Canadian Government Executive - Volume 24 - Issue 04

28 / Canadian Government Executive // July/August 2018 Background The Canadian federal government has had an internal program evaluation sys- tem in place for over 35 years. Virtually all departments and agencies with budgets over one billion dollars have an evaluation unit that regularly examines the relevance and performance of their programs. Of the federal organizations with smaller bud- gets, about half appear to have a program evaluation function. Internal evaluation studies help federal organizations identify ways in which spe- cific programs can be improved or pro- gram portfolios adjusted. However, the in- ternal evaluation system rarely produces the broad, high-level evaluative informa- tion needed for major program and poli- cy decisions by Parliament or the Prime Minister and Cabinet. We perceive a need for specific structures to provide strategic evaluative information to government de- cision makers. The Evaluator General concept In 2007, Canadian Government Executive published an article outlining the idea of an Evaluator General for Canada. The au- thors envisioned an agent of Parliament who would provide evaluative evidence related to issues under debate. The Evalu- ator General position would parallel that of the Auditor General. Whereas the Au- ditor General investigates major issues in terms of compliance with accounting rules, an Evaluator General would inves- tigate issues in terms of expected results achievement. Like the Auditor General, the Evaluator General would aim to pro- vide Parliament with timely, strategic-lev- el information on high profile issues. Over the past 10 years, advocates of the Evaluator General idea have sought to increase its visibility by meeting with Parliamentarians, making presentations, writing newspaper articles and creating a web site. Recent developments In recent years, there have been clear in- dications of interest in improving systems that provide evidence to support decision making in both Parliament and Cabinet. In 2017, revised legislation strengthened the role of the Parliamentary Budget Of- ficer. This key, arms-length advisor is now a full officer of Parliament and reports di- rectly to the Speaker of the House. Government has also created and staffed a position of Chief Science Advisor. The mandate for that position includes advis- ing on processes to ensure that scientific analyses are considered in government decisions. A “Policy on Results” came into effect in July 2016. It combined the former Policy on Evaluation with policies on performance measurement and reporting. Some observ- ers suggest that the combining of policies has led to an overemphasis on program metrics and less attention to the in-depth evaluation of programs that could provide information useful at the strategic level, such as comparisons of program cost- effectiveness. However, a directive on ex- perimentation subsequently released by government could, in principle, increase the availability of strategically useful in- formation. The directive, issued in the context of government’s plan to devote a fixed percentage of program funds to ex- perimenting with new approaches, sets out expectations for serious, professional PROGRAM EVALUATION and Government Decision-Making BY MICHAEL OBRECHT, MICHEL LAURENDEAU AND NICHOLAS GRUEN EVALUATION