMAF sets the goals for management of human resources in the Public Service, and the indicators in turn help to identify strengths and opportunities for improvement. Assessing human resources management outcomes through analysis of indicators is only the first step. The early diagnosis must be complemented by contextual information. This will involve a review of trends, practices and capacities in both departments and central agencies.
It is important to note that comparisons between an organization and the Public Service at large and comparisons within an organization over time are more relevant than the level of an indicator in isolation. Most outcomes have several indicators and therefore all indicators related to an outcome should be given consideration.
This document is a work in progress. Many aspects will be refined over time and will require concerted effort to realize the goal of achieving excellence in human resources management in order to offer better services to Canadians. 	

I.  A Fair Workplace

DRAFT

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

The workplace exhibits fair employment and workplace practices and effective labour relations.

(1) Fair employment and workplace practices

•	Workplace fairness can be assessed through employee perceptions/attitudes on staffing and classification processes and workload.
	
a.	% agreeing that staffing is done fairly

b.	% employees who agree that their workload is acceptable 
	
c.	% who believe workload is distributed fairly 

d.	% employees who feel they can claim compensation for overtime worked 

e.	% satisfied with classification 

f.	% of founded complaints under the various recourse mechanisms in respect of appointments made	
PSES-Q65

PSES-Q13

PSES-Q28

PSES-Q7

PSES-Q5

PSC

(2)  Effective labour relations

•	Employee attitudes will be used to assess awareness and effectiveness of informal conflict processes.

•	Attitudes will also be used to assess the maturity of the labour-management relationship. 

•	Monitoring staff relations and harassment actions (such as harassment complaints and upheld grievances).
	
a.	% employees satisfied with the way informal complaints are resolved 

b.	Senior management engages in meaningful consultation with my union

c.	My immediate supervisor respects my collective agreement

d.	Harassment complaints per capita

e.	Founded harassment complaints per capita

f.	Number of grievances upheld at the adjudication level per capita
	
PSES-Q37

PSES-Q92

PSES-Q90

Values and 
Ethics 
(PSHRMAC)

Values and Ethics (PSHRMAC)

Labour Relations  (TBS)

II.  An Enabling Workplace

DRAFT

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

The workplace exhibits clear direction, collaboration, respect and support for employees’ linguistic rights, diversity and personal circumstances in order to enable them to fulfill their mandate.

(3)  Exhibits clear direction

•	Employees need to understand what is their organization’s mandate, what is expected of them and how they will be evaluated.

a.	% employees understanding organization’s mandate

b.	% employees who know what is expected of them 

c.	% employees who know how they will be assessed

d.	% employees feel workplace provides tools to do their job 	

PSES-Q76

PSES-Q24

PSES-Q26

PSES-Q1	

(4)  Exhibits collaboration

•	Collaboration embodies the ideas of co-operation and teamwork.

•	Communication, the sharing of information and ideas vertically and horizontally enables employees to make a valuable contribution.

a.	% employees who feel there is co-operation and teamwork 

b.	% employees who feel they have good ongoing communication with others in their organization	

PSES-Q34

PSES-Q77	

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

(5)  Respect and support for employees’ linguistic rights

•	A core value of the Public Service is the right of employees to use the official language of their choice.

•	 Monitoring complaints provides a measure of trends.
	
a.	% employees satisfied with their use of official languages as language of work (Index)

b.	Assessment of Commissioner of Official Languages and/or assessment from the Official Languages Branch, PSHRMAC 

c.	Tools are available in the official language of choice.

d.	% of employees who meet bilingual requirements.

e.	% of Managers who meet bilingual requirements.	
PSES-Q3, Q23, Q38

Commissioner of Official Languages and PSHRMAC

PSES-Q2

PSHRMAC

PHSRMAC	

(6)  Respect and support for diversity

•	A key element of an enabling workplace is that employees feel they are accepted.	
a.	% employees agreeing they would be accepted in work unit regardless of race, colour, gender or disability

b.	% employees experiencing discrimination on the job
		
PSES-Q39

PSES ’02-Q58	

(7)  Respect and support for personal circumstances

•	There is support for employees to maintain a work-life balance.
	
a.	% employees satisfied they can balance work and personal life
b.	% employees whose supervisor is supportive of alternative work arrangements	
PSES-Q14

PSES-Q29	

II. An Enabling Workplace

III.  A Healthy and Safe Workplace

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

The workplace is a healthy and safe physical and psychological environment.

