Board of Management Oversight Framework - Assessment Performance - Organization of the Agency

Disclaimer

We do not guarantee the accuracy of this copy of the CRA website.

Scraped Page Content

Organization of the Agency


Strong
Acceptable
Opportunity For Improvement
Attention Required
The Agency demonstrates a rigorous, systematic approach to accountability through performance management practices that support the effective achievement of program results.
  • The Agency's accountability structure generates the optimal amount of co-ordination, innovation, and performance.
  • High alignment and integration exists between the executive cadre performance agreements, the Agency's priorities and the Board's objectives.
  • Accountabilities for results are clearly assigned and appropriate, and executive commitments are of high quality.
Agency accountability structures and processes support the achievement of program results.
  • The Agency's accountability structure generates an acceptable amount of coordination and accomplishment.
  • Adequate alignment and integration exists between the executive cadre performance agreements, the Agency's priorities and the Board's objectives.
  • Accountabilities for results are assigned and executive commitments are of good quality.
Additional improvements are required to meet minimum levels of acceptable accountability. Achievement of program results may be at risk.
  • Deficiencies within the accountability structure of the Agency are identified and tentative steps are taken to address the issues.
  • Policies, processes, and practices are currently in development and require further integration within the Agency.
Achievement of program results are at risk due to serious deficiencies in accountability.
  • Little or no corporate oversight exists regarding the development of appropriate accountability instruments.
  • There is little or no alignment between Agency priorities and management actions.



Expectation: Internal Accountability – The Board must assure itself that the Agency has an appropriate internal accountability structure

Key Questions 1: How does the Board interact with senior management?

Response

  • The staffing of the Deputy Commissioner position in 2009-2010 has allowed the Commissioner to work more closely with the Board of Management on key strategic issues like risk management.
  • The Board Chair and the Commissioner hold regular calls to discuss key issues.
  • The Commissioner provides an update on significant CRA activities at each Board in-person meeting and at each quarterly teleconference.
  • The Board is supported by a Legal Counsel provided by Justice Canada. Legal Counsel participates in all Board/Committee meetings.
  • Members of the Auditor General's Office participate in all regular sessions of the Board's Audit Committee.
  • Working through the Corporate Secretary, Board members have access to senior management.
  • Senior management participates in both the Board in-person meetings, its quarterly teleconferences and any other ad hoc meetings where required.
  • Senior management:
    • works with the Board and committee chairs to develop the committee and Board work plans and meeting agendas.
    • attends the committee and Board quarterly pre-brief meetings with the Board's committee chairs to answer any outstanding questions prior to the committee/Board meetings.
    • is in attendance at the committee/Board meetings and teleconference calls for agenda items related to their respective area of management and at the Board's annual Strategic Planning Meetings.
  • The Agency's Chief Audit Executive participates in closed, in-camera sessions with the Board's Audit Committee at each quarterly in-person meeting.
  • Not with standing the appointment of a new Minister, Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner and Senior Financial Officer, senior management interaction with the Board has remained effective.

Sources of Evidence

  • Canada Revenue Agency Act
  • Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) Board of Management (Board) Governance Manual (including Committee Charters)
  • Board and Committee Work Plans
  • Strategic Planning Meeting- Agendas and Minutes
  • Infozone Committees page

Key Questions 2: Do robust senior management decision-making structures and processes exist?

Response

  • Six corporate committees oversee the business operations and the strategic direction of the Agency, and are supported by the Corporate Secretariat.
  • The Agency Management Committee (AMC) oversees program development and delivery, as well as the day-to-day business operations of the Agency. All business items going before the Board of Management must first be tabled at AMC.
  • AMC serves as the principal forum for deliberations on operational issues and ensures consistency and coherence in program delivery. AMC meetings are scheduled weekly. In-person, full-day meetings are held at least once per quarter in Ottawa. AMC holds Strategic Planning Meetings once a year to formulate the CRA strategic agenda and assess overall performance. The Commissioner is the Chair of AMC. Membership comprises all direct reports to the Commissioner.

