ARCHIVED - Audit of On-Reserve Community Infrastructure

Notice

This website will change as a result of the dissolution of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, and the creation of Indigenous Services Canada and the eventual creation of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. During this transformation, you may also wish to consult the updated Indigenous and Northern Affairs home page.

Archived information

This Web page has been archived on the Web. Archived information is provided for reference, research or record keeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Date: February 2011

PDF Version (100 Kb, 27 Pages)

 

 

Table of Contents

 

 

Executive Summary

Background

Funding provided by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) to First Nation communities related to infrastructure is provided under a number of authorities and from a number of sources. On-reserve infrastructure is funded primarily through contributions made under the Capital Facilities and Maintenance (CFM) Program.

There are three categories of expenditures that are funded by the CFM Program: Major Capital; Minor Capital; and, Operations and Maintenance (O&M). Major Capital projects are defined by INAC Headquarters as funded acquisition, construction and/or major repair projects in excess of $1.5 million. Minor Capital projects cover smaller infrastructure related construction, acquisition, renovation or repair projects, and on-reserve residential housing. O&M funding covers the operations and maintenance of community infrastructure assets.

An Audit of the CFM Program was completed in 2008 and included recommendations to strengthen the management control framework of the program, the management of major capital projects and the management of minor capital and O&M funding. In response to the audit, the department developed a number of documents, including the Management Control Framework, the Performance Management Strategy and a Risk Profile for the CFM Program. Implementation of related measures to strengthen management of the CFM Program was impeded by requirements to implement and administer Canada’s Economic Action Plan (CEAP). A significant level of resources was expended at Headquarters and in Regions to address extensive CEAP project assessment and reporting requirements.

The Audit of On-reserve Community Infrastructure was included in the Departmental 2010-11 Internal Audit Plan.

Audit Objectives, Scope and Approach

The objective of the Audit of On-reserve Community Infrastructure was to provide assurance that governance, risk management and control frameworks are adequate and effective in ensuring that on-reserve community infrastructure funds are used for the intended purposes and that planned outcomes are achieved. At the national level, the audit assessed management practices and controls for providing governance and oversight over the funding of on-reserve community infrastructure activities. At the regional level, the audit assessed management and operational practices and controls for the delivery of funding to First Nations in accordance with Headquarters policies and guidelines.

The scope of the audit covered the 2009/10 fiscal year and the 2010/11 fiscal year up to December 31, 2010 and included on-reserve community infrastructure funding activities provided by INAC through the CFM Program. Funding for on-reserve housing and funding from CEAP were not included in the scope of this audit because they have been subject to other recent audits in the department.

Audit work was conducted at Headquarters in Gatineau, Quebec and in the following regional offices: Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec.

The audit was conducted in accordance with the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Audit and the Treasury Board Policy on Internal Audit.

Conclusion

Based on the results from this internal audit, the Audit and Evaluation Sector has concluded that although progress has been made, there remain gaps to provide assurance that governance, risk management and control frameworks are adequate to provide a reasonable expectation that funds for on-reserve community infrastructure are used for the intended purpose and that outcomes will be achieved. The management of major capital projects is adequate. However, significant gaps remain over the management of funding for minor capital and O&M.

Recommendations

The audit identified opportunities to strengthen management over on-reserve community infrastructure in the areas of performance information management, risk management, program management guidance, and program monitoring and compliance. The following recommendations addressed areas where these opportunities were identified.

  1. Ensure that implementation of the Performance Measurement Strategy for the CFM Program is completed on a timely basis.

  2. Ensure that:

    • the CFM Program Risk Profile Mitigation Plan is completed and implemented;

       
    • major capital project risk assessments are formalized and documented; and,

    • guidance for mitigating actions, specific to the management of infrastructure activities, stemming from the First Nation General Assessment process is developed and communicated.

       
  3. Ensure that the Management Control Framework is extended to the funding of minor capital and O&M and a comprehensive set of guidance documents supporting the Management Control Framework is completed as planned on a timely basis.

  4. Ensure that a comprehensive monitoring and compliance regime, with consideration for conducting compliance audits, covering major capital projects and funding of minor capital and O&M is implemented. This should include a risk based methodology for selecting regions, First Nations and projects for review, as well as , the development of risk based criteria or best practices against which to assess regions and First Nations.
 

 

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Background

Funding provided by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) to First Nation communities related to infrastructure is provided under a number of authorities and from a number of sources. Infrastructure is funded primarily through contributions made under the Capital Facilities and Maintenance (CFM) Program.

