2016-2017 Departmental Results Report

Commissioner's message

I am pleased to present the 2016–17 Departmental Results Report for the Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner (OCSEC or office). The report presents how we have used our resources, the results achieved and the progress made on corporate priorities.

My mandate requires that I review the activities of the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) to ensure they comply with the law.  In the past year the office completed eight reviews and one study addressing a range of critical issues including a review of CSE information sharing with foreign entities, a review of CSE collection activities in exceptional circumstances and a review of CSE cyber defence metadata activities. I am pleased to report that during the past year, all CSE activities reviewed complied with the law.  The eight review reports and one study completed resulted in five recommendations to promote compliance with the law and strengthen privacy protection and the Minister and CSE accepted all recommendations.

My mandate also requires that I investigate complaints against CSE that I consider necessary. In the past year, there were no complaints about CSE activities that warranted investigation.

My mandate also includes, under Section 15 of the Security of Information Act, receiving information from persons who are permanently bound to secrecy seeking to defend the release of special operational information — such as certain information relating to CSE activities — on the grounds that it is in the public interest. No such matters were reported to me in 2016–17.

I must comment on a significant event subsequent to the fiscal year end but within the time frame of the tabling of this report, and that is the first reading in the House of Commons of Bill C-59, An Act respecting national security matters. This Bill proposes to appoint an Intelligence Commissioner and establish the office of the new Commissioner.  As it is currently written, when Bill C-59 does become law, the Commissioner of the Communications Security Establishment becomes the new Intelligence Commissioner under the Intelligence Commissioner Act.  And the Intelligence Commissioner will no longer be responsible for the conduct of review of CSE activities; that responsibility will be assumed by the new single review agency, National Security and Intelligence Review Agency (NSIRA). However, until the legislation is enacted, I will continue to rigorous independent review of the compliance of CSE activities with the law and to ensure that the privacy of Canadians is safeguarded.

The Honourable Jean-Pierre Plouffe, CD

Results at a glance

The total spending of the office for 2016–17 was $2.004 million. The Commissioner was supported by 11 employees, together with a number of subject matter experts, as required.

The Commissioner, each year, provides an overall statement on the lawfulness of CSE activities. This past year, all of the CSE activities reviewed complied with the law.

Throughout the course of the year,

For more information on the department's plans, priorities and results achieved, see the “Results: what we achieved” section of this report.

Raison d'être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do

Raison d'être

The position of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner was created to review the activities of the Communications Security Establishment (CSE) to determine whether it performs its duties and functions in accordance with the laws of Canada. This includes having due regard for the privacy of Canadians. The Commissioner's office exists to support the Commissioner in the effective discharge of his mandate.

Mandate and role

The mandate of the Commissioner under the National Defence Act consists of three key functions:


  1. to review the activities of the CSE to ensure they comply with the law;
  2. in response to a complaint, to undertake any investigation that the Commissioner considers necessary;
  3. to inform the Minister of National Defence and the Attorney General of Canada of any activity of the Communications Security Establishment that the Commissioner believes may not be in compliance with the law;


  1. to submit an annual report to the Minister, for tabling in Parliament, on the Commissioner's activities and findings within 90 days after the end of each fiscal year;


to review and report to the Minister as to whether the activities carried out under a ministerial authorization are authorized; and

Under Section 15 of the Security of Information Act:

to receive information from persons who are permanently bound to secrecy and who seek to defend the release of classified information about the Communications Security Establishment on the grounds that it is in the public interest.

For more general information about the department, see the “Supplementary information” section of this report.

Operating context and key risks

Operating context

Bill C-59, An Act respecting national security matters

For most of last year, the government had undertaken a series of initiatives, including nation-wide public consultations, exploring options to strengthen the accountability of federal government agencies and departments that carry out national security activities. As part of this information gathering process, the Commissioner appeared before Parliamentary committees (both House of Commons and the Senate) offering advice and guidance on the creation of national security accountability framework including greater involvement of Parliamentarians, clarification of roles and responsibilities amongst the various review bodies, and the conduct of joint reviews. The Commissioner also stressed the need for clarity of the legislation so that parliamentarians and the public know exactly what authorities and limitations security and intelligence agencies are operating under and can be reassured that mechanisms are in place to ensure powers are not abused, and if they are, that they will be brought to light and dealt with.

