ARCHIVED - Canadian Food Inspection Agency - Report

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Section II: Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome

2.1 How the Agency Plans and Reports

In accordance with Treasury Board Secretariat's (TBS) MRRS Policy, the CFIA planning and reporting framework is based on strategic outcomes, a PAA and an associated governance framework. The PAA is aligned with the GoC outcomes and takes into consideration the impact of several factors – including the global and national environment, GoC priorities, CFIA strategic risks, its human and financial resource capacity, and outcomes of its past performance and related lessons learned.

This report highlights key accomplishments and reports on progress made in advancing the plans and priorities identified in the CFIA's 2009–10 RPP. Under each strategic outcome and program activity, performance is reported on special initiatives, risk mitigation strategies and ongoing activities, with a focus on expected results for Canadians.

Section 2.2 of this report describes performance information, including highlights, challenges, lessons learned and expected results for each strategic outcome measured against targets using compliance and other relevant performance indicators.

2.1.1 Assessment of Compliance and Performance Targets

Given the complexity and inherent variability of the agriculture, agri-food, forestry and fisheries production, processing and distribution sectors, the approach to assessing compliance varies across commodity groups. The CFIA uses a variety of tools to monitor and promote compliance, including inspections, audits, product sampling and testing. The CFIA uses risk-based approaches that focus effort on the areas of highest risk. For example, the CFIA focuses its efforts on systems, processes and facilities that have the most direct effect on the safety of food. The resulting compliance rates indicate the extent to which regulated parties have adhered to requirements specified in the federal acts and regulations. Year-over-year compliance trends, when the broader environmental context is taken into account, are more informative in terms of the true performance in an area than the absolute compliance rate for any one year. For detailed information on the assessment of compliance, see Section 3.3.3.

Performance targets for compliance rates are qualitative or quantitative goals set by the CFIA that provide a basis for measuring the performance of regulated parties and the Agency toward achieving expected results. The targets in this report are for critical program areas and based either on historical averages of actual performance or on the expected results of effective programming (e.g. rate of industry compliance with regulatory standards). The CFIA has assessed the extent to which performance has met or exceeded established targets and provided analysis when performance has fallen below targets. Targets for programs that monitor activities are set differently than for programs that focus on specific areas of non-compliance. In terms of compliance rates, the CFIA considers performance within +/- 1% to be considered met.

2.1.2 Fair and Reliable Performance Reporting

In 2008–09, as part of a long-term process to improve overall performance measurement and reporting, the CFIA initiated the Performance Management Reporting Solution (PMRS) project, an Agency-wide management tool that will allow for better reporting and enhance performance monitoring and reporting at all levels. The Enterprise and Operational Reporting (EOR) system, an electronic data warehouse that integrates data from CFIA programs for use by the PMRS, was also launched. When fully operational, the PMRS will facilitate the production of corporate documents such as the RPP, the Performance Report and the Management Accountability Framework, and the PAA and its Performance Measurement Framework. In 2009–10, 16% of the programs were rolled out in the EOR system.

2.1.2.1 Data Quality

In 2009–10, a review was conducted of the methodology behind the Data System and Process Control table that used to appear in previous performance reports (PR). It was determined that the methodology previously used to assess the quality of the data and the resulting assigned ratings was no longer valid because it did not adequately reflect the current state of data control at the CFIA. As such, the Data System and Process Control table has been removed.

Consequently, to provide the reader with an understanding of the level of reliability associated with the performance indicator results found in this report, the CFIA has included a table outlining the various data quality checks that are in place for each performance indicator. The CFIA has identified nine general data quality checks that can be present during the process whereby raw performance data is collected, processed, and analysed to generate a final performance result. Table 2-1 shows which of the nine data quality checks are used in each of the data systems behind each performance indicator. This provides the reader with a clear sense of the data quality checks used to generate each performance indicator result.

It is important to keep in mind that the information found in this table provides a relative measure of the reliability of the performance indicator results. This means a data system with nine out of nine data checks in place should be thought of as more reliable than one with five out of nine data checks. It does not mean that a data system with five out of nine data checks in place is unreliable or that a data system with nine out of nine data checks is reliable. The reader should keep in mind that the performance indicator results presented in this report do go through a thorough internal review before they are published. Please note that the new approach used this year to improve the data quality discussion is an interim step in a longer term process. As such, the CFIA will continue to strengthen its data quality discussion in future performance reports.

Table 2.1: Data Quality Checks

Indicator Title	Source Documents available (Guides, Procedures, manuals)	Data is cross-referenced	Performance results are compared to previous years	System reports and results are consistent regardless of when they are generated or who generates them	Employees are trained to manipulate data	No 3rd-party data is used or 3rd-party data is provided in a compulsory fashion	Data is prepared at least once per year	Management Reviews results at least once per year	No new data system(s) used in 2009–10	# Data Quality Checks Met
Extent to which inspected federally-registered establishments comply with federal food safety requirements
Meat	√	X	√	X	X	√	√	X	√	5
Fish and seafood	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	9
Processed products	X	X	√	√	X	√	√	√	√	6
Dairy	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Shell Egg	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	9
Extent to which domestic and imported food products comply with federal chemical residue requirements
Meat	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Fish & Seafood	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	9
Fresh fruit and vegetables	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Processed products	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Honey	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Shell Egg	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Dairy	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Time taken to issue public warnings for Class I recalls	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Extent to which nutrition information on non-registered food products inspected is accurate	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Number of incidents of Avian Influenza that expand beyond the initial control zone	√	√	X	√	X	√	√	√	√	7
Extent to which the CFIA’s data indicates that foreign regulated animal diseases have entered Canada via specified regulated pathways	√	X	√	X	X	X	√	√	√	5
Extent to which the CFIA’s data indicates the spread of foreign regulated animal diseases that entered into Canada this fiscal year	√	√	X	√	X	√	√	√	√	7
Extent to which renderers and feed mills inspected are without any major deviations with respect to the Feeds Regulations and the Health of Animals Regulations
Renderers	Not Reported in 2009–2010
Feed Mills	Not Reported in 2009–2010
Extent to which CFIA data indicates the entry and establishment of new and foreign regulated plant diseases and pests into Canada (listed diseases/pests in the Regulated Pest List for Canada)	√	X	X	√	X	X	√	√	√	5
Extent of change in the presence of regulated plant diseases or pests beyond the regulated areas	√	X	X	√	X	X	√	√	√	5
Extent to which Plant Health risks identified by the CFIA (within and outside Canada) are communicated to the affected stakeholders	Not Reported in 2009–2010
Percentage of inspections of novel products that demonstrate compliance with the requirements and standards outlined in the respective authorizations for experimental purposes
Plants with Novel Traits	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Novel Fertilizers	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Feed	No Inspections Performed
Veterinary Biologics	√	X	X	X	√	√	√	√	√	6
Percentage of regulatory initiatives that meet publication requirements for publication in either Canada Gazette, Part I or Part II	√	√	√	X	√	√	X	√	√	7
Extent to which the net quantity, composition, labelling and advertising of non-registered food products inspected is accurate	√	X	√	√	√	√	√	√	√	8
Extent to which certified food, animal and plant shipments meet the receiving country’s import requirements
Food – Meat	√	X	√	X	X	X	√	√	√	5
Food – Fish and Seafood	√	√	√	√	√	X	√	√	√	8
Food – Processed Egg	√	√	√	√	√	X	√	√	√	8
Animal	No Data Available
Plant	√	X	√	√	√	X	√	√	√	7

