Audit of Policy Management– Phase One

Vetted Report

December 2018

Access to Information

This report has been reviewed in consideration of the Access to Information Act and Privacy Acts. The asterisks [***] appear where information has been removed; published information is UNCLASSIFIED.

Table of contents

• Acronyms and abbreviations
• Executive summary
• Management's response to the audit
• Background
• Objectives, scope and methodology
  • Objective
  • Scope
  • Methodology
  • Statement of conformance
• Audit findings
  • Policy and strategic planning capacity
  • Policy and strategic planning governance
  • Policy and strategic planning resourcing
• Conclusion
• Recommendations
• Appendix A – Audit objective and criteria
• Appendix B – Management action plan

Acronyms/definitions

CAP

Contract and Aboriginal Policing

CM

Civilian Member

CM&C

Corporate Management and Comptrollership

CROPS

Criminal Operations Support

FP

Federal Policing

HR

Human Resources

HRMIS

Human Resource Management Information System

IM/IT

Information Management/Information Technology

NHQ

National Headquarters

PPS

Policy and Publication Section

PRS

Professional Responsibility Sector

PS

Public Servant

RCMP

Royal Canadian Mounted Police

RM

Regular Member

SEC

Senior Executive Committee

SMEs

Subject Matter Experts

SPPD

Strategic Policy and Planning Directorate

SPS

Specialized Policing Services

Executive summary

The Commissioner approved an audit of Policy Management in the 2017-2022 Risk-based Audit Plan with the intended focus on the policy development process across the RCMP. *** in February 2018, the Senior Executive Committee determined that the planned Internal Audit of Policy Management provided the organization with an opportunity to obtain independent assurance on the policy and strategic planning capacity within all Business Lines and Divisions across the RCMP to allow for enhanced evidence-based decision making.

Accordingly, the audit approach was modified to be conducted in two phases. Phase One focussed on the strategic planning and policy capacity within the RCMP. The capacity assessment included an examination of the resources assigned to the strategic, operational, and administrative policy and strategic planning functions across the RCMP both at the national and divisional level.

The objective of the audit was to identify the resources engaged in policy development and strategic planning in the RCMP and assess whether there were any gaps or overlaps in organizational structure, capacity, and processes.

Overall, all Business Lines and Divisions provided comprehensive data and included resources who worked primarily in policy (332 resources) and strategic planning (96 resources) as well as resources who contributed their time to support policy and strategic planning on a part-time or occasional basis^{Footnote 1}. The part-time resources (250 resources for policy, and 148 resources for strategic planning) and occasional resources (254 resources for policy, and 161 resources for strategic planning) utilized by the Business Lines and Divisions contribute some of their time and knowledge to inform policy and strategic planning as subject matter experts, although their primary role is dedicated to operations or administration. The data provided by Business Lines and Divisions was in line with our reasonableness testing performed through data analytics.

The audit found that policy development in the RCMP is based on a hybrid model which includes a central strategic policy unit responsible for the development of policies related to government priorities. This is complemented by decentralized policy resources in Business Lines and Divisions who develop policies related to matters that are within their respective mandates. Similarly, strategic planning is coordinated by a central unit with the support of Business Lines and Divisions. We found that Business Lines have organized these resources differently. The results of our analysis and interviews with senior officials across the organization indicate that the policy model currently in place may not be effectively meeting the needs of the organization. We believe that opportunities exist to review the policy model to assess its effectiveness and determine if it is still the most appropriate model for the organization and also determine whether the capacity allocated to the policy and strategic planning functions within Business Lines and Divisions is appropriate and meets the organization needs.

Opportunities may also exist to: strengthen the policy governance process to ensure accountable structures are in place to support the Senior Executive Committee with evidence-based information for decision making; establish an organization-wide strategic planning process supported by performance reporting and developing an organization-wide strategic plan that will guide Business Lines and Divisions; and assess the mix of employment categories for the policy and strategic planning functions, including the feasibility of civilianizing certain RM positions, as part of a human resource strategy to fill vacancies.