Key Questions 3: What processes exist to ensure management and the Board work collaboratively in pursuit of the Agency's business objectives?

Response

  • The Corporate Secretary:
    • ensures that there is a reliable information flow between the Board and senior management;
    • schedules preparatory meetings between senior management and committee chairs and the Board chair to coincide with Board meetings;
    • records and actions all follow-up actions requested by the Board.
  • The Board provides input into the performance assessments and performance objectives of the Chief Executive Officer ( CEO ), Corporate Audit Executive (CAE), Corporate Finance Officer (CFO), Chief Information Officer (CIO) and ACs of Human Resource Branch (HRB) and Corporate Strategies and Business Development Branch (CSBDB) and the Corporate Secretary.
  • Agency Management works with the Board to develop priorities for the planning cycle during the Corporate Business Plan development process, and participates in the Board's own yearly Strategic Planning Meeting.

Sources of Evidence

  • Performance objectives and assessments of the CEO, CAE, CFO, CIO and ACs of HRB and CSBDB
  • Corporate Business Plan

Key Questions 4: Are accountabilities of executives aligned with corporate plans, priorities and Board objectives?

Response

  • The Board sets annual performance objectives for the Commissioner and provides input into the performance agreements of the CFO, CAE and CIO.
  • The Board conducted the annual assessment of two CEOs' performance in 2009-2010, which will be submitted to the Clerk of the Privy Council; and provided input into the performance assessment of the noted senior executives for 2009-2010.
  • The Board performed a mid-year assessment of progress against the objectives set for the Commissioner for 2009-2010.
  • Each year a list of mandatory commitments is developed and distributed to all Agency Executives (ECs) in the form of a Foundation Table and accompanying Guidelines, in order to ensure Agency priorities are translated into action and accountabilities are assigned.
    • Commitments for all categories must be accompanied by examples of performance measures in each Executive Cadre (EC) Performance Agreement (PA).
    • To assist ECs in identifying appropriate performance measures, the guidelines for each commitment include examples of specific measures or other references to aid in the development of measures.
  • A mid-year (December) review is part of the EC performance management process that ensures a discussion on performance between ECs' and their superiors.
  • A flow chart outlining the EC performance management process will be presented at the Board's June 2010 meeting, as identified in the 2008-2009 next steps.
  • Executive performance agreements address performance gaps noted in the Annual Report.

Sources of Evidence

  • Board of Management Private /In-Camera sessions at the March Board meetings
  • Commissioner's Key Priorities, Measurable Outputs and Time Frames for Fiscal Year 2009-2010
  • 2009-2010 EC Performance Commitments Foundation Table
  • Performance Agreement Analysis

Key Questions 5: Does the alignment of accountabilities with plans, priorities and Board objectives support the horizontal effectiveness of the Agency?

Response

  • The Corporate Business Plan (CBP) identifies the CRA's priorities and deliverables that feed into senior managers' performance commitments.

Sources of Evidence

  • CRA Corporate Business Plan 2010-2011 to 2012-2013


2008-2009
2009-2010
Board's Assessment and Related Comments
Strong
Consideration should be given to assessing the effectiveness of horizontal management throughout the Agency.
Strong
Management has undertaken a review of governance structures and will be implementing changes to those structures.
Next Steps
For 2009-2010, emphasis is being placed on continually improving the quality of performance measures in EC Performance Agreement guidelines. Status: Completed.
The due date to receive all 2009-2010 EC agreements is being advanced 2 weeks to May 30th. This is in order to have all management performance agreements in place as close as possible to the beginning of the fiscal year, since MG agreements typically cascade from EC agreements. Status: Completed.
A flow chart will be shared with the Board outlining the EC performance management process. Status: Presented to Board at June 2010 meeting.
The Board will review the changes and take action in areas where it can add value.




Date modified:
2010-11-15