2.1.3 Auditor General's Assessment of Performance Information

[D]

[D]

2.2 Performance by Strategic Outcome

2.2.1 Strategic Outcome 1: Public health risks associated with the food supply and transmission of animal diseases to humans are minimized and managed

[D]

As a contributor to the GoC's integrated approach to population health, the CFIA, in collaboration with federal partners and provincial, territorial and municipal governments, protects Canadians from preventable foodborne health risks and risks associated with animal diseases potentially transmissible to humans. In carrying out activities toward the achievement of this strategic outcome, the CFIA focused its efforts on the following two priorities:

• Improving inspection and surveillance approaches
• Modernizing the Agency's regulatory framework and tools

While work under the program activities Food Safety and Nutrition Risks and Zoonotic Risks is primarily aimed at addressing the Foodborne Hazards and Zoonotic Outbreaks/Incidents risk areas⁹, it also benefits the other key risk areas noted above.

Percentage of 2009–10 Actual Spending: Strategic Outcome 1

[D]

 

Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Benefits for Canadians

The safety of the Canadian food supply is critical to the overall health and well-being of Canadians. The CFIA, in collaboration with federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal partners and organizations works to protect the overall health of Canadians by minimizing and managing food safety and nutrition risks.

Performance Summary

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected results, performance indicators and targets for the Food Safety and Nutrition Risks program activity, and reports 2009–10 performance against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 3.3.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2–2: Summary of Performance: Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Program Activity: Food Safety and Nutrition Risks

Expected Result: Risks associated with food, including nutrition, are managed within acceptable limits
2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
245.5	276.5	270.5	2,795	2,838	(43)
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Planned Spending and Total Authorities is mainly due to new funding for the Government of Canada Response to Listeriosis, the CEAP and the Growing Forward Program Suite. The variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 2,831 compared to Actual FTEs of 2,838, resulting in a difference of 7.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which inspected federally registered establishments comply with federal food safety requirements	≥ 98% compliance	Meat	96%	Not Met
		Fish and Seafood10	99%	Met
		Processed Products	99%	Met
		Dairy	100%	Met
		Shell Egg	99%	Met
Performance Analysis: Meat In 2008–09, a more rigorous inspection regime was implemented which included a new Compliance Verification System (CVS), new enforcement procedures for meat and poultry establishments, and stronger food safety control measures in ready-to-eat meat plants. In 2009–10, CFIA continued to align its inspection activities with the new regime and adjust to the new system and processes. Although, the Agency did not meet its performance target in 2009–10, Meat establishment compliance has improved because the establishments are more familiar with the Compliance Verification System. Emphasis has also been placed on resolving problems before they occur resulting in enhanced communication and engagement with the meat industry. This includes guidance for both inspectors and operators of federally registered meat and poultry establishments which should also help the industry to improve compliance in subsequent years. Compliance Approaches and Methods: A monitoring approach11 is used to assess compliance for all commodities under this indicator. Compliance results are determined at either the initial inspection or audit or during the first follow-up visit. Three-year Trend Analysis: Meat (2007–08, 99%; 2008–09, 95%) Following the implementation of CVS, the CFIA observed that Industry compliance with regulations decreased from 2007–08 to 2008–09. From fiscal year 2008–09 to fiscal year 2009–10, the Agency reported an increase of 1% (95% to 96%). It is expected that industry compliance with regulations will continue to increase each year as operators of federally registered meat and poultry establishments become more familiar with the CVS. Fish and Seafood A three year trends analysis is not valid as the calculation changed for this sub-indicator in 2009–10. Dairy and Shell Egg For the past three years, Dairy, and Shell Egg met their target. CFIA inspectors have built relationships with industry and worked to instill a comprehensive understanding of inspection requirements. Processed Products In 2008–09, revisions to the Establishment Inspection Manual were completed; as a result, Processed Products has improved compliance due to a better understanding of the new guidelines. Continued co-operation from and collaboration with industry are also responsible for helping the CFIA meet its target.
Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which domestic and imported food products comply with federal chemical residue requirements	≥ 95% compliance	Meat	96%	Met
		Fish and Seafood12	95%	Met
		Fresh fruit and vegetables	97%	Met
		Processed Products	99%	Met
		Honey	61%	Not Met
		Shell Egg	97%	Met
		Dairy	96%	Met
Performance Analysis: All areas were successful in meeting their target, except for honey. Honey The compliance rate for honey was low because of two bee calming agents used by industry to calm bees when honey is being extracted from hives. The calming agent is not currently regulated as part of the Food and Drugs Regulations, which means that a maximum allowable residue limit (MRL) has not yet been prescribed. Currently, an aggressive limit of 0.1 parts/million has been set as the default which lowers compliance rates. Efforts are underway by Health Canada to establish a maximum limit for the residue level. Compliance Approaches and Methods: Fish and Seafood A monitoring13, targeted14 and investigative15 approach is used to assess compliance in the Fish and Seafood sector. Compliance results are assessed during the initial testing phase of food and product samples. Meat, Fresh Fruit and Vegetables, Processed Products, Honey, Shell Egg and Dairy All other sub-indicators are monitored for compliance during the initial testing phase of food and product samples. Three-year Trend Analysis: For the past three years the Meat, Fresh Fruit and Vegetables, Process Products, Shell Egg and Dairy sub- indicators have met their targets. This level of performance can be attributed to the responsible use of agricultural chemicals by food producers. There is a high degree of both compliance and understanding among industry members with respect to maximum residue limits (MRL) for veterinary drugs and pesticides within Canada. Should a violation occur, the CFIA has the appropriate mechanisms in place for follow-up (investigation, directed sampling, etc). Fish and Seafood A three year trends analysis is not valid as the calculation changed for this sub-indicator in 2009–10. Honey (2007–08, 84%; 2008–09, 76%) The compliance rate of the Honey sub-indicator has decreased to 61% and has been decreasing since 2006–07 due to changes in the assessment criteria for the two bee calming agents. In 2007–08 and in 2008–09 the assessment criteria was changed to a more stringent set of requirements which resulted in a significant drop in compliance for testing of these two agents. The overall number of tests for these agents also increased in 2009–10, increasing the likelihood of detecting cases of non-compliance. Additionally, from a human health perspective, the levels of these compounds observed in honey commodities are not of concern as a food additive.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Time taken to issue public warnings for Class I recalls	100% of public warnings for Class I recalls are issued within 24 hours of a recall decision	100%	Met