Management's response to the audit

In general, we agree with the findings and recommendations in the Audit of Policy Management Phase One report. While acknowledging differing interpretations of policy and strategic planning definitions and the imprecise nature of time allocation estimates, the audit provides an overview of the resources contributing to policy and strategic planning across the organization.

The audit identifies that the number of resources contributing advice and expertise to the policy and planning functions varies across Business Lines and Divisions while also identifying that there is no consistency in how the resources are allocated and structured. Given that all Business Lines perform policy and strategic planning functions, it is important to ensure the organizational structure, capacity and processes are in place to support Senior Executive decision making with evidence-based information, at both the national and divisional levels.

We acknowledge the audit conclusion that it is timely to review the policy and strategic planning model currently in place to: assess overall effectiveness and determine if the model remains appropriate for the organization, and determine whether the capacity allocated to the policy and strategic planning functions is appropriate and efficient and meets the needs of the organization.

We also acknowledge the need to continue to assess the category of employees for the policy and strategic planning functions, with a view to civilianize Regular Member positions where feasible.

A detailed action plan which addresses the report recommendations, including specific timelines and milestones, will be developed for review by the Departmental Audit Committee prior to the next Committee meeting. The detailed action plan will consider work being undertaken as part of the RCMP's departmental review and other relevant strategic planning efforts currently underway.

Daniel Dubeau
Deputy Commissioner
Chief Human Resources Officer

Kevin Brosseau
Deputy Commissioner
Contract and Aboriginal Policing

Gilles Michaud
Deputy Commissioner
Federal Policing

François Bidal
Acting Deputy Commissioner
Specialized Policing Services

Chief Financial and Administrative Officer
Dennis Watters

Guylaine Dansereau
Professional Responsibility Officer

Kevin Jones, Assistant Commissioner
Acting Chief Strategic Policy and Planning Officer

Background

The Commissioner approved an audit of Policy Management in the 2017-2022 Risk-based Audit Plan with the intended focus on the policy development process across the RCMP. Parallel to the approval of the planned internal audit, ***

*** in February 2018, the Senior Executive Committee (SEC), led by the Acting Commissioner, determined that the planned Internal Audit of Policy Management provided the organization with an opportunity to obtain independent assurance on the policy and strategic planning capacity within all Business Lines and Divisions across the RCMP to allow for enhanced evidence-based decision making.

Based on the direction of the SEC, the audit approach was modified to be conducted in two phases, with the organization's policy and strategic planning capacity being the focus of the first phase. To help inform the organization's modernization efforts *** the SEC required the first phase of the audit to be completed in Spring 2018.

Through consultations with NHQ Business Lines in the planning phase of the audit, the audit team developed definitions of strategic and operational policy as well as strategic planning to be used for the capacity assessment. Strategic policy was defined as the process of developing positions on emerging issues for the whole organization, providing advice and options that are forward-looking and impact operations^{Footnote 2} RCMP-wide.

Operational and administrative policy was defined as the development and amendment of rules to direct employees in the execution of their daily responsibilities as reflected in the RCMP national and divisional manuals and directives.

Lastly, strategic planning was defined as the process of setting organizational priorities, determining forward looking objectives and a roadmap to achieve them RCMP-wide. It also involves allocating resources to pursue these objectives and tracking progress towards them.

In the RCMP, policy and strategic planning functions are performed by all Business Lines including the Professional Responsibility Sector (PRS), Corporate Management and Comptrollership (CM&C), Specialized Policing Services (SPS), Contract and Aboriginal Policing (CAP), Federal Policing (FP), Human Resources (HR), and notably, SPPD. In addition, Divisions perform policy development and strategic planning functions to address unique divisional differences as a result of inquiries, jurisprudence or provincial legislation.