Bill C-59 was tabled in the House of Commons in June of 2017. As it is currently drafted, the Intelligence Commissioner Act would appoint an Intelligence Commissioner who would be supported by the office of the Intelligence Commissioner.  The transitioning provisions provide for the Commissioner of the Communications Security Establishment to become the Intelligence Commissioner and for all persons formerly occupying a position in the office of the CSE Commissioner to occupy their position in the office of the Intelligence Commissioner.

As the fiscal year drew to a close, the office and its employees were faced with a great deal of uncertainty. As a result, the office increased significantly its strategic planning and resourcing efforts to ensure that it had in place the necessary skill sets not only to fulfill the Commissioner's existing and ongoing review mandate but also to address going forward the (proposed) requirements of the Intelligence Commissioner's mandate.


Should an employee of the office wish to pursue employment opportunities elsewhere in the federal public service, the employee is not eligible to compete or seek deployment (transfer) in internal appointments.  The employee is eligible to compete in competitions that are open only to the general public.  This restriction in future mobility has been a significant factor in qualified individuals declining employment opportunities within the office.

During the course of the year, the office began working with the Public Service Commission to find a solution to increase the mobility of OCSEC employees while still retaining the independent hiring authority of the Commissioner.  As the fiscal year drew to a close, the office was working on obtaining a designation order for “persons employed”.  The designation order will create eligibility for OCSEC employees to participate in staffing open to all persons employed in the public service.


It is the role of existing review bodies, both to encourage transparency and, where information must be kept secret, to ensure that effective, comprehensive review is conducted to bridge the information gap in public debate. Transparency has been a cornerstone of the Commissioner's approach in helping to build public trust in CSE and to better inform public discussion.  Throughout the year, the Commissioner has continued to disclose statistics and as much information as is legally possible and has encouraged CSE to do the same. The Commissioner's Annual Report, available on the office website, continues to expand on the information available regarding reviews and results. By so doing, it provides an assurance to Canadians that the activities of CSE are being reviewed for compliance with the law and for the adequacy of the safeguards protecting the privacy of Canadians. The office has never been more engaged than this year in its outreach activities, explaining the mandate, operations and activities of the office through appearances before Parliamentary committees and participating in meetings and conferences addressing security and intelligence issues.

Key risks

Key risks


Mitigating strategy and effectiveness

Link to the department's Program Link to mandate letter commitments or to government‑wide and departmental priorities

Failure to maintain and build on the existing effective working relationship with CSE

  • conducting and reporting on reviews in a professional and respectful manner
  • regular meetings and briefings with CSE on change and legal, technological and operational issues of significance

Commissioner's review program

Safe and secure Canada

Insufficient review coverage

  • application of a risk-base review planning process
  • maintenance of a highly skilled review workforce
  • engagement of part-time subject matter experts

Commissioner's review program

Safe and secure Canada

Loss of public trust

  • enhanced disclosure of the activities of CSE and the extent to which these activities are rigorously reviewed
  • re-examining what information is able to be disclosed

Commissioner's review program

Safe and secure Canada

Effective working relationship

CSE is constantly evolving in order to effectively respond to changes in its environment – technology, terrorism and threats, and law.  To the same extent, the office must evolve to ensure that the activities of CSE that pose the greatest risk to compliance with the law and the protection of the privacy of Canadians are reviewed.  The office has continued to maintain an effective and open relationship with CSE that includes regular meetings and briefings. These meetings and briefings discuss any new and changing activities within CSE, existing priorities and plans and any potential issues of significance that are on the horizon.  In addition, the classified annual report to the Minister from the Chief of CSE on issues and priorities is made available to the office. These meetings, briefings and information exchanges provide a significant input into the development of the three-year review work plan used by the office.

The office also employs a “no-surprises” approach to the conduct of a review. The methodology and approach are explained in advance of the review and the initial results of the review (the findings) are presented to CSE management for validation and confirmation before finalization. Before a review report is issued, it is presented to management in draft, again for validation and confirmation, and to allow for the formulation of management responses. 

Training of the office's review staff includes attending the same CSE courses given to CSE employees. In turn, the office continued to deliver presentations about the role and work of the Commissioner as part of the orientation of new CSE employees.  The review officers recognize full-well the demands of the environment that CSE employees work in and are respectful of these demands in the performance of their reviews

Sufficient review coverage

The office uses a risk-based and preventive approach to reviews, setting priorities of what to review where risk is assessed as greatest for potential non-compliance with the law and risk to the privacy of Canadians. A three-year work plan is updated twice a year.  With the information sharing resulting from an effective working relationship, from issues identified in past or on-going reviews and from the office's own environment scan, reviews are planned.  