The CFM Program is the major programming element within the Community Infrastructure programming activity which addresses The Economy, one of the Department’s strategic outcomes. The goal of the CFM Program is to contribute to healthy, safe and sustainable First Nation communities and support the commitment to assist First Nations in fulfilling their aspirations for greater self-reliance, particularly in achieving comparability of reserve communities with similar non-reserve communities, in terms of basic living conditions, in the availability of community facilities and services, and in the general quality of life. The stated objective of the CFM Program is "…to provide assistance to First Nations to: invest in physical assets (or services) that mitigate health and safety risks to recipients; ensure that assets meet established codes and standards; and ensure that assets are managed in a cost-effective and efficient manner that protects, maintains and maximizes asset life-cycle; and ensure that the above activities are undertaken in an environmentally sound and sustainable manner".

To meet these objectives, CFM Program funding assists First Nations to acquire, construct, operate and maintain needed infrastructure assets and facilities including: water supply, storage, treatment and distribution; sewage and waste collection, treatment and disposal; schools; electrical power generation and distribution; roads and bridges; fire protection (fire trucks, fire halls, fire equipment); community buildings; and, environmental site cleanup / remediation. CFM Program assistance is provided to First Nations communities, Crown land or recognized First Nations’ land. It does not address infrastructure that is built or acquired specifically for an economic development purpose (this authority rests with the Economic Development Program (EDP), with its own set of criteria).

The sources of authorities for the CFM Program, included in its current approved Terms and Conditions, underscore the evolution and complex makeup of the program. These authorities stem from a number of sources, including the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Act and a number of Treasury Board and Cabinet decisions between 1989 and 2009.

There are three categories of expenditures that are funded by the CFM Program: Major Capital; Minor Capital; and, O&M. Major Capital projects are defined by INAC Headquarters as funded acquisition, construction and/or major repair projects in excess of $1.5 million. Minor Capital projects cover smaller infrastructure related construction, acquisition, renovation or repair projects, and on reserve residential housing. O&M funding covers the operations and maintenance of community infrastructure assets.

Along with other programs, CFM Program funding for First Nations is governed by either one-year Comprehensive Funding Agreements or five-year Canada First Nations Funding Agreements, the latter of which provides First Nations with the authority and flexibility to reallocate funding among a number of program priorities. Funding of Major Capital is based on established project related processes and priority rankings, and project application/proposal assessments and approvals. Only department approved projects are funded. The funding of Minor Capital and O&M is generally formula driven and is provided to First Nations at intervals specified in funding agreements. Over and above this formula driven funding, INAC may also fund Minor Capital and possibly O&M projects on a proposal basis.

The total budget allocation for the CFM Program varies from year to year due to funding sources other than A-base funds that materialize or sunset over time. Planned spending for the 2010-2011 fiscal year is approximately $1.2 billion comprising approximately $700 million of annual A-base funds, with the remainder provided by targeted programs / initiatives including Canada’s Economic Action Plan (CEAP), Building Canada Fund – Gas Tax Fund, the First Nations Water and Wastewater Action Plan (FNWWAP), The First Nations Infrastructure Fund (FNIF) and other minor funding sources. Planned spending for the 2011-2012 fiscal year is expected to be less than $1 billion, mainly due to sun-setting of CEAP funding.

A capital planning or First Nation Infrastructure Investment Plan (FNIIP) process is in place at INAC. Regions work in collaboration with First Nations to establish and prioritize five-year capital plans according to the CFM Program’s National Priority Ranking Framework. The highest priority is assigned to those projects which mitigate the most urgent health and safety risks. First Nation FNIIPs are rolled up by Region and then rolled up nationally.

Key INAC stakeholders involved in the delivery of on reserve infrastructure funding are:

An Audit of the CFM Program was completed in 2008 and included recommendations to strengthen the management control framework of the program, the management of major capital projects and the management of minor capital and O&M funding. In response to the audit, the department developed a number of documents, including the Management Control Framework, the Performance Management Strategy and a Risk Profile for the CFM Program. Implementation of related measures to strengthen management of the CFM Program was impeded by requirements to implement and administer CEAP. A significant level of resources was expended at Headquarters and in Regions to address extensive CEAP project assessment and reporting requirements.

The Audit of On-reserve Community Infrastructure was included in the Departmental 2010-11 Internal Audit Plan.