Performance Analysis: In 2009–10, the CFIA effectively managed the issuance of 68 public warnings for Class I recalls for risks associated with food. Three-year Trend Analysis: The performance target of 24 hours has been missed only once in the last three years. This level of performance is largely due to the cooperation between CFIA food safety recall specialists, inspectors, recall coordinators, technical specialists, communications advisors and assessors at Health Canada.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which nutrition information on non-registered food products inspected is accurate.16	≥80% of food products inspected declare nutrition information, which is accurate.	80%	Met

Performance Analysis: The sampling of products for nutrition information accuracy is targeted to nutrition risks, high-risk food sectors and operators with a history of non-compliance. The 2009–10 sample plans provided inspectors and analysts with adequate procedures and guidelines for assessing products of non-registered establishments. Three-year Trend Analysis: (2008–09, 85%) The result is slightly lower than last year. This variability may be linked to the fact that sampled food sectors vary from year to year. 2008–09 was the first year the CFIA reported on this indicator; for the past two years, the target has been met.

Additional Information: Food safety portal: www.foodsafety.gc.ca Moving Forward on Food Safety Action on Listeria: www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/movava/movavae.shtml CFIA Consumer Centre: www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/concen/concene.shtml Food Recalls and Allergy Alerts: www.inspection.gc.ca/english/corpaffr/recarapp/recaltoce.shtml FCSAP: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/concen/concengov/govplane.shtml

* For more information on data controls and data limitations regarding CFIA's performance indicators, please see Table 2-1.

In addition to the detailed performance results found in Table 2-2, the CFIA also achieved strategic performance results under the Food Safety and Nutrition Risks PA:

Strategic Performance Analysis

In responding to the recommendations in the Report of the Independent Investigator into the 2008 Listeriosis Outbreak, the CFIA has implemented changes to food safety programs and directives that are designed to improve and strengthen existing processes and procedures. The CFIA was the lead in addressing 25 of a total of 57 recommendations. As identified in the March “Progress on Food Safety” report¹⁷, the Government has made progress on all of the recommendations contained in the report of the Independent Investigator. The following are examples of progress made by the CFIA with respect to the 25 recommendations for which it is the lead Agency:

• Implemented revised Listeria directives that require meat processors to bring all Listeria-positive results to the attention of CFIA inspectors. Requirements from the directives, as well as additional improvements, were included in an updated version of the Meat Hygiene Manual of Procedures.
• Expanded its capacity to conduct enhanced Listeria surveillance and testing pursuant to sampling plans implemented in April 2009. To address the increased volume of samples, all CFIA food microbiology laboratories were made available to receive samples and perform tests seven days per week.
• Met with consumers and consumer association representatives across Canada to share information on topics such as the CFIA's role in food recalls, food labelling and food safety investigations. Results from these meetings helped the CFIA to strengthen outreach—such as the launch of the GoC Food Safety Portal and the redesign of the Agency's Consumer Centre website—and to inform policies relating to food safety.
• Worked with Health Canada on a number of food safety publications and multimedia products.
• Provided additional information on Class II and III food recalls on the CFIA's website to raise consumer awareness of the potential risks to the food supply.

The CFIA is committed to continually strengthening its programs to maintain Canadians' high level of confidence in Canada's food safety system. In 2009–10, the CFIA achieved the following:

• Implemented the CVS in the Feed Program and continued the improvement of the CVS for the Meat Program. The CVS will help improve regulated parties' compliance with regulations and enhance food safety oversight. Furthermore, the CFIA continued to study the feasibility of implementing the CVS throughout its commodity inspection programs.

Within the context of the Food and Consumer Safety Action Plan (FCSAP), the CFIA is advancing initiatives that support the following: active prevention to better identify food safety risks, targeted oversight to enhance inspection of high-risk food sectors, and rapid response to problems when they occur (i.e. enhanced food recall capacity and improved tools to alert Canadians to food-related hazards). For example, in 2009–10, the CFIA achieved the following:

• Signed an important arrangement with the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine of the People's Republic of China (AQSIQ) as part of Year Two of the FCSAP. This arrangement establishes a Canada–China Food Safety Working Group, whose main objective is a mutual understanding of our structures, programs and operating mechanisms to facilitate exploration of approaches for the rapid exchange of information on food safety issues and the handling of food safety emergencies.
• Continued to enhance its relationship with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (U.S. FDA) by discussing options for information-sharing regarding mutual food safety challenges, and by identifying areas for collaboration.
• Enhanced the delivery of inspections by targeting “high-risk” products such as seasonings, flavourings, pastes and sauces (e.g. chili paste, curry powder mix) for undeclared allergens (soy, gluten, milk, etc.) or snack foods, as well as flavoured beverages for undeclared allergens (peanut, milk, tree nuts).
• Worked with domestic government partners to increase capacity to identify and mitigate food safety risks through such activities as developing and implementing a risk mapping model. The CFIA also focused on the development of policy and associated programs to enhance food safety oversight, and increased awareness and understanding of consumers and industry stakeholders regarding their role in food safety through the use of communications tools and a number of outreach initiatives. These outreach initiatives included industry and consumer conferences, information sessions and workshops.

Zoonotic Risks

Benefits for Canadians

Managing and mitigating the spread of zoonotic diseases from animals to humans is important because it minimizes the danger to the health and well-being of Canadians. This involves work with federal, provincial and territorial partners and non-government stakeholders.