(8) Healthy and safe physical and psychological environment

•	The psychological dimension of the workplace is assessed through an index that combines measures of social support, decisional latitude and recognition.

•	Physical safety is not only a management issue but also a legal responsibility and is measured through standard measures as developed for the Canada Labour Code.	
a.	Business Culture Health Index
i.	% employees who can complete their assigned workload during regular working hours 
ii.	% employees who can balance personal, family and work needs in their current job 
iii.	% employees who have a say in the decisions and actions that have an impact on their work 
iv.	% employees who get adequate recognition from their immediate supervisor when they do a good job 
b.	Rate of Occupational Health Safety complaints found to be valid 

c.	Rate of Occupational Health Safety-related work refusals found to be valid

d.	% workdays lost of all workdays due to workplace injuries among staff

e.	% employees on long-term leave for health reasons (including disability)

f.	Absenteeism rate (% FTE sick leave of total FTE per time period)

g.	% of employees who report they have been subject to harassment in the last two years	

PSES-Q13

PSES-Q14

PSES ’02-Q18

PSES ’02-Q21

Departmental Reports

Departmental Reports

Departmental Reports

PSHRMAC

PSHRMAC

PSHRMAC

IV.  A Productive Workforce

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

A committed workforce with the size, mix of skills and diversity of backgrounds to competently perform its duties.

(9)  Committed workforce

•	A key factor in meeting business goals and service delivery objectives is a committed workforce.	

a.	Job satisfaction
i.	% employees satisfied with their career 
ii.	% employees satisfied with their promotional opportunities
iii.	% employees who believe their organization is a good place to work 
b.	Employee commitment
i.	% employees proud of the work carried out in their work unit
ii.	% employees committed to making their organization successful

PSES-Q89
PSES-Q46

PSES-Q88

PSES-Q33

PSES-02-Q86	

(10)  Size, mix of skills, diversity of backgrounds

•	To be effective, the workforce needs to be of the right size and to have the right mix of skills to deliver its mandate.
•	The workforce should be diverse in experience and backgrounds because different points of view and experiences make for a stronger workplace.	

a.	In my work unit, I believe that we hire people who can do the job

It is recognized this indicator is not adequate by itself.  Departments may wish to supplement with their own information.  Further work will be undertaken to develop more indicators.	

PSES-Q64 	

V. A Principled Workforce

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

The workforce is reflective of Canada’s population, is respectful of Canada’s official languages and performs its duties guided by the values and ethics of the Public Service.

(11)  Reflective of Canada

•	The Public Service of Canada should be reflective of Canada’s population.

a)       i) % of employees who declare French as     )       	  their first official language
ii) % of employees who declare English as their first official language

b)      Employment Equity group participation rates compared to workforce availability

c)      % of new recruits who are members of visible minority groups

PSHRMAC

PSHRMAC

PSC	

(12)  Respectful of Canada’s official languages

•	Providing services to Canadians in the official language of their choice is a key requirement. 

•	Internally, employees need to be satisfied with their use of their choice of official language.
	
a)	Assessments from the Commissioner of Official Languages and/or assessment of the Official Languages Branch, PSHRMAC

b)	% employees in bilingual positions who meet the language requirement

c)	Training availability in both official languages	
Commissioner of Official Languages and PSHRMAC

PSHRMAC

PSES-Q17	

(13)  Guided by values and ethics 

•	An environment which promotes and supports values and ethics is essential so that employees can feel trust in management integrity and honesty, confidence that all employees behave in accordance with Public Service values, free to speak truth to power and report wrongdoing without fear of reprisal and that they are treated with respect.

a.	% employees who know where to go for help in resolving an ethical dilemma or conflict between values in the workplace 

b.	Overall, my organization treats me with respect

It is recognized that many other indicators support the values and ethics outcomes and that over time additional indicators and data sources will be developed. Departments may wish to supplement with their own information.	

PSES-Q82

PSES-Q87	

VI.  A Sustainable Workforce

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

A workforce that is renewable and affordable over time.

(14)  Renewable

•	Capacity of the organization to ensure a balanced renewal of the workforce.	

a.	Ratio of indeterminate appointments to separations

b.	External hires as % of total hires (term and indeterminate appointments)

c.	Age profile and experience profile at key levels

d.	Degree to which HR planning and business planning are integrated	

PSC

PSC

PSHRMAC

PSHRMAC/
Departments and agencies

(15)  Affordable

•	The objective is to determine if the cost of the workforce is well balanced with respect to other costs and expenditures, reflecting the skills sought.