1.2 Audit Objective

The objective of the Audit of On-Reserve Community Infrastructure was to provide assurance that governance, risk management and control frameworks are adequate and effective in ensuring that on-reserve community infrastructure funds are used for the intended purposes and that planned outcomes are achieved. At the national level, the audit assessed management practices and controls for providing governance and oversight over the funding of on-reserve community infrastructure activities. At the regional level, the audit assessed management and operational practices and controls for the delivery of funding to First Nations in accordance with Headquarters policies and guidelines.

1.3 Audit Scope

The following areas were assessed in the audit:

The scope of the audit covered the 2009/10 fiscal year and the 2010/11 fiscal year up to December 31, 2010 and included on-reserve community infrastructure funding activities provided by INAC through the CFM Program. Funding for on-reserve housing and funding from CEAP were not included in the scope of this audit because they have been subject to other recent audits in the department.

Audit work was conducted at Headquarters in Gatineau, Quebec and in the following regional offices: Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec.

1.4 Audit Approach

The audit was conducted in accordance with the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Audit and the Treasury Board Policy on Internal Audit. These standards require that the audit be planned and performed in such a way as to obtain reasonable assurance that audit objectives are achieved.

The schedule followed for the audit was as follows:

Planning Phase
January to March 2010

Conduct Phase
November 2010 to January 2011

Reporting Phase
January to February 2011

During the Planning Phase, risks related to the management of on reserve community infrastructure were identified and assessed. This Risk and Control Assessment was developed from information derived from:

Information from the Planning Phase led to the confirmation of audit objectives and scope and the development of the Conduct Phase audit program, including audit criteria. These audit criteria, presented in Annex A to this report, were used in the Conduct Phase to address the audit objectives. These criteria were derived from the Risk and Control Assessment, taking the following sources into consideration:

During the Conduct Phase, the following audit approaches were executed to address the audit criteria:

1.5 Conclusion

Based on the results from this internal audit, the Audit and Evaluation Sector has concluded that although progress has been made, there remain gaps to provide assurance that governance, risk management and control frameworks are adequate to provide a reasonable expectation that funds for on-reserve community infrastructure are used for the intended purpose and that outcomes will be achieved. The management of major capital projects is adequate. However, significant gaps remain over the management of funding for minor capital and O&M.

The audit identified opportunities to strengthen management over on-reserve community infrastructure in the areas of performance information management, risk management, guidance, and program monitoring and compliance. The observations and recommendations that follow address areas where these opportunities were identified.

1.6 Statement of Assurance

In the professional judgment of the Chief Audit Executive, sufficient and appropriate audit procedures have been conducted and evidence gathered to support the accuracy of the opinion provided and contained in this report.

The opinion is based on a comparison of the conditions, as they existed at the time, against pre-established audit criteria that were agreed on with management. The opinion is applicable only to the entity examined. The evidence was gathered in compliance with Treasury Board policy, directives and standards on internal audit, and the procedures used meet the professional standards of the Institute of Internal Auditors. The evidence gathered is sufficient to support the audit opinion expressed in this report.

 

 

2.0 Observations, Recommendations and Management Action Plan

2.1 Performance Information Management

The Performance Measurement Strategy for the CFM Program Has Not Been Sufficiently Implemented to Demonstrate the Extent to Which Funding for Infrastructure Activities in First Nation Communities Achieves Expected Results.

INAC’s 2009-10 Departmental Performance Report (DPR) identifies the following performance indicators related to on-reserve community infrastructure:

  1. Percentage of First Nation community infrastructure assets in compliance with generally accepted standards; and,

  2. Percentage of First Nation communities with acceptable water and wastewater facility risk ratings.

The DPR states that data is not available to measure performance related to the first indicator above.

The DPR reports the percentage of First Nation water or waste water systems ranked as low or medium risk. The identification of risk ratings of water and wastewater facilities is provided by regions. However, inspections of water and waste water systems have not been conducted for one or more years, with one exception, in the regions visited in anticipation of the National Water and Waste Water System Assessment that is almost complete. As a result, there is a risk of inaccuracy of data reported in the DPR related to the risk levels of water and waste water systems.

The 2008 Audit of the CFM Program included a recommendation to implement a performance management framework. The department has made significant progress by implementing the November 16, 2009 Performance Measurement Strategy document for the CFM Program. The strategy identifies the following Intermediate Outcomes in its Logic Model: "First Nation communities have a base of safe water and waste systems, education facilities infrastructure and community infrastructure that meets established standards". A number of performance indicators and related measurement strategies are also included in the strategy. In November, 2010, CIB has developed additional process documentation to assist in implementing the Key Performance Indicators included in the Performance Measurement Strategy.