Objectives, scope and methodology

Objective

The audit objective for Phase One of the audit was to identify the resources engaged in policy development and strategic planning in the RCMP and assess whether there were any gaps or overlaps in organizational structure, capacity, and processes. Appendix A presents the audit objective and criterion.

Scope

The preliminary scope of the audit was intended to focus on the policy development process across the RCMP. As mentioned in the background section *** the SEC determined that the audit provided the organization with an opportunity to obtain independent assurance on the policy and strategic planning capacity within all Business Lines and Divisions across the RCMP to allow for enhanced evidence-based decision making.

Accordingly, the audit approach was modified to be conducted in two phases. Phase One focussed on the strategic planning and policy capacity within the RCMP. The capacity assessment included an examination of the resources assigned to the strategic, operational, and administrative policy and strategic planning functions across the RCMP both at the national and divisional level. The period of scope for the capacity assessment consisted of resources allocated to the policy and strategic planning functions for fiscal year 2017-2018.

Phase Two will focus on policy development and approval processes, the publication process at the national and divisional levels and oversight and monitoring. Phase Two will be conducted at the conclusion of Phase One.

Methodology

Planning for the audit was completed in February 2018. In this phase, the audit team conducted interviews, process walkthroughs and examined relevant policies, procedures and results of previous audit work performed. The audit team also conducted a site visit to one Division.

The examination phase, which concluded in April 2018, employed various auditing techniques including interviews, documentation reviews and data analysis. Upon completion of the examination phase, the audit team held meetings with senior managers of Business Lines and Divisions to discuss relevant findings.

Statement of conformance

The audit engagement conforms to the Institute of Internal Auditors' International Professional Practices Framework and the Treasury Board of Canada Directive on Internal Audit, as supported by the results of the quality assurance and improvement program.

Audit findings

In order to assess the policy and strategic planning capacity across the organization and provide greater assurance *** Business Lines and Divisions were asked to identify their resources involved in policy and strategic planning and provide a number of data elements including: the employee's name, employment category by rank or classification as well as an estimate of time spent on policy and strategic planning activities for each employee. The audit team performed a challenge function of the reported resources by Business Lines and Divisions which included: the use of data analytics using information from the Human Resource Management Information System (HRMIS), analysis of the inventory of RCMP operational and administrative policies, Business Line and Division cross-comparisons, and interviews with Senior Management at the Assistant Commissioner or Director General level.

Overall, all Business Lines and Divisions provided comprehensive data and included resources who worked primarily in policy and strategic planning as well as resources who contributed their time to support policy and strategic planning occasionally. The data provided by Business Lines and Divisions was in line with the reasonableness testing performed through data analytics. During our follow-up meetings across the organization, senior management confirmed the estimates submitted and provided valuable context to support the resources assigned to the policy and planning functions.

While some limitations were encountered by the audit team, including certain data integrity issues within HRMIS, different interpretations of policy and strategic planning definitions by employees, and the imprecise nature of time allocation estimates, we were able to validate the reasonableness of the total resources reported.

Policy and strategic planning capacity

Policy management includes the development of strategic policy positions on emergent issues and government priorities, as well as the development of operational policies and directives that guide decision-making on a daily basis in an organization. Due to the operational nature of the organization, the RCMP requires the development of both strategic, operational and administrative policies.

While strategic policy is the process of developing positions on emerging issues of government interest, operational and administrative policies constitute advance official approval of the actions that employees are to take under stated circumstances.^{Footnote 3} Policies state what is to be done and who is responsible to do it.

RCMP Policy Model

An organization's policy management model can either be centralized, with most policy resources found in a core policy unit, or decentralized, with policy resources within the organization's programs and units, or a hybrid of the two. As part of our examination of policy capacity within the RCMP, we expected to find a defined policy model with roles and responsibilities that were clearly understood and levels of resourcing appropriate to support the selected model. Through our data analysis and interviews with senior officials across the organization, we found that the RCMP has in place a hybrid policy model consisting of a small central group of policy resources in SPPD, a group of policy analysts in each Business Line and Divisions as well as SMEs across different programs.

