|
Session Title: Assessing the Health of and Improving the Evaluation Function Across the Government of Canada Through the Management Accountability Framework (MAF)
|
|
Panel Session 537 to be held in CROCKETT D on Friday, Nov 12, 9:15 AM to 10:45 AM
|
|
Sponsored by the Government Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Anne Routhier, Treasury Board of Canada, anne.routhier@tbs-sct.gc.ca
|
| Abstract:
In 2003, the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) was created by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) to define/outline the expectations of senior public service managers for good management. The MAF is structured around 10 key elements (comprising 21 Areas of Management (AoMs)). These elements are assessed on a periodic basis (either annually or tri-annually) and the results are reported to Deputy Heads of departments to assist them in identifying management priority issue areas. In this panel presentation, the TBS Centre of Excellence for Evaluation (CEE) will present its methodology and experience in assessing MAF AoM 6 (Quality and Use of Evaluation) in departments and agencies of the Government of Canada and will be joined by representatives from Industry Canada, Canadian Heritage and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada who will share their experience in undergoing and utilizing MAF to improve the evaluation function in their departments.
|
|
Overview of the Government of Canada’s MAF's Area of Management 6 (AoM6) (Quality and Use of Evaluation) and Its Use in Assessing the Health of the Evaluation Function
|
| Anne Routhier, Treasury Board of Canada, anne.routhier@tbs-sct.gc.ca
|
| Brian Moo Sang, Treasury Board of Canada, brian.moosang@tbs-sct.gc.ca
|
|
This presentation will provide a background and context for participants concerning the goals and structure of the Government of Canada’s Management Accountability Framework (MAF) process to assess Area of Management 6 - Quality and Use of Evaluation (AoM6). Further, this presentation will provide an overview of the MAF-AoM6 assessment process that the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s Centre of Excellence for Evaluation (TBS-CEE) uses in its periodic ‘MAF Reviews’ of federal departments/agencies. The presentation will include a description of TBS-CEE’s MAF assessment methodology which addresses four overarching assessment criteria – 1) quality of evaluations 2) evaluation coverage 3) neutrality of evaluation 4) utilization of evaluation. As TBS-CEE is the policy centre/functional leader of the evaluation in the Canadian federal government, the presenter (the Senior Director TBS-CEE) is uniquely situated provide an overall perspective on the impact of MAF on evaluation quality and on the overall health of the evaluation function.
|
|
|
Department of Canadian Heritage’s Experience in MAF to Inform Continuous Improvement of the Evaluation Function.
|
| Paule-Anny Pierre, Department of Canadian Heritage, paule-anny.pierre@pch.gc.ca
|
|
The Department of Canadian Heritage is responsible for policies and programs that help all Canadians participate in their shared cultural and civic life. It is specifically responsible for formulating and implementing cultural policies related to copyright, foreign investment and broadcasting, as well as policies and programs related to arts, heritage, official languages, sports, state ceremonial and protocol, and Canadian symbols. Main activities involve funding communities and organizations to promote the benefits of culture, identity, and sport for Canadians. The measurement of these policies and programs impact is challenging given the nature of the expected results. This presentation will provide participants with an overview of how MAF contributed to enhance the department’s evaluation function with regards to the quality and use of evaluations. The presenter will highlight challenges in meeting MAF expectations, but also its influence on the planning, continuous improvement and increased recognition of the evaluation function within the department.
| |
|
Building Evaluation Excellence at Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: Using the the MAF as a Roadmap
|
| Tamara Candido, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, tamara.candido@ainc-inac.gc.ca
|
| Judith Moe, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, judith.moe@ainc.gc.ca
|
|
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) has one of the broadest and most complex mandates in the Canadian Federal context. The mission seeks to improve social and economic well-being, to develop healthier, more sustainable communities, and to ensure full participation of Canada’s Aboriginal Peoples (First Nations, Inuit and Métis) and Northerners in Canada's political, social and economic development. The Mandate is shaped by centuries of history, statutes, negotiated agreements and legal decisions and is adapted to unique demographic and geographic challenges.
The presentation will focus on progress against a four point strategy toward evaluation excellence using the MAF as a roadmap. This strategy, implemented over a period of four years, includes:
• Strengthen Evaluation and Performance Measurement Capacity (e.g. neutrality, technical expertise)
• Elevate Evaluation Quality / Expand Evaluation Coverage
• Build Relationships of Trust and Collaboration
• Transfer Evaluation Knowledge
The presentation will also include reflection on key challenges.
| |
|
Use of the MAF at Industry Canada in Improving the Evaluation Function
|
| Kim Bachmann, Industry Canada, kim.bachmann@ic.gc.ca
|
| Beate Schiffer-Graham, Industry Canada, beate.schiffer-graham@ic.gc.ca
|
|
Industry Canada's mandate is to help make Canadian industry more productive and competitive in the global economy. The department oversees a variety of programs and activities to support this mandate, ranging from the creation of marketplace frameworks and regulations to the delivery of programs in support of economic development. Management Accountability Framework (MAF) assessments are being used at Industry Canada to identify not only management practices that need improvement, but what we are doing well. In our presentation we will discuss how the MAF assessment has assisted the evaluation function in refining our internal practices, benchmarking our progress, and engaging in discussions with the broader evaluation community.
| |