Performance Summary

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected result, performance indicators and targets for the Zoonotic Risks program activity, and reports 2009–10 performance against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 3.3.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2–3: Summary of Performance: Zoonotic Risks

Program Activity: Zoonotic Risks

Expected Result: Risks of the transmission of animal diseases to humans are managed within acceptable limits18
2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
75.3	91.2	83.3	679	539	140
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Planned Spending and Total Authorities is mainly due to new funding for the H1N1 Preparedness and Response and the CEAP, as well as funding received for the continuance of the BSE initiative. The Variance between Total Authorities and Actual Spending relates to lapsing funds in both BSE and Avian Influenza. The Variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 298 compared to Actual FTEs of 539, resulting in a difference of 241. This variance can be explained by the FTEs received during the fiscal year for the continuance of BSE.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Number of incidents of avian influenza that expand beyond the initial control zone19	No expansion of the disease beyond the initial control zone	Met
Performance Analysis: As there were no incidents of avian influenza reported, none expanded beyond the initial control zone. Three-year Trend Analysis: As 2008–09 was the CFIA's first year reporting on this indicator, a three year trend is not possible.
Additional Information: Avian Influenza programming: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/heasan/disemala/avflu/avflue.shtml Animal diseases: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/disemala/disemalae.shtml

* For more information on data controls and data limitations regarding CFIA's performance indicators, please see Table 2-1.

In addition to the detailed performance results found in Table 2-3, the CFIA also achieved strategic performance results under the Zoonotic Risks PA:

Strategic Performance Analysis

The CFIA continued to enhance systems to manage and mitigate the spread of existing federally controlled zoonotic diseases. In 2009–10, the CFIA did the following:

• Continued to protect cows from BSE and ensuring Canadian's food is safe by verifying industry's removal of specified risk material (SRM) from the human food and animal feed chains. Removal of SRM is recognized as the single most effective measure for controlling BSE.
• Helped prevent animal infections by working to detect poultry flocks infected with notifiable avian influenza before the disease could be spread to other flocks. This was achieved by educating industry through the CFIA's biosecurity programs and ongoing surveillance. In addition, the CFIA conducted field exercises within the Agency and with partners in provinces and industry; continued training in foreign animal disease recognition; and reviewed containment strategies such as vaccination.
• Enhanced communications on reportable disease detections in farmed animals. All confirmed cases of any of the reportable diseases are now reported monthly or quarterly on the CFIA's website, at which time email notification is sent to subscribers. This centralized format provides additional disease background more readily for stakeholders and partners.
• Collaborated with the Canadian Animal Health Surveillance Network (CAHSN) National BSE Surveillance Program achieving a web-based, central repository for merged provincial BSE test data that is accessible for analysis and reporting to the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE).

The CFIA is a key player in a number of international zoonotic disease fora and is actively called upon to manage Canadian portions of international zoonotic disease outbreaks. A number of key partnerships have been formed, and plans have been proactively developed to respond to zoonotic diseases and protect public health, such as the following:

• In collaboration with the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), the CFIA developed a test to confirm, within a very short timeline, the presence and characteristics of the H1N1 virus in animals. This test was then shared with other animal disease diagnostic laboratories in Canada and around the world.
• To ensure that the CFIA would be able to respond effectively to an H1N1 outbreak in animals, the Agency purchased over $100,000 of personal protective equipment for front-line staff. Additionally, the CFIA developed a national policy entitled “Policy to Manage Pandemic H1N1/2009 in Animal Populations” to improve the management of infected livestock and poultry.
• The CFIA continued to work with federal, provincial and territorial partners, and other national and international organizations such as the OIE to share scientific knowledge, establish collaborative approaches to common challenges and share best practices as they pertain to zoonotic disease preparedness, disease mitigation and control.

2.2.2 Strategic Outcome 2: A safe and sustainable plant and animal resource base

[D]

The CFIA's programming is aimed at protecting Canada's crops, forests, livestock, aquatic species and wildlife from regulated pests and diseases; preventing the introduction of contaminants into human food or the environment through animal and plant production systems; and assessing the environmental sustainability and impact on biodiversity of new products derived through enabling technologies such as biotechnology. In carrying out activities toward the achievement of this strategic outcome, the CFIA focused its efforts on the following priorities:

• Enhancing compliance and enforcement activities; and
• Modernizing the Agency's regulatory framework.

While work under such program activities as Animal Health Risks and Production Systems, Plant Health Risks and Production Systems, and Biodiversity Protection, is primarily aimed at addressing the Animal and Plant Pest and Disease risk areas, it also benefits the other key risk areas noted above.

Percentage of 2009–10 Actual Spending: Strategic Outcome 2

[D]

Animal Health Risks and Production Systems

Benefits for Canadians

The Canadian agriculture and agri-food industry depends on a safe and sustainable animal resource base. In support of this, the CFIA works to protect the animal resource base—through the regulation of terrestrial and aquatic diseases and feed—from risks that could impact the food supply, economy, environmental sustainability and well-being of Canadians.

Performance Summary

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected result, performance indicators and targets for the Animal Health Risks and Production Systems program activity, and reports 2009–10 performance against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 3.3.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2–4: Summary of Performance: Animal Health Risks and Production Systems

Program Activity: Animal Health Risks and Production Systems

Expected Result: Risks to the animal resource base are managed within acceptable limits
2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
56.7	84.1	80.1	652	725	(73)
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Planned Spending and Total Authorities is mainly due to funding received for the Growing Forward Program Suite and for additional statutory compensation. The Variance between Total Authorities and Actual Spending relates to lapsing funds in some of the CFIA's initiatives, as well as internal reallocations. The Variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 792 compared to Actual FTEs of 725, resulting in a difference of 67. This variance relates to lapsing funds in some of the Agency's initiatives.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which the CFIA's data indicates that foreign regulated animal diseases have entered Canada via specified regulated pathways	No evidence (i.e. confirmed by the CFIA's data) that foreign regulated animal diseases have entered into Canada through specified regulated pathways	Met
Performance Analysis: No foreign regulated animal diseases have entered Canada via specified regulated pathways in 2009–10. The CFIA administers risk management processes designed to prevent the entrance of foreign regulated animal diseases into Canada via regulated pathways; this includes surveillance initiatives and partnerships with other government departments at the provincial, territorial and federal levels. Three-year Trend Analysis: For the past three years, the CFIA has met its target for this performance indicator.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which the CFIA's data indicates the spread of foreign regulated animal diseases that entered into Canada this fiscal year20.	No evidence, as confirmed by the CFIA's data of spread of foreign regulated animal diseases beyond the initial control zone.	Met
Performance Analysis: No foreign regulated animal diseases have entered Canada via specified regulated pathways, and therefore none have spread. Three-year Trend Analysis: For the past two years, the CFIA has met its target; 2008–09 was the first year reporting.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which renderers and feed mills inspected are without any major deviations with respect to the Feeds Regulations and the Health of Animals Regulations (enhanced feed ban)21	≥ 95% compliance	Renderers	Not reporting	Not reporting
		Feed Mills	Not reporting	Not reporting
Performance Analysis: Following the transition to a different database system, data issues have been detected which must be resolved to ensure accurate reporting of program performance. Performance on this indicator will be available later in the year once the issues have been addressed. Compliance Approaches and Methods: A monitoring approach is used to assess compliance for both sub-indicators. Compliance results are determined following a correction period of 60 days minimum after the end of the fiscal year. Three-year Trend Analysis: As 2009–10 performance for these sub-indicators will not be reported this year, trends analysis is not available at this time.
Additional Information: Animal Health Programs: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/animae.shtml

* For more information on data controls and data limitations regarding CFIA's performance indicators, please see Table 2-1.