The office must also ensure that the necessary knowledge and experience to understand and assess the many technical, legal and privacy aspects of CSE activities. Despite its small size and the lack of mobility provisions to help attract and retain staff, the office, through both staffing and interchange agreements, had a full complement of highly skilled and motivated review officers throughout the year.  Where and when required, part-time technical and subject matter experts were engaged to supplement the existing staff in the performance of complex reviews. In addition, office employees attended courses, conferences and workshops in order to strengthen and expand their review capabilities.

Throughout the course of the year, the office also continued to consult with review bodies in Canada and abroad to discuss approaches and methodologies, including cooperative efforts, for the performance of review in intelligence and security agencies.

To learn more about the Commissioner's risk-based and preventive approach to planning and conducting of reviews, please visit the office's website.

Public trust

There is a direct link among transparency, accountability, and public trust.  Openness and transparency have been a priority of the Commissioner since his appointment. The Commissioner continues to stress that it is the role of the office to encourage transparency and, where information must be kept secret, to ensure that effective, comprehensive review is conducted.  Fuller disclosure, within legal limits, of what is reviewed, how it is reviewed, and what is discovered will contribute to a greater public appreciation of the accountability measures in place and will lead to an enhancement of public trust.

There is a need to re-examine what information is able to be disclosed to the public, the legal limits to disclosure. There have been significant strides in this regard in the United Kingdom and in the United States. It is time to do likewise in Canada. Fuller disclosure leads to greater transparency leads to greater public trust.

Results: What We Achieved


The Communications Security Establishment Commissioner's review program


The Commissioner's review program includes research, monitoring, planning, the conduct of reviews and the reporting of results. It also includes consultations and communications with CSE officials, with other government officials, and senior representatives of the security and intelligence review community in Canada and abroad.

A logic model of the review program can be found on the office website under Reviews, Review methodology and criteria.


During the 2016–17 reporting year, the Commissioner submitted nine classified reports to the Minister on his reviews of CSE activities.

The reviews, and one study, were conducted under the Commissioner's authority:

CSE has accepted and implemented, or is working to address, 95 percent (157) of the 166 recommendations made since 1997, including the five recommendations in reports this year. Commissioners track how CSE addresses recommendations and responds to negative findings as well as areas for follow-up identified in reviews. The Commissioner's office is monitoring 16 active recommendations that CSE is working to address – 11 outstanding recommendations from previous years and five from this year.  This past year, CSE advised the office that work had been completed in response to two past recommendations.

Last year, in the office's review of CSE's assistance to the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) under part (c) of CSE's mandate regarding a certain type of reporting involving Canadians (summarized in the 2015–16 annual report), the Commissioner recommended that CSE keep the Minister informed, on an annual basis, of its activities under part (c) of its mandate to transmit reporting involving Canadians from Five Eyes partners to CSIS. CSE addressed this recommendation by providing to the Minister a summary of these activities.

CSE also addressed a recommendation from the office's review of CSE's foreign signals intelligence metadata activities (summarized in the 2014–15 annual report). That review revealed that CSE's system for minimizing certain types of metadata was decentralized and lacked appropriate control and prioritization. CSE also lacked a proper record-keeping process. Therefore, the Commissioner recommended that CSE use its existing centralized records system to record decisions and actions taken regarding new and updated collection systems, as well as decisions and actions taken regarding minimization of metadata involving Canadian identity information. CSE has advised that it has updated its information management processes for those areas responsible for collection systems with the objective of improving the record-keeping of decisions made and actions taken, particularly in regard to minimization. CSE will continue to examine these processes and improve as necessary through additional policy and business process changes. The Commissioner will also monitor these efforts.

The Commissioner reminded the Minister of one important outstanding recommendation summarized in the 2013–14 annual report: that the Minister issue a new general directive to CSE that sets out expectations for the protection of the privacy of Canadians when CSE shares foreign intelligence. While information sharing with Second Party partners is an essential component of CSE foreign signals intelligence and other activities, it has the potential to directly affect the privacy and security of Canadians when a private communication or Canadian identity information is shared. The Minister has acknowledged that CSE is committed to addressing this as a priority.