In the current model, SPPD serves as a central policy group responsible for providing strategic policy advice and ensuring strategy development for government-wide priorities. SPPD provides guidance as it relates to the development of parliamentary and cabinet affairs documents, supports the RCMP policy committee process approved by the SEC in 2010, and serves as the policy committee secretariat.^{Footnote 4}

In addition, there are a number of decentralized policy resources in Business Lines that address policy issues within their respective areas of responsibility. We found that Business Lines have organized these resources differently. While SPS and Federal Policing have established a strategic policy group that provides policy advice and develops policy positions related to the Business Line as a whole, other Business Lines have no such unit. All Business Lines also rely on SMEs who have the operational knowledge and expertise.

While we were informed by senior officials that the model was established through a SEC decision in the 2003 – 2005 timeframe, we were informed that a record of decision or other supporting documentation that would confirm the hybrid as the formally selected policy model for the organization was not available. In addition, documentation highlighting the guiding principles of the model to ensure that roles and responsibilities were understood across all Business Lines and Divisions was also not available.

Overall, interviews with senior managers in the RCMP indicated that the policy model currently in place may not effectively meet the needs of the organization. While this model may serve Business Lines that have been able to develop their own expertise in strategic policy, it leaves capacity gaps in Business Lines that have not been able to do so. Given the policy capacity of SPPD as a central strategic policy unit, we were informed by senior officials that it is unable to consistently support Business Lines that do not have a strong strategic capacity. As such, the current hybrid model does not ensure the optimization of the allocation of policy resources and does not provide the flexibility to re-assign resources to address emerging issues.

In terms of the role of Divisions in strategic policy, we determined that documentation formalizing Divisions' role in the policy development model was not available and roles and responsibilities were not clearly understood. Based on our data analysis and interviews with senior divisional officials, we found that Divisions interpreted their roles in strategic policy differently depending on the requirements from their contract partners and the extent to which they were consulted by NHQ on the development of strategic policies.

A decentralized or hybrid model requires coordination between all organizational stakeholders to ensure alignment where needed and consistent policy messages. Additionally, it requires adequate policy capacity at all levels to function effectively. We believe that opportunities exist to review the policy model to assess its effectiveness and determine if it is still the most appropriate model for the organization.

Policy Capacity

While our expectation was that resources across the RCMP would be performing either strategic policy, operational / administrative policy or strategic planning functions, our examination revealed that in many instances resources were performing a combination of all these functions. Based on the data we collected from all Business Lines and Divisions, a total of 982 resources were reported as being involved in policy and strategic planning in the RCMP.^{Footnote 5}

As part of assessing the policy capacity in the RCMP, the audit team completed an inventory of all policies contained in the RCMP manual structure at the national level. Table 1 identifies the number and distribution of RCMP national policies and the policy owner.

As indicated in table 2, NHQ Business Lines reported a total of 580 resources working on policy. This consisted of 52 resources working only on strategic policy, 261 working only on operational or administrative policy, and 267 resources working on both. We were informed by senior managers across the organization that depending on their areas of expertise, employees may work on activities related to strategic policy and also provide content expertise needed to support operational policy.

Overall, employees involved in strategic policy were involved in tasks such as writing briefing notes, providing policy advice, engaging with external stakeholders, and preparing parliamentary documents. Employees involved in operational and administrative policy were involved in tasks such as tracking operational issues, drafting operational/administrative policies, reviewing policies, and publishing policies.

As indicated in table 3 below, Divisions reported a total of 256 resources working on policy at the RCMP. This consisted of 15 resources working only on strategic policy, 89 working only on operational and administrative policy, and 152 resources working on both strategic and operational policy. Similar to NHQ, divisional employees may work on activities related to strategic policy and may also provide content expertise needed to support operational policy.