Department/agency reports indicating the extent to which the expected cost of the workforce fits in the expected department/agency budget envelope over time. This could include examining salary costs or total compensation compared to overall departmental spending.

RPP/DPR/
EMIS	

VII. An Adaptable Workforce

PCMAF Outcome	Indicators	Data Source	

A workforce that is versatile, innovative and engages in continuous learning.

(16)  Versatile

•	The main concept is the capacity of an organization to adapt to change.
•	 At the same time, concepts of mobility and the extent to which employees are able to be multi-skilled are other dimensions of “versatility.”
	
a.	Interdepartmental mobility—ratio of movements within and between departments or agencies 

b.	% of employees agreeing they have opportunity to develop and apply skills needed to advance their career 

c.	% of employees who perceive high turnover is a problem in their organization	
PSHRMAC and
PSC

PSES–Q43

PSES–Q40	

(17)  Innovative and engages in continuous learning

•	Can the organization respond to changing circumstances with new solutions?

•	The workforce maintains its productivity, sustainability and adaptability through continuous learning and training.	

a.	% employees who feel they are encouraged to be innovative/creative

b.	My work unit periodically takes time out to rethink the way it does business

c.	% employees satisfied they get the training they need to do the job 

d.	% employees satisfied with developmental opportunities

e.	% employees who believe they get on-the-job coaching to help improve the way they do their work

f.	% spent per employee on training

g.	Availability of continuous learning events for all employees	

PSES-Q16

PSES-Q36

PSES-Q41

PSES-Q45

PSES-Q42

PSHRMAC

PSHRMAC/
depts and agencies	

Tab 4

Central Agency Accountability and Indicators 

Central Agency Accountability and Indicators	
People Component of the Management Accountability Framework (PCMAF)	
	
July 2005	

Central Agency Accountability and Indicators
The Management Accountability Framework (MAF) sets expectations of good management. The People Component of the MAF (PCMAF) elaborates on the expectations and accountability for human resources management in the Public Service. They provide a basis to examine, analyze and assess human resources outcomes and achievements in departments and agencies as well as across the Public Service.
Central agencies have important roles in providing the overall framework and the enabling environment for departments and agencies. It is key that the accountabilities and indicators should be just as clearly described for central agencies as they are for departments and agencies. The purpose of this document is to outline these accountabilities and indicators and to propose an approach to measure progress and effectiveness.
The Public Service Commission of Canada (PSC) is an independent agency reporting to Parliament, which is responsible for the administration of the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA). Although the PSC is an independent agency and not a central agency, it is also an active participant in developing a broad framework for human resources management and ensuring the health of the federal human resources system.
Central Agency Accountability
The human resources accountabilities of central agencies are of three types: 
1.	To develop the appropriate principles, policies, and instruments required by departments and agencies to achieve the PCMAF outcomes;
2.	To create an enabling environment with appropriate tools and specific programs and initiatives to achieve outcomes across the Public Service; and
3.	To exercise an oversight and monitoring role which includes the capacity to intervene and take corrective action where appropriate.
Possible Indicators for Central Agencies
There are two complementary, but different, approaches that could be used to assess how central agencies meet these accountabilities. 
The first approach corresponds to the first accountability described above: have central agencies carried out the enabling functions appropriately? Some parts of this assessment can relatively easily be made by describing whether the various policies and instruments are in place and regularly updated as needed. However, much of this accountability should describe how departments and agencies perceive the role of central agencies with respect to HR management: have they, in fact, provided the tools that appear useful to those for whom they are intended? This, we believe, requires a third party assessment—at least partly carried out through in-depth interviews of a representative sample of deputy heads and HR specialists.
Annex A identifies what we view as the main expected contributions of central agencies to creating the supporting infrastructure, which assist departments and agencies in their human resources management (e.g. the policies, tools, various supports and guidance). The elements of the supporting infrastructure are described in the PCMAF document (TAB 1). Annex A also identifies which central agency has responsibility for each specific element and sets out, in a generic manner, the indicators that could be reviewed in order to determine how these institutions are meeting their responsibilities. As part of this analysis, it will be important also to examine how the various actions and policies of specific institutions relate to or interact with one another’s responsibilities. It would also be necessary to examine the cost implications and the degree to which sources of funding are available to support transition measures or for ongoing costs of implementing new policies.
The second type of accountability described above is somewhat different from the first. While in the first the emphasis was on having the right policies and tools in place, the second type of accountability in effect asks the following question: even though all the tools and policies are in place, does the human resources system produce system-wide results that are in line with the principles of good human resources management embodied in the PCMAF? For this type of analysis, we believe very much that the same indicators and approaches we recommend for individual departments and agencies should of course now applied to the Public Service as a whole. In effect, we recommend that the PCMAF indicators should not only be analyzed department by department and agency by agency but also from the perspective of the Public Service as a whole, looking for positive and negative trends as well as for danger signals. 
In carrying out this system-wide analysis, one needs to take account of the overall environment that might affect human resources management in the Public Service. Specific trends or issues may be identified which affect a group of departments that require support or corrective action by the central agencies. Identification of trends across the Public Service may indicate areas where a set of policies or directives need to be reviewed or where new approaches need to be developed. They may also signal that specific corrective actions or close monitoring might be required. 
In essence there is a collective responsibility of central agencies for the health of the human resources management system and hence for the achievement of specific outcomes set out in the PCMAF. It is important, therefore, that the indicators of PCMAF outcomes (TAB 3) be reviewed from the perspective of determining whether there are positive trends for PCMAF outcomes overall and to identify whether different actions or policy adaptation are needed. This will help to assess the contribution of central agencies to the achievement of the desired PCMAF and human resources management outcomes and to creating an effective workforce in a successful workplace across the Public Service. Over time, the indicators will be refined as new sources of information are developed and the reliance on indicators from the Public Service Employee Survey is reduced.

The initial assessment of the adequacy of the supporting infrastructure and the progress in achieving outcomes must be complemented by contextual information, informed by an understanding of trends over time and balanced against information from other indicators and sources of information. 
Finally, the third type of accountability of central agencies relates to intervening in specific situations where warranted. The accountability regime for this role is, by definition, case-and context-specific and will need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis.
Assessment, Review and Feedback
It is important that central agencies be accountable for their role in achieving the outcomes identified in the PCMAF, and these agencies should be expected to assess their effectiveness. There are a number of possible mechanisms by which central agencies may wish to assess themselves and their performance in respect of the PCMAF, and some suggested models are listed below:
a)	Regular internal review by each institution of how they contribute to PCMAF outcomes and provide the supporting infrastructure, in the same way that departments and agencies will do for themselves; 
b)	Regular structured review by a third party, possibly involving selected interviews with senior managers of departments and agencies;
c)	Analysis of outcomes, trends and context against PCMAF indicators;
d)	Selected and targeted surveys of specific groups regarding the policies, tools and guidance provided by central agencies.
The heads of central agencies, such as the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada, and the Canada School of Public Service, as well as the President of the Public Service Commission of Canada, may also wish to consider how they may work together in developing and sharing these assessments, given the many interdependencies between their respective institutions. 

Supporting Infrastructure
 Annex A
Policy	Responsible Institution	Indicators of Effective Policy	

Health and Safety	
TBS	

•	Policy has been developed in consultation with departments, agencies and bargaining agents

•	Policy is clearly articulated and is consistent with other policies and instruments

•	Guidelines and directives provide clear expectations on implementation and outcomes

•	Appropriate tools and mechanisms are established to implement and apply consistently

•	Resources are available to support major transitions or implementation schedules

•	Monitoring, reporting, and auditing processes are appropriate

•	Central agencies have the capacity to provide advice and identify or implement corrective actions

•	Learning needs are identified and supported

•	Best practices are researched and shared

HR Planning and Accountability	

PSHRMAC		

Labour Relations	
TBS		

Leadership Development	
PSHRMAC/CSPS		

Employment Equity and Diversity	

PSHRMAC/PSC		

Learning	
PSHRMAC/CSPS		

Informal Conflict Management Systems	

PSHRMAC		

Performance Management	
PSHRMAC/TBS		

Official Languages	
PSHRMAC/CSPS/PSC		

Organization Design and Classification	
PSHRMAC		

Compensation	
TBS		

Staffing (appointments, revocation, political activities, recourse and audit)	

PSC		

Resourcing 	
PSHRMAC/PSC		

Values and Ethics	
PSHRMAC		

Workplace Well-being	
PSHRMAC		

Supporting Infrastructure
Annex A
Common Tools	Responsible Institution	Indicators	

Public Service Employee Surveys	
PSHRMAC	
Regular conduct of Public Service surveys in support of human resources management and PCMAF