The Minister has also acknowledged the Commissioner's encouragement for the government to hasten action on his 2015 recommendation to amend the National Defence Act and the Ministerial directive on metadata to provide explicit authority and more comprehensive direction for CSE's collection, use and disclosure of metadata.

Results achieved

Expected results Performance indicators Target Date to achieve target 2016–17 Actual results 2015–16 Actual results 2014–15 Actual results
The CSE performs its duties and functions in accordance with the laws of Canada and with due regard for the privacy of Canadians % of recommendations accepted 80% March 31, 2017 100% 100% 100%
% of reviews completed within targeted time frames 80% March 31, 2017 100% 100% 90%
Budgetary financial resources (dollars) 
Main Estimates
Planned spending
Total authorities available for use
Actual spending
(authorities used)
(actual minus planned)
1,620,000 1,620,000 1,650,453 1,359,747 (260,253)
 Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2016–17 Planned 2016–17 Actual 2016–17
Difference (actual minus planned)
8.5 8.5 0

The office was able to achieve these results while spending $260,000 less than planned on the review program. The program expenditures for the past two or three years have lower than planned expenditures and this year is no exception.  These program savings result from several initiatives undertaken by management.  Building a competent workforce has gradually resulted in an increased capacity within the office to undertake highly technical reviews and lower the office dependence on engaging part-time technical expertise.  Of the over $200,000 set aside for the performance of complex technical reviews, only $60,000 was actually used. The costs of employee benefits were down $15,000 from what was planned. With the reduced costs, the office was able to return to the Consolidated Revenue Fund slightly in excess of $190,000.

Information on the OCSEC's program is available on the departmental website and in the TBS InfoBase.

Internal Services


Internal Services are those groups of related activities and resources that the federal government considers to be services in support of programs and/or required to meet corporate obligations of an organization. Internal Services refers to the activities and resources of the 10 distinct service categories that support Program delivery in the organization, regardless of the Internal Services delivery model in a department. The 10 service categories are: Management and Oversight Services; Communications Services; Legal Services; Human Resources Management Services; Financial Management Services; Information Management Services; Information Technology Services; Real Property Services; Materiel Services; and Acquisition Services.


 Budgetary financial resources (dollars)
Main Estimates
Planned spending
Total authorities available for use
Actual spending
(authorities used)
(actual minus planned)
505,377 505,377 545,214 644,631 139,254
 Human resources (full-time equivalents)
2016–17 Planned 2016–17 Actual 2016–17
Difference (actual minus planned)
3 3 0

Internal service costs were $139,000 over planned costs.  These additional costs were for professional services to address human resources and mobility, a necessary upgrade to secure telecommunications equipment and an upgrade to furniture (tables and chairs) that had a zero book value and had been in service prior to the start-up of the office in 1996.

Analysis of trends in spending and human resources

Actual expenditures

Departmental spending trend graph

Departmental spending trend graph

For the past three years, the spending by the office has varied very little, less than 2%.  The office is delivering on its mandate and achieving the results intended.

Budgetary performance summary for Programs and Internal Services (dollars) 
Programs and Internal Services 2016–17
Main Estimates
Planned spending
Planned spending
Planned spending
2016–17 Total authorities available for use 2016–17
Actual spending (authorities used)
2015–16 Actual spending (authorities used) 2014–15
Actual spending (authorities used)
Commissioner's Review Program 1,620,000 1,620,000 1,581,736 1,581,736 1,650,453 1,359,747 1,498,360 1,445,424
Internal Services 505,377 505,377 527,480 527,480 545,214 644,631 536,517 598,136
Total 2,125,377 2,125,377 2,109,216 2,109,216 2,195,667 2,004,378 2,034,877 2,043,560

Actual human resources

Human resources summary for Programs and Internal Services (full‑time equivalents) 
Programs and  Internal Services 2014–15 Actual
2015–16 Actual
2016–17 Planned 2016–17 Actual 2017–18 Planned 2018–19 Planned
Commissioner's Review Program 7.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5
Internal Services 3 3 3 3 3 3
Total 10.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5 11.5

Expenditures by vote

For information on OCSEC's organizational voted and statutory expenditures, consult the Public Accounts of Canada 2017.

Alignment of spending with the whole-of-government framework

Alignment of 2016–17 actual spending with the whole-of-government framework (dollars) 
Program Spending area Government of Canada activity 2016–17 Actual spending
Commissioner's Review Program Social Affairs A safe and secure Canada 1,359,747
Total spending by spending area (dollars) 
Spending area Total planned spending Total actual spending
Economic affairs    
Social affairs 1,620,000 1,359,747
International affairs    
Government affairs    

Financial statements and financial statements highlights

Financial statements

The financial statements [unaudited] of the office for the year ended March 31, 2017, are available on the departmental website.

Financial statements highlights

Condensed Statement of Operations (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2017 (dollars) 
Financial information 2016–17
Difference (2016–17 actual minus 2016–17 planned) Difference (2016–17 actual minus 2015–16 actual)
Total expenses 2,388,961 2,163,226 2,249,317 (225,735) (86,091)
Net cost of operations before government funding and transfers 2,388,961 2,163,226 2,249,317 (225,735) (86,091)

The planned results were based on the full utilization of the appropriation.

The reduction in net cost of operations can be accounted for as follows:

Condensed Statement of Financial Position (unaudited) as at March 31, 2017 (dollars) 
Financial Information 2016–17 2015–16 Difference
(2016–17 minus
Total net liabilities 196,628 175,714 20,914
Total net financial assets 175,701 189,893 (14,192)
Departmental net debt 20,927 (14,179) 35,106
Total non-financial assets 624,320 687,353 (63,033)
Departmental net financial position 603,393 701,532 (98,139)

The decrease in net financial position of $98 thousand can be accounted for as follows:

Supplementary information

Corporate information

Organizational profile

Appropriate minister:  The Honourable Harjit S. Sajjan, PC, OMM, MSM, CD, MP
Minister of National Defence

Institutional head: The Honourable Jean-Pierre Plouffe, CD – Commissioner

Ministerial portfolio: National Defence

Enabling instrument[s]: National Defence Act; Inquiries Act; Security of Information Act

Year of incorporation / commencement: 1996

Other: 2008 – the Commissioner's office was granted its own appropriation from Parliament.

Reporting framework

The office's Strategic Outcome and Program Alignment Architecture of record for 2016–17 are shown below.

  1. Strategic Outcome: The strategic outcome of the Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner is that the CSE performs its duties and functions in accordance with the laws of Canada. This includes safeguarding the privacy of Canadians.

    1.1 Program: The Communications Security Establishment Commissioner's review program

    Internal Services

Supplementary information tables

The following supplementary information tables are available on the office's website:

Federal tax expenditures

The tax system can be used to achieve public policy objectives through the application of special measures such as low tax rates, exemptions, deductions, deferrals and credits. The Department of Finance Canada publishes cost estimates and projections for these measures each year in the Report on Federal Tax Expenditures. This report also provides detailed background information on tax expenditures, including descriptions, objectives, historical information and references to related federal spending programs. The tax measures presented in this report are the responsibility of the Minister of Finance.

Organizational contact information

The Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner can be reached at the following address:

Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner
P.O. Box 1474, Station "B"
Ottawa ON K1P 5P6

The Office may also be reached:

Telephone: 613-992-3044
Facsimile: 613-992-4096
Email: info@ocsec-bccst.gc.ca

For further information on the Office of the Communications Security Establishment Commissioner, its mandate and function, please visit the office's website.