According to the policy on RCMP Manuals, Divisions can develop supplemental operational and administrative policies when a directive applies only to their particular area, and when the information is not contained in any national policy. Supplements are not meant to repeat national directives and only local practices unique to a province should be included in divisional supplements (blue / green sheets).^{Footnote 8}

The number of policy resources reported by Business Lines and Divisions varies widely. While 836 resources were identified as working on policy^{Footnote 9}, a breakdown of resources according to the time they allocate to policy better reflects the actual functioning policy capacity of the RCMP. This breakdown is based on full-time, part-time occasional resources as shown in table 4 and 5 below.

The policy capacity data in Table 4 above indicates that 281 employees were working full-time on policy activities in NHQ Business Lines^{Footnote 10}. This includes units that are solely responsible for strategic policy in SPPD, FP and SPS. All Business Lines also had full-time resources within their service lines and programs who worked on strategic policy related to their area of expertise.

Business Lines also had 181 part-time policy resources who devoted 11 to 49 percent of their time to analyze issues related to specific operational matters and contributed to the policy process as required. Finally, Business Lines identified 118 resources providing occasional expertise and allocating 1 to 10 percent of their time to policy tasks. We were informed by senior officials across Business Lines that this reflects the need for Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) within Business Lines to provide operational knowledge and expertise in support of developing relevant strategic and operational policy.

Similarly, the same distribution of work existed in the Divisions as shown in the table 5 below. Interviewees explained that employees working full-time on policy are generally employed in the Criminal Operations (CROPS) office and are responsible for operational policy advice, coordinating and reviewing policy for the Division and providing comments on national policies when requested. Other employees within HR, IM/IT, Real Property, Corporate Services and policing units also provide policy advice and support to the strategic and operational matters of the Division. Finally a number of SMEs contribute their operational knowledge and expertise to support the policy function across the Division.

Strategic Planning Capacity

As indicated in table 6 below, NHQ Business Lines reported a total of 249 resources working on strategic planning either full-time, part-time or occasionally. Employees involved in strategic planning were involved in tasks such as setting goals and objectives, establishing and tracking organizational performance, allocating resources to priorities, and contributing to departmental reporting.

Results show that the planning capacity across Business Lines varies greatly. While some Business Lines have had the resources available to invest in their planning capacity, others have not been able to do so resulting in lower capacity. Strategic planning resources perform a variety of activities depending on how the units determine and define their planning needs.

As shown in table 7, Divisions reported a total of 156 resources assigned to strategic planning. We were informed by senior divisional officials that Divisions across the country require capacity to plan and report on divisional priorities based on their agreements with contract partners.

These employees are generally employed in the Operational Strategy Branch, Administration and Personnel office, and the CROPS offices and are responsible for strategic planning at the divisional level. Other employees within HR, IM/IT, Real Property, Corporate Services and operational units also contribute to strategic planning. Provincial priorities may vary widely among provinces and hence the planning capacity and time spent within Divisions also differs. In larger Divisions, resources may be assigned a majority of their time to strategic planning while in smaller Divisions, planning resources may also be responsible for other tasks.

Policy and strategic planning governance

Policy Governance

Given the RCMP's decentralized and complex environment, there is a need to maintain effective governance over the policy function to ensure the coordination of horizontal initiatives and the development of integrated policy positions.

As previously mentioned in section 3.1, a policy committee process was established through a 2010 SEC decision and included a Senior Policy Committee and Policy Working Group, supported by a formalized terms of reference. The structure was intended to improve strategic direction and result in better articulated policy that is more closely aligned with the priorities of the Force and the Government of Canada.^{Footnote 11}

Based on a preliminary analysis of the current policy committee process, it was observed that working groups meet infrequently and that no records of decisions were available. In addition, we were informed that attendance by committee members was inconsistent and alternates were not always participating actively. In addition, the available terms of reference have not been updated since 2010.

Without a strong policy committee process in place, there is a risk that rigorous analysis of issues is not being conducted with input from key internal stakeholders and reviewed by the accountable bodies to ensure that evidence-based information is provided to SEC to support policy decision making. A strengthened policy committee could increase coordination for horizontal policy initiatives and ensure that key internal stakeholders are engaged. It could also ensure the consistency of policy messages when engaging with external stakeholders. Committees could also ensure that policy decisions are aligned to RCMP priorities and investment commitments.

Given the gaps identified in the current policy model, an opportunity exists to strengthen the governance structure. In addition, the governance structure should be adapted to any changes that may be made to the model in the future.

Strategic Planning Gap

SPPD is mandated to play a key role in strategic performance management, including leading the organization with processes and activities that support informed decision making.^{Footnote 12} The strategic planning function generally includes providing central oversight, governance and coordination to identify long-term gaps and concerns for the organization. However, the capacity data in Table 6 identifies that SPPD has 13 resources of the total 405 planning resources across Business Lines and Divisions, which may be insufficient to carry out this mandate for the RCMP and adequately meet the central strategic planning demands.

Senior management identified an overall capacity gap related to a Force-wide strategic planning function during our interviews. We were informed that programs look to SPPD for guidance and training on performance reporting but SPPD does not have sufficient resources to meet this demand. Senior managers within SPPD as well as other Business Lines have identified that SPPD currently does not have the capacity to conduct environmental scans, longer-term research and forward-looking planning needed to support the evolving needs of a modern professional police service. The planning capacity for SPPD reported in Table 6 corroborates this. Although there is planning capacity across the organization within Business Lines and Divisions, horizontal coordination is needed to effectively plan. The absence of an integrated long-term planning function increases the risk that the RCMP may not be identifying and monitoring issues to better position the Force for the future.

While the RCMP is currently developing its Departmental Results Framework in relation to the 2017 Treasury Board Policy on Results, interviewees also indicated the need for a strategic plan for the Force. The most recent strategic plan expired in 2017 and has not been updated. While some Business Lines and Divisions may have developed strategic plans to meet their specific needs, the plans may not be integrated. Without a Force-wide plan, there is a risk that the individual strategic plans may not be aligned with national priorities.

Finally, we were informed that performance information is not readily available to support the strategic planning process and to articulate the achievements and resource needs of the RCMP. The gathering of performance information is currently manual and can be time-consuming. The importance of business intelligence for evidence-based decision making is widely recognized across the Force, but a system is currently not in place to obtain the necessary metrics and performance information needed.

Policy and strategic planning resourcing

In addition to reporting their policy and planning resources, Business Lines and Divisions also reported the number of vacant positions they had as part of the capacity assessment.^{Footnote 13} The number of vacant positions across Business Lines and Divisions are compiled in Tables 8 and 9 below. Vacant positions in the policy function indicate an average vacancy rate of 17 percent for Business Lines and 10 percent for Divisions. Vacant positions in the strategic planning function indicate an average vacancy rate of 22 percent for Business Lines and 18 percent for Divisions. Business Lines that exceed the average vacancy rates include CAP, HR, FP as well as G, L, National, M and V Divisions.

Vacant positions in the policy and strategic planning functions serve as an indicator of a possible capacity gap for Business Lines and Divisions. However, the audit did not assess the number of positions each Business Line should have relative to the amount of policy and planning work they were responsible for. As such, it is uncertain whether any capacity issues would be resolved if all vacancies were filled.

Resource Allocation by Employment Category

Business Lines use different staffing models for their policy and strategic planning capacity and employ a mix of Regular Members (RMs), Civilian Members (CMs), and Public Servants (PSs). Senior management informed us of their need for analytical skill sets and policy expertise that PSs may bring, combined with the need for specialized policing knowledge from RMs. For example, SPPD is staffed solely with PSs based on the expertise and skill set required for the government-wide strategic policy function. CAP has a higher ratio of RMs as the focus of the policy capacity is mostly operational while Federal Policing has staffed their policy functions with a mix of employment categories.

While there are differing policy needs across each Business Line, we believe there is an opportunity to review the mix of employment categories to best optimize the use of limited resources given the skill sets required for the development of strategic, operational and administrative policies. With the ongoing pressures on the availability of RMs for operational roles and issues related to releasability and the credit system, further review by Business Lines could serve to assess the feasibility of civilianizing certain policy and strategic planning positions. Vacant policy and planning positions should also be included in a review of employment categories.

Operational Policy Gap

During the audit interviews, we were informed by senior managers across the organization that Business Lines and Divisions do not have sufficient resources to update National Policy Manuals on a consistent basis, resulting in many outdated policies. This was confirmed through our analysis of the current inventory of RCMP policies contained in the Administration, Operational, and Subsidiary Manuals. The results are documented in Table 12 and revealed that 42 percent of RCMP policies have not been updated in over 5 years (21 percent in over 10 years).^{Footnote 14}

A contributing factor to outdated policies may be the current backlog of policies waiting to be published by the Policy and Publication Section (PPS). Based on the status update provided by PPS on the RCMP intranet in April 2018, the backlog consisted of 135 policies.

Outdated policies present a risk of increased exposure to the RCMP if members act on current guidance that may be in conflict with the formal documented policy, particularly for high-risk programs. While the risk can be partly mitigated by the publication of bulletins and directives, the RCMP has a responsibility to incorporate new policies into their respective chapter or supplement within three months.^{Footnote 17} Phase II of this audit will examine the policy monitoring framework and assess potential gaps.

Conclusion

Overall, all Business Lines and Divisions provided comprehensive data and included resources who worked primarily in policy and strategic planning as well as resources who contributed their time to support policy and strategic planning occasionally. The data provided by Business Lines and Divisions was in line with our reasonableness testing performed through data analytics.

The audit found that policy development in the RCMP is based on a hybrid model which includes a central strategic policy unit responsible for the development of policies related to government-wide priorities. This is complemented by decentralized policy resources in Business Lines and Divisions who develop policies related to matters that are within their respective mandates. Similarly, strategic planning is coordinated by a central unit with the support of Business Lines and Divisions. We found that Business Lines have organized these resources differently. The results of our analysis and interviews with senior officials across the organization indicate that the policy model currently in place may not be effectively meeting the needs of the organization. We believe that opportunities exist to review the policy model to assess its effectiveness and determine if it is still the most appropriate model for the organization and also determine whether the capacity allocated to the policy and strategic planning functions within Business Lines and Divisions is appropriate and meets the organization needs.

Opportunities may also exist to: strengthen the policy governance process to ensure accountable structures are in place to support the Senior Executive Committee with evidence-based information for decision making; establish an organization-wide strategic planning process supported by performance reporting and developing an organization-wide strategic plan that will guide Business Lines and Divisions; and assess the mix of employment categories for the policy and strategic planning functions, including the feasibility of civilianizing certain RM positions, as part of a human resource strategy to fill vacancies.

Recommendations

1. The Senior Executive Committee should consider:
• whether the current hybrid policy model remains appropriate; and
• whether the capacity allocated to the policy and strategic planning functions within Business Lines and Divisions is appropriate and meets the organization needs.
2. The Chief Strategic Policy and Planning Officer, in consultation with heads of Business Lines, should consider strengthening the policy governance process to ensure accountable structures are in place to support the Senior Executive Committee with evidence-based information for decision making.
3. The Chief Strategic Policy and Planning Officer, in consultation with the Senior Executive Committee, should consider establishing an organization-wide strategic planning process supported by performance reporting and developing an organization-wide strategic plan that will guide Business Lines and Divisions.
4. Business Line Heads should consider reviewing their mix of employment categories for the policy and strategic planning functions, including the feasibility of civilianizing certain RM positions, as part of a human resource strategy to fill vacancies.

Appendix A – Audit objective and criteria

Appendix B – Management action plan

Date modified:

2019-05-07