In addition to the detailed performance results found in Table 2-4, the CFIA also achieved strategic performance results under the Animal Health Risks and Production Systems:

Strategic Performance Analysis

The CFIA continues to respond to emergencies and domestic animal disease outbreaks while maintaining a collaborative approach with stakeholders. More specifically, the CFIA undertook the following:

• Launched an animal health awareness campaign that helped increase awareness and the adoption of core biosecurity principles on farms across Canada. The campaign included a national advertising campaign, training video and handbook, and face-to-face interaction at fairs, conferences and meetings with producers across Canada. Two-thirds of producers surveyed recall having seen, read or heard advertising about animal health or biosecurity over the past few months.
• Released the national Avian On-Farm Biosecurity Standard, designed to minimize the introduction and spread of diseases and pests that has since been incorporated into Chicken Farmers of Canada's on-farm safety program. The Standard was developed through extensive consultation with agri-commodity stakeholders, academia, and provincial and federal partners.
• The CFIA continued to address action items identified in the Foot and Mouth (FMD) Preparedness Risk Based Action Plan in order to enhance Agency preparedness and response capabilities. Activities included industry biosecurity guideline development for susceptible livestock species, progress on the CFIA–U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) project on regionalization in the event of foreign animal disease, and elaboration of animal disposal procedures to include all hazards/species and transportation of infected animal material.
• Further implemented the National Aquatic Animal Health Program in 2009–10, which led to proposed regulatory changes to ensure that Canada maintains its exports by having an internationally recognized aquatic animal health program that meets international standards. These changes will increase consumer and aquatic resources (both wild and farmed) protection, and will enhance market access for aquaculture and wild aquatic commodities.
• Completed foresight exercises as part of the Foresight for Canadian Animal Health (Fore-CAN) project, led by the CFIA with partners in PHAC, AAFC, provinces and territories, academia and industry. Foresight is a key element for a better understanding of the challenges and opportunities that science partners will have to face a decade or more into the future.

In 2009–10, the CFIA continued to work with federal, provincial and territorial governments to advance key initiatives under the animal health program.

• For example, the discovery of pandemic H1N1 2009 influenza virus (pH1N1) in a herd of pigs in Alberta at the initial stages of the 2009 pandemic resulted in a collaborative effort involving animal health and public health authorities at the international, national and the federal, provincial and territorial levels to address issues of common concern associated with the pathogenicity of the virus, virus transmission and occupational safety and health. The One World, One Health concept was illustrated by this situation and continues to be applied in federal, provincial and territorial discussions on policy and regulatory approaches for identified and emerging zoonotic diseases.
• Federal, provincial, and territorial governments are committed to move forward on a comprehensive national traceability system for livestock and poultry by 2011, which is critical for managing animal health and food safety issues, as well as expanding market access and driving efficiencies.

To continue to modernize the animal programs, the CFIA updated key elements of the regulatory framework by undertaking the following in 2009–10:

Plant Health Risks and Production Systems

Benefits for Canadians

The protection of the plant resource base is integral to a safe and accessible food supply and critical to the economy, environmental sustainability and well-being of all Canadians. The CFIA helps to protect Canada's plant resource base from regulated pests and diseases and from deliberate threats, and regulates agricultural and forest products to promote the sustainability of the plant resource base.

Performance Summary

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected result, performance indicators and targets for the Plant Health Risks and Production Systems program activity, and reports 2009–10 performance against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 3.3.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2–5: Summary of Performance: Plant Health Risks and Production Systems

Program Activity: Plant Health Risks and Production Systems

Expected Result: Risks to the plant resource base are managed within acceptable limits
2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
61.3	94.7	89.7	655	735	(80)
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Planned Spending and Total Authorities is mainly due to funding received to assist in the payment of litigation costs; funding received related to the CEAP; and funds received for additional statutory compensation. The Variance between Total Authorities and Actual Spending relates to lapsing funds in some of the Agency's initiatives, as well as internal reallocations. The Variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 735, the same as the Actual FTEs.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which CFIA data indicates the entry and establishment of new and foreign regulated plant diseases and pests into Canada (listed diseases/pests in the Regulated Pest List for Canada)22	No evidence (i.e. confirmed by CFIA data) of the entry and establishment of new foreign regulated plant diseases and pests into Canada through specified regulated pathways	Met 0 entries of pests currently on the Regulated List for Canada
Performance Analysis: The Agency continues to demonstrate its ability to quickly respond and investigate the risks posed to Canada's plant resource base; this was achieved by developing strategies for control and eradication (e.g. regulatory tools such as: restrictions on the movement of materials that act as pathways for the transmission of the pest; or treatment or destruction of infested material). The spread of pests and diseases can result from many natural factors including wind and wildlife. Three-year trend Analysis: (2007-08, 3 entries, 2008–09, no entries) In the past two fiscal years there has been a decrease of pest entries into Canada due in part to a refinement of the indicator to reflect pests which are currently on the regulated pest list.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent of change in the presence of regulated plant diseases or pests beyond the regulated areas	No evidence of increase in the size of regulated areas for plant diseases/pests attributable to human activity	Not Met Four pests spread outside their regulated areas.
Performance Analysis: The prevention of the spread of plant pests through human activity relies on regulated parties and the general public to be aware of any restrictions on the movement of regulated or high-risk materials from an infested area to a non-infested area. Of the four pests that spread outside of the regulated area during the 2008–09 fiscal year, only the emerald ash borer and the blueberry maggot spread again in 2009–10. In 2009–10, the pine shoot beetle and the brown spruce longhorn beetle spread outside of their regulated areas. Three-year Trend Analysis: (2006–07, Some Increase; 2007–08, Increase; 2008–09, Five Pests Spread) The performance of this indicator has improved over the years due to the CFIA’s continued focus on a proactive approach of education and outreach aimed at informing the general public about the significance of plant health in Canada.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which Plant Health risks identified by the CFIA (within and outside Canada) are communicated to the affected stakeholders	Following the identification of a plant health risk, appropriate information is communicated with the relevant stakeholders in less than one month	Not Reporting
Performance Analysis: During 2009–10, the second year of reporting on this indicator, a change to the methodology was required to better measure the CFIA's performance relating to the communication of plant health risks to stakeholders. However, it was determined that the existing data collection approach was unable to support the updated methodology. Consequently, there is insufficient data to accurately report on this indicator for 2009–10. For 2010–11, the third year of reporting on this indicator, the CFIA will be implementing a new data collection system which will allow the CFIA to report on this indicator. Three-year Trend Analysis: As this indicator will not be reported for 2009–10, a trends analysis is not available.
Additional Information: Plant Protection Programs: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/plavege.shtml Plant Pests: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/pestrava/pestravae.shtml

* For more information on data controls and data limitations regarding CFIA's performance indicators, please see Table 2-1.

In addition to the detailed performance results found in Table 2-5, the CFIA also achieved strategic performance results under the Plant Health Risks and Production Systems PA:

Strategic Performance Analysis

In 2009–10, the CFIA focused on advancing the development of a systemic approach to managing plant pest–related risks.

• As indicated in the CFIA's 2008–2009 Performance Report, the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) conducted an audit to examine the CFIA's management of risks associated with the import of plants and plant products. In June 2009, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (PACP) considered the findings of the OAG's 2008 report and the CFIA's management action plan, as well as its progress in addressing the OAG's recommendations, and developed its own set of recommendations. The GoC will implement its integrated detailed and technical action plan (DTAP). This plan, which responds to the PACP's report, is available online on the Parliament of Canada's website.²³ As proposed and described in the DTAP, the CFIA has strengthened internal governance, assessed the flow of import documentation at its import service centres to identify potential solutions to change the current paper-based system, and developed an action plan for modernizing the Plant Health Import Program.
• In addition, the CFIA has completed an internal evaluation of its Invasive Alien Species Program in order to determine the effectiveness and success of the Program's design and to propose improvements to its design, governance structure and allocation of resources.²⁴ The resulting recommendations from the internal evaluation focused on strengthened governance, including Information Management and Information Technology action items, as well as performance management.
• A key recommendation in the Standing Committee on Agriculture and Agri-Food (SCAAF) report on potato cyst nematode (PCN) in Quebec and Alberta was the timely completion of the negotiations to establish Guidelines on Surveillance and Phytosanitary Actions for PCN.²⁵ In June 2009, the CFIA and the USDA signed the revised Canada and United States Guidelines on Surveillance and Phytosanitary Actions for PCN.²⁶ Application of the Guidelines resulted in the deregulation of the majority of previously PCN-quarantined land in Alberta.
• The CFIA recognizes that prevention depends on effective environmental scanning, identification of high-risk pests and pathways, and collaboration between internal and external stakeholders to develop and implement effective risk-mitigation measures for plant commodities. To that end, new phytosanitary measures were put in place to minimize the risk of introduction of two new plant pests—tomato leafminer moth²⁷ (Tuta absoluta) and false codling moth²⁸ (Thaumatotibia leucotreta), both of which can enter Canada via imported greenhouse produce.

Biodiversity Protection

Benefits for Canadians

The protection of Canada's biodiversity is critical to the sustainability of the animal and plant resource base, the economy, the environment and the well-being of Canadians. Through targeted programs and services, the CFIA is managing risks and protecting Canada's environment from the spread of invasive alien species, other pests, novel agricultural products and emerging technologies.²⁹

Performance Summary

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected result, performance indicators and targets for the Biodiversity Protection program activity, and reports 2009–10 performance against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 3.3.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2–6: Summary of Performance: Biodiversity Protection

Program Activity: Biodiversity Protection³⁰

Expected Result: Risks to biodiversity within the animal and plant resource base are managed within acceptable limits
2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
11.1	11.3	9.5	113	99	14
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Total Authorities and Actual Spending relates to lapsing funds in some of the Agency's initiatives as well as internal reallocations. The Variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 99 FTEs, the same as the Actual FTEs.

Performance Indicators*	Targets31	Performance Status
Percentage of inspections of novel products that demonstrate compliance with the requirements and standards outlined in the respective authorizations for experimental purposes32	Plants with Novel Traits: 90% Novel Fertilizer: 95% Novel Feed: 80% Veterinary Biologics: 80% Additional information33	Plants with Novel Traits	95%	Met
		Novel Fertilizer	95%	Met
		Novel Feed	Not Applicable 0 inspections
		Veterinary Biologics	100%	Met
Performance Analysis: Novel Feed: In 2009–10 no verification inspections were performed on novel feed. Due to the low level of risk associated with the authorized research trials (as determined during the pre-authorization assessments) resources were directed towards other higher-risk compliance verification activities. Compliance Approaches and Methods: For the Plants with Novel Traits, Novel Fertilizer and Veterinary Biologics sub-indicators, a monitoring approach is used for assessing compliance, and compliance results are determined during the initial inspection. For the Novel Feed sub-indicator, a directed approach is used for assessing compliance, and compliance results are determined during the initial inspection. Three-year Trend Analysis: Plants with Novel Traits The Plants with novel traits sub-indicator has met its target for the last three years due to applicants' increasing experience with the program requirements and on-going communication with industry. Novel Fertilizer (2007–08 95%), (2008–09 80%) The compliance rate for novel fertilizer has improved from the previous year's 80% and exceeded this year's target of 95% due to on-going communication with industry and stressing the importance of containment and safety precautions. Novel Feed and Veterinary Biologics As 2009–10 is the first year that the CFIA is reporting on Novel Feed and Veterinary Biologics, trend information is not available.
Additional information: Invasive Alien Species: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/invenv/refe.shtml Plant Biosafety: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/pbobbve.shtml

* For more information on data controls and data limitations regarding CFIA's performance indicators, please see Table 2-1.

In addition to the detailed performance results found in Table 2-6, the CFIA also achieved strategic performance results under the Biodiversity Protection PA:

Strategic Performance Analysis

Introducing new and innovative products contributes to maintaining the competitiveness of Canada's agricultural sector. However, competitiveness and innovation cannot come at the expense of environmental sustainability. As such, the CFIA considers impacts on the environment and other species (biodiversity) a key component of the regulatory review process that is mandatory for plants with novel traits, novel feeds and novel supplements or veterinary biologics.