Appendix: definitions

appropriation (crédit)
Any authority of Parliament to pay money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
budgetary expenditures (dépenses budgétaires)
Operating and capital expenditures; transfer payments to other levels of government, organizations or individuals; and payments to Crown corporations.
Core Responsibility (responsabilité essentielle)
An enduring function or role performed by a department. The intentions of the department with respect to a Core Responsibility are reflected in one or more related Departmental Results that the department seeks to contribute to or influence.
Departmental Plan (Plan ministériel)
Provides information on the plans and expected performance of appropriated departments over a three‑year period. Departmental Plans are tabled in Parliament each spring.
Departmental Result (résultat ministériel)
A Departmental Result represents the change or changes that the department seeks to influence. A Departmental Result is often outside departments' immediate control, but it should be influenced by program-level outcomes.
Departmental Result Indicator (indicateur de résultat ministériel)
A factor or variable that provides a valid and reliable means to measure or describe progress on a Departmental Result.
Departmental Results Framework (cadre ministériel des résultats)
Consists of the department's Core Responsibilities, Departmental Results and Departmental Result Indicators.
Departmental Results Report (Rapport sur les résultats ministériels)
Provides information on the actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Departmental Plan.
Evaluation (évaluation)
In the Government of Canada, the systematic and neutral collection and analysis of evidence to judge merit, worth or value. Evaluation informs decision making, improvements, innovation and accountability. Evaluations typically focus on programs, policies and priorities and examine questions related to relevance, effectiveness and efficiency. Depending on user needs, however, evaluations can also examine other units, themes and issues, including alternatives to existing interventions. Evaluations generally employ social science research methods.
full-time equivalent (équivalent temps plein)
A measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person‑year charge against a departmental budget. Full‑time equivalents are calculated as a ratio of assigned hours of work to scheduled hours of work. Scheduled hours of work are set out in collective agreements.
government-wide priorities (priorités pangouvernementales)
For the purpose of the 2016–17 Departmental Results Report, government-wide priorities refers to those high-level themes outlining the government's agenda in the 2015 Speech from the Throne, namely: Growth for the Middle Class; Open and Transparent Government;  A Clean Environment and a Strong Economy; Diversity is Canada's Strength; and Security and Opportunity.
horizontal initiatives (initiative horizontale)
An initiative where two or more federal organizations, through an approved funding agreement, work toward achieving clearly defined shared outcomes, and which has been designated (for example, by Cabinet or a central agency) as a horizontal initiative for managing and reporting purposes.
Management, Resources and Results Structure (Structure de la gestion, des ressources et des résultats)
A comprehensive framework that consists of an organization's inventory of programs, resources, results, performance indicators and governance information. Programs and results are depicted in their hierarchical relationship to each other and to the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute. The Management, Resources and Results Structure is developed from the Program Alignment Architecture.
non‑budgetary expenditures (dépenses non budgétaires)
Net outlays and receipts related to loans, investments and advances, which change the composition of the financial assets of the Government of Canada.
performance (rendement)
What an organization did with its resources to achieve its results, how well those results compare to what the organization intended to achieve, and how well lessons learned have been identified.
performance indicator (indicateur de rendement)
A qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging the performance of an organization, program, policy or initiative respecting expected results.
performance reporting (production de rapports sur le rendement)
The process of communicating evidence‑based performance information. Performance reporting supports decision making, accountability and transparency.
planned spending (dépenses prévues)
For Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports, planned spending refers to those amounts that receive Treasury Board approval by February 1. Therefore, planned spending may include amounts incremental to planned expenditures presented in the Main Estimates.
A department is expected to be aware of the authorities that it has sought and received. The determination of planned spending is a departmental responsibility, and departments must be able to defend the expenditure and accrual numbers presented in their Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports.
plans (plans)
The articulation of strategic choices, which provides information on how an organization intends to achieve its priorities and associated results. Generally a plan will explain the logic behind the strategies chosen and tend to focus on actions that lead up to the expected result.
priorities (priorité)
Plans or projects that an organization has chosen to focus and report on during the planning period. Priorities represent the things that are most important or what must be done first to support the achievement of the desired Strategic Outcome(s).
program (programme)
A group of related resource inputs and activities that are managed to meet specific needs and to achieve intended results and that are treated as a budgetary unit.
Program Alignment Architecture (architecture d'alignement des programmes)
A structured inventory of an organization's programs depicting the hierarchical relationship between programs and the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute.
results (résultat)
An external consequence attributed, in part, to an organization, policy, program or initiative. Results are not within the control of a single organization, policy, program or initiative; instead they are within the area of the organization's influence.
statutory expenditures (dépenses législatives)
Expenditures that Parliament has approved through legislation other than appropriation acts. The legislation sets out the purpose of the expenditures and the terms and conditions under which they may be made.
Strategic Outcome (résultat stratégique)
A long‑term and enduring benefit to Canadians that is linked to the organization's mandate, vision and core functions.
sunset program (programme temporisé)
A time‑limited program that does not have an ongoing funding and policy authority. When the program is set to expire, a decision must be made whether to continue the program. In the case of a renewal, the decision specifies the scope, funding level and duration.
target (cible)
A measurable performance or success level that an organization, program or initiative plans to achieve within a specified time period. Targets can be either quantitative or qualitative.
voted expenditures (dépenses votées)
Expenditures that Parliament approves annually through an Appropriation Act. The Vote wording becomes the governing conditions under which these expenditures may be made.
Date modified: