2014-2015 Departmental Performance Report
Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
Original signed by
The Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, P.C., Q.C., M.P.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
Suzanne Legault
Information Commissioner of Canada
ISSN 2368-2957
Table of Contents
- Message from the Commissioner
- Section I: Organizational Expenditure Overview
- Section II: Analysis of Program by Strategic Outcome
- Section III: Supplementary Information
- Section IV: Organizational Contact Information
- Appendix: Definitions
- Endnotes
Message from the Commissioner
The year 2014–2015 was a particularly challenging one for my office. We made significant inroads on some files and as an organization we continued to introduce measures to ensure we are working as effectively as possible. However, as was noted in our 2013–2014 Departmental Performance Report, the financial constraints on my office have been hindering our efforts to deliver on our mandate to protect information rights under the Access to Information Act. Our requests for additional resources have been so far refused. Consequently, our inventory grew over the year 2014–2015, thereby increasing the risk that complaints will not be investigated in a timely manner. This ultimately results in an erosion of access rights.
As mentioned above, we have made significant progress on some fronts, particularly through our interventions before the federal courts. These courts decisions will bring much needed clarity to the use of time extensions and of fees for electronic records, allowing us to move forward on a number of files. We have also tabled a special report in Parliament on modernizing the Access to Information Act. Unfortunately, our call for modernization has been left unanswered.
At a corporate level, we have continued to make difficult decisions to keep within appropriations and deliver on our mandate and maintain excellence in governance. My team has shown great resolve over the past year as it continued to do more with fewer resources.
We are a lean and efficient office and rely on a dedicated and high-performing group of employees. Regardless of the financial constraints imposed on my office, I know that, together, we will continue to strive for excellence and to protect Canadians’ quasi-constitutional right of access to government information.
Section I: Organizational Expenditure Overview
Organizational Profile
Commissioner: Suzanne Legault
Enabling Instrument: Access to Information Act (R.S.C., 1985, C-1)Footnote 1
Year Established: 1983
Organizational Context
Raison d’être
The Information Commissioner of Canada reports directly to the House of Commons and Senate. The Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada ensures that the rights conferred by the Access to Information Act are respected, which ultimately enhances transparency and accountability across the federal government.Footnote 2
Responsibilities
The Office of the Information Commission of Canada (OIC) is an independent public body created in 1983 under the Access to Information Act. The OIC’s primary responsibility is to conduct efficient, fair and confidential investigations into complaints about federal institutions’ handling of access to information requests. The OIC strives to maximize compliance with the Act while fostering disclosure of public sector information using the full range of tools, activities and powers at the Commissioner’s disposal.
The OIC primarily uses mediation and persuasion to resolve complaints. In doing so, the OIC gives complainants, heads of institutions and all third parties affected by complaints a reasonable opportunity to make representations. The OIC encourages institutions to disclose information as a matter of course and to respect Canadians’ rights to request and receive information, in the name of transparency and accountability. The OIC brings cases to the Federal Court to ensure that the Act is properly applied and interpreted, with a view to maximizing disclosure of information.
The OIC also supports the Information Commissioner in her advisory role to Parliament and parliamentary committees on all matters pertaining to access to information. The OIC actively makes the case for greater freedom of information in Canada through targeted initiatives such as Right to Know Week and ongoing dialogue with Canadians, Parliament and federal institutions.
The following diagram shows the OIC’s organizational structure.
View Text Version
This chart shows the high-level structure of the Office of the Information Commissioner. The Information Commissioner heads the organization. Three senior officials report to her: the General Counsel and Director, Legal Services; the Assistant Commissioner, Complaints, Resolution and Compliance; and the Director General, Corporate Services.
Legal Services represents the Commissioner in court as she seeks to clarify points of access law and uphold information rights. OIC lawyers provide legal advice on investigations, and administrative and legislative matters, as well as customized reference tools and training on recent case law. Legal Services also monitors legislative developments to determine their possible effect on the Commissioner’s work and access to information in general.
The Complaints Resolution and Compliance Branch investigates individual complaints about the processing of access requests, conducts dispute resolution activities and makes formal recommendations to institutions, as required. The Branch also carries out systemic investigations and analysis.
Corporate Services provides strategic and corporate leadership for planning and reporting, communications, human resources and financial management, security and administrative services, internal audit and evaluation, as well as information management and technology. Corporate Services conducts external relations, with a wide range of stakeholders, notably Parliament, governments and representatives of the media, and provides input to the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat on improving the administration of the Act. Corporate Services is also responsible for managing the OIC’s access to information and privacy function.
Strategic Outcome and Program Alignment Architecture
1. Strategic Outcome: Rights under the Access to Information Act are safeguarded.Footnote 3
1.1 Program: Compliance with access to information obligations
Internal Services
Organizational Priorities
The following were the Commissioner’s organizational priorities for 2014–2015, as set out in the OIC’s 2011–2014 strategic plan.Footnote 4
| Priority | Type | Program |
|---|---|---|
| Exemplary service delivery to Canadians | Ongoing | Compliance with access to information obligations |
| Summary of Progress | ||
| The Commissioner continued to provide excellent service with strained resources to Canadians through her investigations. She received 1,749 new complaints, closing 1,605, and carried out a pilot project to resolve certain complaints more quickly through the use of mediation. The Commissioner successfully pursued several matters in court that will affect a number of ongoing investigations. In 2014, the Federal Court of Appeal confirmed that timeliness is a constituent part of the right of access. The decision is expected to reduce the length of time extensions institutions take to respond to requests. In March 2015, the Federal Court agreed with the Commissioner’s position that emails and word-processing files are computerized records. This means that institutions are no longer allowed to charge search and preparation fees for these records. | ||
| Priority | Type | Program |
|---|---|---|
| A leading access to information regime | Ongoing | Compliance with access to information obligations |
| Summary of Progress | ||
| The Commissioner published a comprehensive report on modernizing the Access to Information Act in March 2015. This was the last key commitment under the 2011–2014 strategic plan left to meet.Footnote 5 The report contains 85 recommendations—anchored in over 30 years of experience at the OIC—designed to bring Canada’s freedom of information law into line with the most progressive national and international standards. The Commissioner completed two outstanding systemic investigations. She also published her observations on the health of the access system, based on an analysis of publicly available information on 24 institutions in 2012–2013.Footnote 6 In the fall of 2014, the Commissioner wrote to the President of the Treasury Board of Canada to share her perspective on the Government of Canada’s draft Action Plan 2.0 under the Open Government Partnership. Finally, the Commissioner hosted, along with the Privacy Commissioner, a conference for federal, provincial and territorial access to information and privacy commissioners in October 2014. | ||
| Priority | Type | Program |
|---|---|---|
| An exceptional workplace | Ongoing | Compliance with access to information obligations Internal services |
| Summary of Progress | ||
| The Commissioner implemented her talent management program and ensured it was compliant with the Directive on Performance Management. The Commissioner also pursued shared services opportunities with fellow agents of Parliament and other small organizations. The Commissioner instituted a Code of Values and Ethics for the OIC. | ||
Risk Analysis
Key Risks
| Risk | Risk Response Strategy | Link to Program Alignment Architecture |
|---|---|---|
| Resources: That ongoing financial restraint will result in the OIC being unable to adequately fulfill its mandate of safeguarding information rights under the Access to Information Act |
|
Compliance with access to information obligations |
| Growing complaints inventory: That the 30-percent increased volume of complaints experienced in 2013–2014, plus an increase in complex investigations in 2014–2015, and the heightened fiscal restraint within our office, will lead to an increase in the inventory of complaints. This will impede the OIC’s ability to investigate complaints in a timely manner, which will ultimately result in an erosion of access rights |
|
Compliance with access to information obligations |
| Human resources: That employee workload and turnover will have an impact on the organization’s ability to deliver its mandate and meet its obligations as a federal entity, due to its small size |
|
Compliance with access to information obligations Internal services |
The Commissioner continued to introduce measures to ensure her office is working as effectively as possible. Nonetheless, the Commissioner closed fewer complaints in 2014–2015 than she did the previous year. This was due to two reasons. First, there were a number of complex investigations in 2014–2015 that required the dedicated attention of a number of investigators. Second, there was a reduction in financial resources available. Under current staffing levels, there is not sufficient investigative capacity within the OIC to address the current inventory of complaints, absorb the number of new complaints and undertake complex investigations.
Together, these various factors are hindering the Commissioner’s efforts to deliver on her mandate. Her ability to adequately safeguard information rights is effectively in jeopardy. In practical terms, they are increasing the risk that complaints will not be investigated in a timely manner, which will ultimately result in an erosion of access rights.
The Corporate Services team continued to work at the minimum size. This has meant the Commissioner has been able to devote as many resources to the program as possible. However, it is putting corporate memory (increasing the risk of error) and the Commissioner’s ability to meet policy and other obligations at risk. The stretched capacity of the team is making it difficult to respond to unforeseen circumstances without having to put other priorities aside. It also increases the risk of employee burn out. One way the Commissioner is seeking to mitigate these risks is by entering into agreements with other organizations to share services, to take advantage of expertise the OIC does not have in-house.
Actual Expenditures
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
| 2014–15 Main Estimates | 2014–15 Planned Spending | 2014–15 Total Authorities Available for Use | 2014–15 Actual Spending (authorities used) | Difference (actual minus planned) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $11,200,960 | $11,200,960 | $11,910,330 | $11,770,808 | $569,848 |
Human Resources (Full-Time Equivalents [FTEs])
| 2014–15 Planned | 2014–15 Actual | 2014–15 Difference (actual minus planned) |
|---|---|---|
| 93 | 90 | (3) |
Budgetary Performance Summary for Strategic Outcome and Program (dollars)
| Strategic Outcome, Program and Internal Services | 2014–15 Main Estimates | 2014–15 Planned Spending | 2015–16 Planned Spending | 2016–17 Planned Spending | 2014–15 Total Authorities Available for Use | 2014–15 Actual Spending (authorities used) | 2013–14 Actual Spending (authorities used) | 2012–13 Actual Spending (authorities used) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strategic Outcome: Rights under the Access to Information Act are safeguarded | ||||||||
| Compliance with access to information obligations | $8,624,739 | $8,624,739 | $8,669,716 | $8,669,716 | $9,170,954 | $9,152,469 | $9,961,251 | $9,179,989 |
| Internal services | $2,576,221 | $2,576,221 | $2,589,656 | $2,589,656 | $2,739,376 | $2,618,339 | $5,343,842 | $3,112,691 |
| Total | $11,200,960 | $11,200,960 | $11,259,372 | $11,259,372 | $11,910,330 | $11,770,808 | $15,305,093 | $12,292,680 |
The Commissioner’s single program and related spending fall under Government Affairs in the whole-of-government framework and align to the following Government of Canada outcome: A transparent, accountable and responsive federal government.Footnote 7
For more information on the OIC’s spending, see “Departmental Spending Trend,” below.
Departmental Spending Trend
View Text Version
This bar chart shows the OIC’s spending trend from 2012–2013 to 2017–2018 in three categories: anticipated sunset programs, statutory and voted. The figures for each are as follows:
- Anticipated sunset programs: $147,000 in 2012–2013 and $2,702,000 in 2013–2014. There are no anticipated sunset programs in any year from 2014–2015 to 2017–2018.
- Statutory: $1,388,000 in 2012–2013, $1,340,000 for 2013–2014, $1,284,000 for 2014–2015 and $1,332,000 for each of 2015–2016, 2016–2017 and 2017–2018.
- Voted: $10,758,000 for 2012–2013, $11,263,000 for 2013–2014, $10,487,000 for 2014–2015 and $9,927,000 for each of 2015–2016, 2016–2017 and 2017–2018.
The OIC’s expenditures have been on a downward trend since 2012–2013, with the exception of 2013–2014. That year, spending was artificially high due to the mandatory relocation of the OIC’s office from Ottawa to Gatineau in early 2014.
With Total Authorities of less than $12 million in 2014–2015, the OIC used nearly all of its limited resources, lapsing $139,522. This meant that the Commissioner had no financial flexibility to augment her investigative capacity or to respond to unforeseen circumstances.
The impact of the operational spending freeze announced in the 2013 Speech from the Throne is not factored into these levels. The freeze means the OIC will have to absorb salary increases until 2015–2016.
Otherwise, and assuming the government does not announce further budget reduction or cost containment measures, the authority levels will remain constant from 2015–2016 to 2017–2018. These funding levels are the lowest since 2009–2010 in the context of an ever-growing inventory.
Effective management of public funds is of paramount importance. The Commissioner has had, and will continue, to make difficult decisions to keep within appropriations, deliver her mandate and maintain excellence in governance. Her success in this regard in recent years has resulted in a very lean organization.
Expenditures by Vote
For information on the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada’s organizational voted and statutory expenditures, consult the Public Accounts of Canada 2015 (under Department of Justice Canada), which is available on the Public Works and Government Services Canada website.Footnote 8
Section II: Analysis of Program by Strategic Outcome
Strategic Outcome
Rights under the Access to Information Act are safeguarded.Footnote 9
Program
Compliance with access to information obligations
Description
The Access to Information Act is the statutory authority for the oversight activities of the Information Commissioner, which are: to investigate complaints from requestors; to review the performance of government institutions; to report results of investigations/reviews and recommendations to complainants, government institutions and Parliament; to pursue judicial enforcement; and to provide advice to Parliament on access to information matters. The Office of the Information Commissioner supports the Commissioner in carrying out these activities.
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
| 2014–15 Main Estimates | 2014–15 Planned Spending | 2014–15 Total Authorities Available for Use | 2014–15 Actual Spending (authorities used) | 2014–15 Difference (actual minus planned) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $8,624,739 | $8,624,739 | $9,170,954 | $9,152,469 | $527,730 |
Human Resources (FTEs)
| 2014–15 Planned | 2014–15 Actual | 2014–15 Difference (actual minus planned) |
|---|---|---|
| 70 | 67 | (3) |
Performance Results*
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| Canadians receive timely resolution of complaints about how federal institutions process access to information requests | Percentage of administrative cases completed within 90 days | 85 percent | 63 percent |
| Percentage of priority/early resolution cases completed within 6 months | 75 percent | 58 percent | |
| Institutions meet their obligations under the Access to Information Act and adopt measures to address institutional and systemic issues affecting access to information | Percentage of recommendations from investigations that are adopted | 95 percent | 99 percent |
| Percentage of recommendations from report cards and systemic investigations that are adopted | 80 percent | 38 percent The Commissioner did not issue report cards in 2014–2015. The two systemic investigations completed (on interference and consultations) contained 13 recommendations in total. The President of the Treasury Board did not address the Commissioner’s five recommendations on interference. Of the eight recommendations related to consultations, the President agreed to implement five. |
* In the OIC’s 2015–2016 Report on Plans and Priorities it was indicated that, due to the financial situation, the OIC would be unable to meet these targets.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Exemplary service to Canadians. The Commissioner closed 1,605 complaints in 2014–2015 while receiving 1,738 new files. As a result, the inventory of complaints grew for a second year.
The Commissioner strove to meet her productivity targets. She reduced by a week the overall median time it took to complete a complaint, to 83 days.
The Commissioner carried out a pilot project to increase the use of mediation during investigations. Of 318 files in the pilot, 70 percent were mediated. Of those, 12 percent were narrowed in scope, 22 percent were amalgamated with other files, 2 percent were settled and 34 percent were discontinued.
The Commissioner carried out a detailed mapping of the investigation process. This allowed her to determine areas of inefficiency and identify best practices. The “lean process” will be implemented on a pilot basis for incoming complaints in 2015–2016. The Commissioner’s goal is to provide better, timelier service, and greater transparency and predictability for complainants and institutions.
A leading access to information regime. In March 2015, the Commissioner published a special report to Parliament on modernizing the Access to Information Act.Footnote 10 She also completed two systemic investigations. One was on the impact of inter-institution consultations on the timeliness of responses to requests. The second was on interference with requests. The Commissioner made recommendations to the President of the Treasury Board for system-wide improvements in these areas.Footnote 11 The Commissioner hosted, along with the Privacy Commissioner, a conference for federal, provincial and territorial access to information and privacy commissioners.
Looking ahead, the Commissioner seeks to be a leader in the area of transparency and an agent of change for access. She will support and assist parliamentarians should they decide to modernize the Act after the fall 2015 election.
An exceptional workplace. In 2014–2015, the OIC adapted its talent management program to meet the requirements of the Treasury Board Directive on Performance Management. As a learning organization, the OIC will enhance this program in 2015–2016 by developing a formal training strategy to ensure that employees have the required skills they need and the opportunities to grow in order to meet their goals and those of the organization.
Internal Services
Description
Internal Services are groups of related activities and resources that are administered to support the needs of programs and other corporate obligations of an organization. These groups are Management and Oversight Services, Communications Services, Human Resources Management Services, Financial Management Services, Information Management Services, Information Technology Services, Real Property Services, Materiel Services, Acquisition Services, and Travel and Other Administrative Services. Internal Services include only those activities and resources that apply across an organization and not those provided to a specific program.
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
| 2014–15 Main Estimates | 2014–15 Planned Spending | 2014–15 Total Authorities Available for Use | 2014–15 Actual Spending (authorities used) | 2014–15 Difference (actual minus planned) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $2,576,221 | $2,576,221 | $2,739,376 | $2,618,339 | $42,118 |
Human Resources (FTEs)
| 2014–15 Planned | 2014–15 Actual | 2014–15 Difference (actual minus planned) |
|---|---|---|
| 23 | 23 | 0 |
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
The Corporate Services team continued to ensure sound stewardship and governance for the organization. The external Audit and Evaluation Committee provided important guidance throughout the year.
Early in 2014–2015, the information technology group launched the legal component of the OIC’s case management system. The legal component interfaces with its investigative counterpart to facilitate reporting and sharing of information between lawyers and investigators as they work together on investigations, particular those that result in litigation.
To remain within its funding envelope, the OIC pursued opportunities to share services with other organizations. These allow the OIC to take advantage of expertise it does not have in-house, reduce risk, make efficient use of resources and provide better services.
Three IT-related shared services projects are ongoing: migrating to a new human resources information system (MyGCHR), participating in the pay modernization project and adopting a new financial system that will be shared with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner and hosted by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
Within available budgets, the Commissioner continued to provide training and development opportunities to staff. In 2014–2015, the OIC signed a memorandum of understanding with Elections Canada and three other organizations to establish a shared approach to internal training and set up a common training calendar.
In 2015–2016, the OIC will also pursue shared services opportunities related to information technology security.
Section III: Supplementary Information
Financial Statements Highlights
Condensed Statement of Operations (unaudited)
For the Year Ended March 31, 2015
(dollars)
| Financial Information | 2014–15 Planned Results | 2014–15 Actual | 2013–14 Actual | Difference (2014–15 actual minus 2014–15 planned) | Difference (2014–15 actual minus 2013–14 actual) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total expenses | 13,126,688 | 13,340,328 | 15,240,038 | 213,640 | (1,899,710) |
| Total revenues | - | - | - | - | - |
| Net cost of operations before government funding and transfers | 13,126,688 | 13,340,328 | 15,240,038 | 213,640 | (1,899,710) |
The OIC’s total expenses for 2014–2015 decreased by $1.9 million from 2013–2014. This was primarily due to the one-time costs associated with the office relocation in 2013–2014.
Condensed Statement of Financial Position (unaudited)
As at March 31, 2015
(dollars)
| Financial Information | 2014–15 | 2013–14 | Difference (2014–15 minus 2013–14) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total net liabilities | 1,609,564 | 1,922,784 | (313,220) |
| Total net financial assets | 738,182 | 1,042,257 | (304,075) |
| Departmental net debt | 871,382 | 880,527 | (9,145) |
| Total non-financial assets | 2,142,098 | 2,412,001 | (269,903) |
| Departmental net financial position | 1,270,716 | 1,531,474 | (260,758) |
The OIC’s total assets for 2014–2015 decreased by $269,903 from 2013–2014, primarily due to the decrease in the value of the assets acquired for the office relocation in 2013–2014.
Financial Statements
The OIC website contains the organization’s most recent audited financial statements, Statement of Management Responsibility Including Internal Control over Financial Reporting, and the corresponding annex on the development and assessment of our system of internal controls.Footnote 12
Supplementary Information Tables
The supplementary information tables listed in the 2014–2015 Departmental Performance Report are available on the OIC website.Footnote 13
- Internal Audits and Evaluations
Tax Expenditures and Evaluations
The tax system can be used to achieve public policy objectives through the application of special measures such as low tax rates, exemptions, deductions, deferrals and credits. The Department of Finance Canada publishes cost estimates and projections for these measures annually in the Tax Expenditures and Evaluations publication.Footnote 14 The tax measures presented in the Tax Expenditures and Evaluations publication are the responsibility of the Minister of Finance.