• Under the draft Canadian Invasive Plant Framework, the CFIA has developed a draft Invasive Plant Policy, a Least Wanted Invasive Plants pilot project and a streamlined risk assessment tool. Phase III of stakeholder consultation on the draft Framework has been completed and the document is expected to be finalized by December, 2010. Broad stakeholder consultations on both the draft Invasive Plants Policy and the Least Wanted Invasive Plants pilot project will be completed by September 2010, and the implementation of these initiatives will be based on outcomes of the consultations. The risk assessment tool refined under the pilot project initiative would be an effective model to adopt in the future for other plant pests in order to protect the plant resource base.
• The CFIA continued delivering its Travellers Biosecurity Awareness campaign, which provides up-to-date information on what can and cannot be brought into Canada. The campaign included advertising, outreach and partnership strategies with a special focus on the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games. As well, partnerships with 11 new airlines were established, bringing the total to 22.

2.2.3 Strategic Outcome 3: Contributes to consumer protection and market access based on the application of science and standards

[D]

The CFIA's programming contributes to securing the conditions needed for consumer protection (as it relates to food and certain agricultural products) and for a prosperous Canadian agri-food sector that is able to access domestic and global markets. The Agency aims to verify that information provided to Canadian consumers through labels and advertising is truthful and not misleading. The CFIA also works to facilitate continued and new market access for Canadian agriculture, fishery, forestry, and food products by verifying that Canadian products meet domestic regulations and international standards, and by representing Canada's interests in international fora through the provision of technical support and in negotiating technical agreements and standards. In carrying out activities toward the achievement of this strategic outcome, the CFIA focused its efforts on the following priorities:

• Improving inspection and surveillance approaches; and
• Modernizing the Agency's regulatory framework and tools.

Work under the program activities Integrated Regulatory Frameworks and Domestic and International Market Access is primarily aimed at addressing the Program Framework and Partnership risk areas, it also benefits the other key risk areas noted above.

Percentage of 2009–10 Actual Spending: Strategic Outcome 3

[D]

Integrated Regulatory Frameworks

Benefits for Canadians

The CFIA contributes to the development, maintenance and effective implementation of strong national and international regulatory frameworks. These frameworks are critical to a safe and sustainable food supply, to an animal and plant resource base for Canadian consumers and food industries, and to prosperous food and agricultural industries.

Performance Summary

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected result, performance indicators and targets for the Integrated Regulated Frameworks program activity, and reports 2009−10 performance against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 3.3.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2–7: Summary of Performance: Integrated Regulatory Frameworks

Program Activity: Integrated Regulatory Frameworks

Expected Result: The CFIA's regulatory framework provides the greatest net benefit for Canadians as it is based on scientific approaches and takes into account international contributions and stakeholders' interests
2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
14.2	14.2	10.7	207	47	160
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Total Authorities and Actual Spending relates to lapsing funds in some of the Agency's initiatives and internal reallocations. The Variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 66 compared to Actual FTEs of 47, resulting in a difference of 19. This variance relates to lapsing funds in some of the Agency's initiatives.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Percentage of regulatory initiatives that meet publication requirements for either the Canada Gazette, Part I or Part II34	≥95% of regulatory initiatives that meet publication requirements	77%	Not Met
Performance Analysis: During the 2009–10 reporting period, the CFIA planned to publish 18 regulatory proposals in both the Canada Gazette, Part I (6 proposals) and Part II (12 proposals). However, the Agency published 14 of the 18, resulting in a completion rate of 77%. For the regulatory proposals that were not completed, delays were related to a number of causes including: Comments received from stakeholders during prepublication required further analysis, consideration and subsequent revision, thus delaying its completion; and Receipt of new information on international standards and processes during the prepublication period required further study of that information. Three-year Trend Analysis: (2008–09, 100%) This is the CFIA's second year reporting on this indicator. In addition to a change in wording, there was also a change in methodology; a comparison from last year is therefore not possible.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which the net quantity, composition, labelling and advertising of non-registered food products inspected is accurate35.	70% of products, labels, and advertisements inspected are accurately represented.	82%	Met
Performance Analysis: The program design, inspection and reporting systems for identification and assessment of non-registered food products for net quantity, composition, label and advertising are effective. Inspection strategies will continue to be directed toward high-risk non-registered foods and establishments (importers, manufacturers and retailers with labelling and advertising responsibilities). The results are an indication of our program's capacity to identify areas of non-compliance. Three-year Trend Analysis: (2008–09, 82%) 2008–09 was the first year the CFIA reported on this indicator; for the past two years, the target has been met.
Additional information: Paperwork Burden Reduction Initiative official site (Industry Canada): http://www.reducingpaperburden.gc.ca/epic/site/pbri-iafp.nsf/en/h_sx00001e.html Fair Labelling Practices: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/labeti/labetie.shtml Seeds: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/seesem/seeseme.shtml Fertilizer: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/fereng/ferenge.shtml

* For more information on data controls and data limitations regarding CFIA's performance indicators, please see Table 2-1.

In addition to the detailed performance results found in Table 2-7, the CFIA also achieved strategic performance results under the Integrated Regulatory Frameworks PA:

Strategic Performance Analysis

The CFIA worked with stakeholders to address and provide guidance on priority regulatory areas of interest to Canadians, and undertook the following in 2009–10:

• Continued to provide effective and sound compliance and enforcement services through its Enforcement and Investigation Services (EIS). The CFIA continued to provide core national regulatory enforcement training courses to enhance its inspection staff's and EIS investigation specialists' capacity to effectively deliver the Agency's regulatory mandate. The core training consists of foundations of inspection and regulation, note-taking, search warrants and tactical communications.
• Announced amendments to the Seeds Regulations in July 2009, following an extensive consultation period with stakeholders. The amendments will create a more flexible variety registration system with reduced regulation, while continuing to maintain the integrity of seed certification and environmental, food and feed safety. This flexible system should stimulate innovation in the seed industry and provide producers with more choice—thereby supporting the long-term growth of the seed sector.

The CFIA continued to strengthen its regulatory base to enhance consumer protection in the area of food safety. For instance, the Agency undertook the following:

• Continued work on bilingual labelling, including identification of health and safety criteria for feed product labels, which ensures that manufacturers' conditions are met. These improvements will ensure that consumers are provided with health and safety-related information in both official languages on product labels.
• Continued work for the timely renewal and modernization of its legislative framework. The CFIA continues to develop a strategy to modernize its legislative framework in light of the changing needs of industry to protect the safety of the food supply for Canadians.