The Performance Measurement Strategy identifies performance measurement challenges for the CFM Program, including:

Requirements for monitoring and compliance processes related to performance information management will be addressed in Section 2.4.

The implementation of the Performance Measurement Strategy, including measurable performance indicators, targets for all performance indicators and accurate tracking and reporting of achievement against performance indicator targets would enhance the ability to demonstrate the achievement of expected outcomes for infrastructure activities in the department.

Recommendation

Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations Sector should ensure that implementation of the Performance Measurement Strategy for the CFM Program is completed on a timely basis.

2.2 Risk Management

First Nation and Project Level Risk Mitigation Strategies Specific to the Management of On-Reserve Infrastructure Have Not Been Sufficiently Implemented.

CFM Program Risk Management

The Treasury Board Policy on Transfer Payments (2008) requires that departments apply recipient-specific, risk based approaches to managing transfer payments. The Policy on Transfer Payments and Directive on Transfer Payments specify the need to ensure that the administrative requirements on recipients to ensure effective control, transparency and accountability are proportionate to factors including the risk profile of applicants and recipients. They further state that monitoring, reporting and auditing reflect program and recipient risks.

The 2008 Audit of the CFM program included a recommendation to implement a risk management framework. In response, the department developed the CFM Program Risk Profile document. This Risk Profile document identifies high-level risks that can impact on the achievement of key outcomes, the level of these risks, and the activities and outcomes being affected. The document discusses risk drivers, possible consequences and potential mitigation for each identified risk.

We found that although a 'Preliminary Mitigation Plan’ is included as an Appendix to the Risk Profile document, the mitigation plan has not been completed. More specifically, the mitigation plan does not address the majority of identified risks and does not assign responsibility or timelines for implementation thereof.

The Management Control Framework for the CFM Program includes roles and responsibilities for regions to undertake due diligence for major capital projects to determine if adequate controls are in place to ensure identified risks are mitigated to appropriate levels. The 2009 Treasury Board Submission for the CFM Program stated that risk-based tools to assess project complexity, as well as management capacity, were in progress. CIB plans to implement the risk-based tools in conjunction with the updated Management Control Framework, which is targeted for completion in April 2011.

We found that regions employ different practices in identifying, documenting and managing risks related to specific capital projects. Regional practices varied from a formal project risk assessment tool to assist in the administration and oversight of funding for major capital projects, to a lack of risk assessment documentation on file.

Requirements for monitoring and compliance processes related to risk management will be addressed in Section 2.4.

The completion and implementation of the Risk Profile Mitigation Plan and the formalization of major capital project risk assessments would enhance accountability for managing identified key risks; facilitate the formulation of oversight, monitoring and compliance review activities; and, result in a more effective and justifiable allocation of resources.

General Assessment of First Nations

The Directive on Transfer Payments includes the requirement to determine appropriate funding approaches for Aboriginal recipients based on an assessment of: the governance structure; management, financial and administrative capacity; management and financial control processes and procedures; accountability mechanisms; and, financial position.

The department has commenced the development and implementation of the General Assessment (GA) process of First Nation recipients. The GA process will assess First Nation capacity to manage funding and deliver on expected results related to a number of funded programs and activities, including capital infrastructure activities. The GA is designed primarily to identify and highlight risks that may impact the future performance of recipients in delivering on programs, activities, and requirements pursuant to funding agreements. The GA results would be predominantly used to determine appropriate funding mechanisms and the length of funding agreements and with First Nations in accordance with the Directive on Transfer Payments. Full implementation of the GA process is planned by end of fiscal year 2010-2011.

To date, tools including a GA Workbook and a 'draft’ Users Guide have been developed to facilitate a risk profile of individual First Nation recipients. Management in the regions is aware of the GA process and requirements, and assessments in the regions are being conducted. However, we identified a need for further guidance to identify possible mitigating actions, over and above the implementation of appropriate funding mechanisms, to be undertaken for high risk areas, including those involving management of capital infrastructure activities. The draft GA Users Guide confirms the need for further clarification and implementation. Examples of mitigating actions specific to the management of capital infrastructure activities could include the extent of: monitoring and site visits conducted by regions to First Nations; financial and performance reporting submitted by First Nations to regions; and, due diligence exercised on project claims and supporting invoice documentation submitted by First Nations to regions.