Human Resources Information Management	
PSHRMAC/TBS	
Information management systems, based on shared business processes and models with timely, accurate information

Current and Future Needs 	
PSHRMAC	
Informed analysis of important trends and needs in support of departments and functional communities

Reports and Reporting	
PSHRMAC leads integrated approach with other TB Portfolio members and PSC
	
Reporting processes which are consolidated and based, wherever possible, on available information sources (e-reporting) and timed to coincide with broader reporting and planning cycles of government	

Tab 5

An Integrated Approach to Reporting and Annual Report to Parliament 

An Integrated Approach to Reporting and
Annual Report to Parliament	

Under the legislated reporting requirements for the assessment of human resources management across the Public Service, departments and agencies are required to collect and submit data to central agencies for a variety of reports aimed at assessing and intervening on business and human resources management. As well as legislated requirements, there are numerous non-legislated requirements for reporting to support policy monitoring such as for classification, labour relations, harassment and internal disclosure, learning etc. There are also requirements to report to other departments and agencies, such as Canadian Heritage for its Annual Report on the Operation of The Canadian Act 2003–04 and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada for its report on Part II of the Canada Labour Code. Finally, departments and agencies must submit annually their own report on plans and priorities (RPP) and departmental performance report (DPR) to Parliament. 
Departments and agencies have expressed concern about the burden of reporting on human resources management. A new and integrated approach to reporting is much needed.
Implementation of an Integrated Approach to Reporting 	

In the longer–term, the development of integrated reporting will help bring about an effective human resources management information system. The objective is to begin planning now for an integrated system that will capture administrative data for all departments, including reporting requirements necessary to support the PCMAF, as well as the needs of the various policy centres. This information system will also need to be fully integrated with the Expenditure Management Information System (EMIS) being developed by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat. Ultimately, the need to report information would be eliminated as the electronic information management systems would capture the information automatically. 
In the interim, the intention is to reduce the reporting burden on departments and agencies through streamlining data collection, automating and renovating existing systems, and eliminating duplication. Some efforts have already been made and data from six different systems have been integrated into a common source of information and data, held in the Public Service Human Resources Management Agency of Canada (PSHRMAC) and available to central agencies and departments alike. Priority will be given to automating data capture for information needed to support current policy centre requirements and to support data needed for the PCMAF indicators. This will be a co-ordinated effort by the Treasury Board Portfolio, working also in collaboration with the Public Service Commission of Canada.
These steps will continue and be facilitated by other initiatives to rationalize human resources systems and to establish the Common Administrative Shared Systems (CASS). 
It will also be important to develop more co-ordinated mechanisms to call for information and reports to support legislated and policy monitoring requirements. These can include the following:
•	using automated data sources where available;
•	consolidating call letters to minimize demands and reduce duplication;
•	linking the cycle of requests for reporting with the preparation of RPPs and DPRs and the annual cycle of HR and business planning;
•	consolidating and aligning, where possible, preparation of annual reports to Parliament; and 
•	harmonizing collection, where possible, among central agencies, such as through joint call letters.
Annual Report to Parliament on Human Resources Management 	

The Public Service Modernization Act (PSMA) requires the President of the Treasury Board to table an annual report to Parliament on the administration of the government’s human resources management responsibilities. The first annual report, covering 2005–06, is due during the subsequent fiscal year. It will provide parliamentarians and Canadians with information and analysis on the administration of human resources management across the Public Service.
PSHRMAC will lead the consultation and development of the first annual report to Parliament using the seven outcomes of the PCMAF and include one or two themes, such as integrating human resources and business planning and informal conflict management systems. It is intended that the employment equity report will be incorporated into this new annual report. In addition, where appropriate, consideration will be given to incorporating or referencing in the report other legislated or non-legislated reports. 
The major sources of data for the report will be the Public Service Employment Survey (PSES) and presently available government-wide data. This will reduce the administrative and reporting burden on departments and agencies. It will require minimal, if any, additional human resources information from departments and agencies and move toward the development of a more integrated approach to reporting, being developed concurrently, that will minimize the number of times departments and agencies are asked for data. It is planned that improvements to future reports will be made through lessons learned and expanded automated information collection systems. 

Tab 6
The Management Accountability Framework

This publication is available via the Treasury Board Secretariat Web Site at the following address: http://publiservice.tbs-sct.gc.ca/maf-crg/maf-crg_e.asp