Section IV: Organizational Contact Information
Layla Michaud
Acting Assistant Commissioner and Chief Financial Officer
Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada
30 Victoria Street
Gatineau QC K1A 1H3
Tel.: 819-994-0004
Fax: 819-994-1768
Email: layla.michaud@oic-ci.gc.ca
Website: www.oic-ci.gc.ca
Appendix: Definitions
appropriation (crédit): Any authority of Parliament to pay money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
budgetary expenditures (dépenses budgétaires): Includes operating and capital expenditures; transfer payments to other levels of government, organizations or individuals; and payments to Crown corporations.
Departmental Performance Report (rapport ministériel sur le rendement): Reports on an appropriated organization’s actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Report on Plans and Priorities. These reports are tabled in Parliament in the fall.
full-time equivalent (équivalent temps plein): Is a measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person-year charge against a departmental budget. Full-time equivalents are calculated as a ratio of assigned hours of work to scheduled hours of work. Scheduled hours of work are set out in collective agreements.
Government of Canada outcomes (résultats du gouvernement du Canada): A set of 16 high-level objectives defined for the government as a whole, grouped in four spending areas: economic affairs, social affairs, international affairs and government affairs.
Management, Resources and Results Structure (Structure de la gestion, des ressources et des résultats): A comprehensive framework that consists of an organization’s inventory of programs, resources, results, performance indicators and governance information. Programs and results are depicted in their hierarchical relationship to each other and to the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute. The Management, Resources and Results Structure is developed from the Program Alignment Architecture.
non-budgetary expenditures (dépenses non budgétaires): Includes net outlays and receipts related to loans, investments and advances, which change the composition of the financial assets of the Government of Canada.
performance (rendement): What an organization did with its resources to achieve its results, how well those results compare to what the organization intended to achieve and how well lessons learned have been identified.
performance indicator (indicateur de rendement): A qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging the performance of an organization, program, policy or initiative respecting expected results.
performance reporting (production de rapports sur le rendement): The process of communicating evidence-based performance information. Performance reporting supports decision making, accountability and transparency.
planned spending (dépenses prévues): For Reports on Plans and Priorities (RPPs) and Departmental Performance Reports (DPRs), planned spending refers to those amounts that receive Treasury Board approval by February 1. Therefore, planned spending may include amounts incremental to planned expenditures presented in the Main Estimates.
A department is expected to be aware of the authorities that it has sought and received. The determination of planned spending is a departmental responsibility, and departments must be able to defend the expenditure and accrual numbers presented in their RPPs and DPRs.
plan (plan): The articulation of strategic choices, which provides information on how an organization intends to achieve its priorities and associated results. Generally a plan will explain the logic behind the strategies chosen and tend to focus on actions that lead up to the expected result.
priorities (priorité): Plans or projects that an organization has chosen to focus and report on during the planning period. Priorities represent the things that are most important or what must be done first to support the achievement of the desired Strategic Outcome(s).
program (programme): A group of related resource inputs and activities that are managed to meet specific needs and to achieve intended results and that are treated as a budgetary unit.
Program Alignment Architecture (architecture d’alignement des programmes): A structured inventory of an organization’s programs depicting the hierarchical relationship between programs and the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute.
Report on Plans and Priorities (rapport sur les plans et les priorités): Provides information on the plans and expected performance of appropriated organizations over a three-year period. These reports are tabled in Parliament each spring.
result (résultat): An external consequence attributed, in part, to an organization, policy, program or initiative. Results are not within the control of a single organization, policy, program or initiative; instead they are within the area of the organization’s influence.
statutory expenditures (dépenses législatives): Expenditures that Parliament has approved through legislation other than appropriation acts. The legislation sets out the purpose of the expenditures and the terms and conditions under which they may be made.
Strategic Outcome (résultat stratégique): A long-term and enduring benefit to Canadians that is linked to the organization’s mandate, vision and core functions.
sunset program (programme temporisé): A time-limited program that does not have an ongoing funding and policy authority. When the program is set to expire, a decision must be made whether to continue the program. In the case of a renewal, the decision specifies the scope, funding level and duration.
target (cible): A measurable performance or success level that an organization, program or initiative plans to achieve within a specified time period. Targets can be either quantitative or qualitative.
voted expenditures (dépenses votées): Expenditures that Parliament approves annually through an Appropriation Act. The Vote wording becomes the governing conditions under which these expenditures may be made.
whole-of-government framework (cadre pangouvernemental): Maps the financial contributions of federal organizations receiving appropriations by aligning their Programs to a set of 16 government-wide, high-level outcome areas, grouped under four spending areas.