Guidance for mitigating actions, specific to the management of capital infrastructure activities, stemming from the GA process would ensure that actions are commensurate to First Nation risks.

Recommendation

Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations Sector should ensure that:

2.3 Program Management Guidance

There is Insufficient Guidance and Awareness Thereon for the Management of Infrastructure, Particularly for the Funding of Minor Capital and O&M Activities.

The 2008 Audit of the CFM Program included a recommendation to develop a comprehensive set of national guidelines to address all aspects of the management of the CFM Program. This audit noted that many regions had, to varying degrees, developed and implemented their own program guidelines / procedures which led to variances and inconsistencies among regions in the delivery of the CFM Program.

In response, the department developed and implemented the Major Capital Project Management Control Framework document. The 2009 Treasury Board Submission for the CFM Program acknowledged the intent for the Management Control Framework document to initially focus on major capital projects, and identified departmental plans for the full implementation of the Management Control Framework to include management of funding for minor capital and O&M.

The management of funding for minor capital and O&M has not been incorporated in the Management Control Framework to date. The existing Management Control Framework document provides guidance for the management of major capital projects, including the national capital planning process (FNIIP, CEAP funded projects and FNIF funded projects). The document includes major capital project funding approval authorities, project documentation requirements, and roles and responsibilities at Headquarters and in Regional Offices.

We found that the Management Control Framework is a high level guidance document that does not provide procedural guidance for the management of various aspects of infrastructure funding. A need was identified to develop a comprehensive set of procedural documents with more detailed guidance to support the Management Control Framework. We note that there are examples of other guidance documentation that have been developed or are in the process of being developed by Headquarters. However this documentation does not cover all infrastructure related areas. Also, some of this documentation is dated or is in draft form.

We found a number of inconsistencies and gaps in regional practices in the following areas, related to the management of infrastructure, which may be indicative of the above need to develop and disseminate additional guidance.

We note that the department is in the process of extending the Management Control Framework to funding for minor capital and O&M and for supporting the Management Control Framework with a comprehensive set of guidance documents.

Additional national guidance, including a comprehensive set of guidance documents supporting the Management Control Framework, would ensure a more consistent approach to the delivery of infrastructure activities in accordance with national requirements, and enhance the effectiveness of monitoring and compliance practices.

Recommendation

Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations Sector should ensure that the Management Control Framework is extended to the funding of minor capital and O&M and a comprehensive set of guidance documents supporting the Management Control Framework is completed as planned on a timely basis.

2.4 Program Monitoring and Compliance

There is Insufficient Monitoring and Compliance Review in Place for the Management of Infrastructure, Particularly for the Funding of Minor Capital and O&M Activities.

The 2008 Policy and Directive on Transfer Payments state that monitoring, reporting and auditing of recipients of contribution funding should reflect program and recipient risks. They also identify departmental responsibility to determine when recipient audits are necessary to complement other monitoring activities and develop and execute a risk-based recipient audit plan when required.

The 2008 Audit of the CFM program included recommendations to:

As noted in Section 2.3 of this report, the Management Control Framework for the CFM Program initially focused on major capital projects. The document includes a monitoring requirement for Headquarters staff to conduct annual detailed file reviews in regions for a sample of major capital projects. The departmental plans for the full implementation of the Management Control Framework to include management of funding for minor capital and O&M. A comprehensive Management Control Framework would include requirements for monitoring and compliance reviews addressing management of funding for minor capital and O&M.

The existing Management Control Framework states that Headquarters will conduct on-site visits to two regions annually to review a five percent risk-based sample of major capital projects. This review would focus on compliance with CFM Program Terms and Conditions, the Management Control Framework and file documentation standards.

Quarterly site visits to Regions, focusing primarily on CEAP projects, have been conducted by Headquarters pursuant to the Management Control Framework. These site visits included a review of major capital project processes at regional offices and a review of project progress for a sample of First Nations within regions. Site visit reports were prepared that included observations related to regional processes. We found that there were some inconsistencies in the extent to which major capital project file documentation is addressed among these reports.

We also found that:

We found inconsistencies in regional practices in the following areas which may be indicative of the need to enhance monitoring and compliance reviews by Headquarters and/or regions.

A comprehensive risk based monitoring and compliance regime, with consideration for conducting compliance audits, covering major capital projects and funding of minor capital and O&M would ensure a more consistent approach to the delivery of infrastructure activities in accordance with national requirements, and decrease the risk that funds are not spent for the purposes intended. The monitoring and compliance regime should include a risk based methodology for selecting regions, First Nations and projects for review, and include the development of risk based criteria or best practices against which to assess regions and First Nations. We note that monitoring and compliance processes would have to reflect the ability for First Nations having Canada First Nations Funding Agreements to have authority and flexibility to reallocate funding among a number of program priorities.

Recommendation

Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Regional Operations Sector should ensure that a comprehensive monitoring and compliance regime, with consideration for conducting compliance audits, covering major capital projects and funding of minor capital and O&M is implemented. This should include a risk based methodology for selecting regions, First Nations and projects for review, as well as , the development of risk based criteria or best practices against which to assess regions and First Nations.

 

 

Appendix A - Audit Criteria

PROGRAM DESIGN AND GOVERNANCE

  1. Infrastructure programs and activities are authorized and are aligned with departmental and program objectives and priorities

  2. The program design of infrastructure programs and activities is effective in demonstrating achievement of program objectives

  3. There is adequate governance and oversight over infrastructure programs and activities

    PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION

  4. The basis for the allocation of funding for Major Capital, Minor Band Based Capital and O&M Expenditures is effective in demonstrating how infrastructure related objectives will be achieved

  5. Funding for capital projects is aligned with national, regional and First Nation priorities

  6. There is sufficient human resource capacity and capabilities to effectively deliver and manage infrastructure programs and activities

  7. Guidance for the delivery and management of infrastructure programs and activities (including policies, procedures and training) are adequately developed and communicated and are aligned with key program authority documents

  8. Information systems and processes track, accumulate and report infrastructure related information in a consistent, efficient, effective and timely manner for decision making purposes

    PROGRAM PERFORMANCE AND RISK MANAGEMENT

  9. A performance management framework (including the logic model, performance indicators and measurement strategy) is adequate in  measuring and reporting on the achievement of objectives and results related to infrastructure programs and activities

  10. A risk management framework is adequate in identifying, assessing and mitigating program risks related to infrastructure programs and activities

    PROCESSES FOR FUNDING ALLOCATION / ASSESSMENT / APPROVAL

  11. Infrastructure projects are undertaken pursuant to long term capital plans

  12. Funding decisions for infrastructure projects are made in a fair and consistent manner

  13. Adequate due diligence is exercised in the assessment of infrastructure projects

     
  14. Infrastructure project approval decisions are executed by individuals with delegated authority in a timely manner

    PROCESSES FOR FUNDING AGREEMENT EXECUTION

  15. Appropriate due diligence is exercised in determining the duration of funding arrangements / agreements (one year vs. five year) with First Nations for Minor Capital and O&M expenditures.

  16. Funding agreements are consistent with approved departmental templates and contain clauses to mitigate key program risks and to ensure compliance with Treasury Board, INAC and other policies and regulations

  17. Funding agreements are signed by persons with delegated authority

    PROCESSES FOR PAYMENTS, MONITORING AND REPORTING

  18. Payments are made pursuant to Funding Agreements, and are based on need in accordance with the Treasury Board Policy on Transfer Payments

  19. Payments are made by persons with delegated authority

  20. Reporting on ACRS Inspections and on asset conditions is being done in an accurate or timely manner and is being followed up

     
  21. Monitoring and recipient auditing practices specific to infrastructure programs and activities are adequate to ensure:

    • Funds are spent as intended
    • Risks are identified and managed
    • Reporting of activities and results is accurate
    • Compliance with Funding Agreement clauses

  22. Financial and performance information related to infrastructure programs and activities is captured and reported in a timely, useful, accurate and complete manner

  23. Financial and performance reports related to infrastructure programs and activities are communicated to Parliament, Treasury Board and to departmental senior management to demonstrate accountability of infrastructure funds and achievement of infrastructure related objectives
 

 

Appendix B - Listing of Acronyms

ACRS

Asset Condition Reporting System

CEAP

Canada's Economic Action Plan

CFM

Capital Facilities and Maintenance Program

CIB

Community Infrastructure Branch

CRTP

Circuit Rider Training Program

DPR

Departmental Performance Report

EDP

Economic Development Program

FNIF

First Nations Infrastructure Fund

FNIIP

First Nation Infrastructure Investment Plan

FNWWAP

First Nations Water and Wastewater Action Plan

GA

General Assessment

ICMS

Integrated Capital Management System

INAC

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

O&M

Operations and Maintenance

 
 
Date modified: