Canadian Government Executive - Volume 23 - Issue 07

Improving performance and delivering results is a central focus and core mandate of every department and agency of the Canadian Government as exemplified in the new Policy on Results (July 2016). Public Service October 2017 // Canadian Government Executive / 13 General’s Advisory Group representing all branches of the Department; Step 3: Secured buy-in from the 40 pro- grams to complete their PIPs, including presentation of four information sharing workshops and support provided by ex- perts to programs seeking additional in- formation; Step 4: Programs were asked to add missing content to their PIPs, as identified by a PIPs Monitors sub-group of techni- cal experts who reviewed all PIPs using a standardized assessment grid, to ascertain completeness and alignment in an objec- tive manner; Step 5: Programs, which had questions or gaps in their PIPs, were able to request assistance, provided by the PIPs Monitors sub-group of experts; Step 6: PIPs were revised by programs, gaps were identified, and revised with as- sistance as needed; and, Step 7: PIPs were reviewed by the DG Advisory Group (led by Head of Perfor- mance Measurement and Head of Evalu- ation) whose role is to assess PIPs and advise the Chief Results Delivery Officer (CRDO), (Assistant Deputy Minister at ESDC), who is accountable for the PIPS to be submitted to the Treasury Board Sec- retariat (TBS) by November 2017. Giving the CRDO this additional role, beyond the Results and Delivery approach, assures continuity between it and the Policy on Results. The objective of Phase 1 was completing all 40 PIPs and having them accepted for submission which was achieved largely thanks to this seven step process. Keys to success were: 1. Well planned technical support sys- tem and availability of expertise to as- sist drafting PIPs; 2. Demonstrated ownership – utilizing existing structures - of the process by programs; and, 3 Senior level support at multiple levels up to the Deputy Minister. Phase 2 - Improvement in Quality of PIPs Phase 2, planned to begin in Novem- ber 2017, will consist of communities of practice working together to better inte- grate program information and evalua- tion findings to build a department-wide, evidence-based decision-making culture. This work on improving quality is intend- ed to produce robust PIPs with meaning- ful outcomes that will demonstrate the consistency of program investments with the TBS Policy on Results (e.g. relevance, effectiveness, efficiency). In Phase 2, PIPs will evolve beyond com- pliance to innovate a systems approach intended to improve quality of PIPs. This Phase will include development of Part A, which focuses on assessing quality of indi- cators and Part B which focuses on assess- ing quality of data. These two are symbiotic in the sense that indicators cannot be mea- sured without data and data is of no use if it is not measuring quality indicators. To ac- complish this linkage, a process is planned to work across five communities of practice of similar programs within ESDC. Part A will work largely through com- munities of practice to address the quality criteria of relevance, meaningfulness, ef- fectiveness, efficiency and impact/sustain- ability. These criteria are based on OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), DAC (Development Assistance Committee) criteria, which are well established internationally, accepted by Global Affairs Canada, and are similar to TBS’ criteria. These will be defined in checklists and then validated by the com- munities of practice. Part B is largely focused on data quality and establishes what data is accessible and whether it is valid and accurate. Overall, the objective is to determine if data sources are sufficiently robust to be used to validate the indicators and demonstrate program impact or, if not, for programs to be able to develop plans to measure impact. Phase 3 - Integration of Standardized Practices Based on the above, in Phase 3, ESDC will use quality information for decision mak- ing across all its programs to be better able to tell programs’ performance stories. In addition to facilitating horizontal evalua- tions within ESDC, this new scenario will enable integrated planning through link- ing program activities, as described in the PIPs, with other data i.e. number of staff and planned expenditures for each activity. Phase 4 - Department-wide evidence-based system Phase 4 operates at the Departmental lev- el and features an integrated culture with high levels of innovation in risk analysis, planning and evaluating impact. In Phase 4, changes will have been institutionalized across all levels of ESDC and the benefits of inclusive evidence-based decision-mak- ing will be evident for programs and se- nior management. Personnel at all levels will be encour- aged to build their personal and profes- sional capacities and contribute to dem- onstrating program impacts through inclusive, evidence-based decision-mak- ing. This phase uses PIPs, which are itera- tive and evergreen, as part of a system of continuous improvement and learning. The goal is for PIPs to be integrated into all Departmental operating systems to provide information based on evidence. Summary This four-Phase approach is aligned with the overall Results Agenda of the Gov- ernment of Canada. The approach dem- onstrates how PIPs are scaffolding for transforming the organizational culture towards integrated systems of planning, collecting and using quality data to dem- onstrate results and impact. A variety of federal, provincial, andmunici- pal governments as well as private sector and non-government organizations could ben- efit from applying this approach. The authors welcome being contacted as we work togeth- er to deliver results for Canadians. M ichael J. M iner is a Senior Evalua- tor, Evaluation Directorate at ESDC. M elinda M ac D onald , PhD is a Senior Evaluator, Evaluation Directorate at ESDC. J ohn M orris , PhD is a Senior Policy Advisor, Corporate Planning and Management Directorate at ESDC. Y ves G ingras is a Director General, Evalua- tion Directorate at ESDC.