Domestic and International Market Access

Benefits for Canadians

Maintaining domestic and international market access for Canadian products is critical to the sustainability of the agriculture, fishery, forestry and food industry and the economic prosperity of Canada. To support Canada's economic growth, the CFIA plays an ongoing role in the international arena to maintain and facilitate the opening of new markets to Canadian products by:

• Negotiating import and export conditions in a complex international environment; and
• Demonstrating the integrity of Canada's food, plant and animal regulatory system to Canadians and our trading partners.

Performance Summary

The following table identifies the CFIA's expected result, performance indicators and targets for the Domestic and International Market Access program activity, and reports 2009–10 performance against these expectations. For more detailed information, including results from previous reporting periods, refer to the Summary of Performance Indicators in Section 3.3.1. Where applicable, performance indicator results have been rounded down to the nearest percentage point.

Table 2–8: Summary of Performance: Domestic and International Market Access

Program Activity: Domestic and International Market Access

Expected Result: Canadian producers of food, plants, animals and related products operate within a fair and efficient marketplace, from which Canadian consumers benefit
2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
24.6	36.1	32.4	424	521	(97)
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Planned Spending and Total Authorities is mainly due to funding received for the Pork Industry Recovery and Expansion Strategy and for the Growing Forward Program Suite. The Variance between Total Authorities and Actual Spending relates to lapsing funds in some of the Agency's initiatives and internal reallocations. The Variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 519 compared to Actual FTEs of 521, resulting in a difference of 2.

Performance Indicators*	Targets	Performance Status
Extent to which certified food, animal and plant shipments meet the receiving country's import requirements	≥ 99% meet requirements	Food - Meat	99%	Met
		Food - Fish and Seafood	99%	Met
		Food - Processed Egg	99%	Met
		Animal	No data available
		Plant	99%	Met
Performance Analysis: Animal In 2009–10, the CFIA has issued 39,488 certificates for the exportation of live animals confirming that the sanitary requirements of an importing country have been complied with. However, there is a lack of information available to track animals once the certificate has been issued. As such, the CFIA has no data available for the animal sub-indicator; however, the CFIA is working on creating a new system that will allow it to collect accurate data on this area. Three-year Trend Analysis: For the past three years, the overall success of all the sub-indicators with the exception of the Animal sub indicator, can be attributed to the certification inspection process carried out by CFIA inspectors, as well as the continued co-operation and collaboration from industry that allows us to meet the requirements of other countries. Animal:(2007–08, No Data Available; 2008–09, No Data Available) Due to the unavailability of data, a three year trend is not available at this time.
Additional information: In 2009, the CFIA received 311 applications for plant breeders' rights (PBR), granting rights to 264 plant varieties. The Agency also renewed the protection of 1,556 varieties previously approved for grant of rights. For more information on PBR, please visit: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/pbrpov/pbrpove.shtml Destination Inspection Services: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/frefra/dis/dise.shtml#serv Canada Organic Regime: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/orgbio/stainte.shtml

* For more information on data controls and data limitations regarding CFIA's performance indicators, please see Table 2-1.

In addition to the detailed performance results found in Table 2-8, the CFIA also achieved strategic performance results under the Domestic and International Market Access PA:

Strategic Performance Analysis

The CFIA worked with existing and new trading partners to facilitate market access opportunities and to address unexpected market access issues.

• In 2009, traces of genetically modified flax were found in Canadian flax shipments to the European Union (EU)—leading to trade disruptions for Canadian flax exports, which account for 80% of world exports. In response, the CFIA and its Agriculture and Agri-Food Portfolio partners (Canadian Grain Commission and AAFC) worked with the flax industry, Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada and international counterparts to secure continued market access to the EU for Canadian flax. In particular, the CFIA contributed scientific expertise and advice to the resultant rapid response management strategy and to the validation of seed testing protocols.

The CFIA continued to work with international organizations to promote and influence the development and implementation of coherent and consistent international standards.

• The CFIA provided technical knowledge for a number of trade negotiations and worked with foreign counterparts on technical agreements to take advantage of expanded market opportunities. To support the CFIA's ongoing trade negotiations, the Agency established a chief technical negotiator.
• Canadian delegations continued to promote the adoption of risk-based Codex international standards. For instance, the CFIA played a significant role in promoting the adoption of MRLs for Melamine in Food and Feed, and of the microbiological criteria for Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods by contributing scientific knowledge and research results supporting the adoption of these Codex standards.

The CFIA worked toward implementing technical solutions to facilitate compliance with import and export regulatory requirements.

• The CFIA continued advancing its Paper Burden Reduction Initiative. Under this initiative is the E-Certification project, which aims to improve the security of export documentation, minimize fraudulent activities and reduce the time of issuing import/export certificates. In 2009–10, the CFIA launched the implementation of the meat module “Read Import Countries Requirements,” which allows meat inspectors direct, online access to the importing country's requirement—thereby removing the burden of hard copy manuals. The CFIA also conducted a review to examine the possibility of consolidating the three existing E-Certification projects (Meat, Plant Health and Terrestrial Animal Health) into one E-Certification initiative. The review considered the business scope, architecture, design and risks. This consolidation moves the CFIA toward better horizontal planning while providing the opportunity to leverage best practices between individual programs, increase consistency, provide better return on future investments, and support the Agency in keeping up with an ever-changing and competitive environment.

2.2.4 Internal Services

Internal services are groups of related activities and resources that are administered to support the needs of programs and other corporate obligations of an organization. These groups include Management and Oversight Services, Communications Services, Legal Services, Human Resources Management Services, Financial Management Services, IM/IT Services, Real Property Services, Security Management Services, Environmental Management Services, Materiel Management Services, Procurement Services, and Travel and Other Administrative Services.

Percentage of 2009–10 Actual Spending: Internal Services

[D]

 

Benefits for Canadians

The CFIA delivers projects in a more disciplined manner, thereby contributing to prudent stewardship of financial resources and providing Canadians value for their tax dollar. Internal Services refer to groups of related activities and resources that are administered to support the needs of programs and other corporate obligations of an organization.

Work under this program activity is aimed at addressing Human Resources, Information Decision Making and Internal Coordination risk areas.

Performance Summary Table 2-9: Summary of Performance: Internal Services³⁶

Program Activity: Internal Services

2009-10 Financial Resources ($ millions)			2009-10 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending	Planned	Actual	Difference
108.3	142.5	141.9	832	1,021	(189)
Variance Analysis
The Variance between Planned Spending and Total Authorities is mainly due to funding received for the Government Response to Listeriosis and the Growing Forward Program Suite, as well as collective bargaining and the 2008–09 carry-forward.37 The Variance analysis between Planned and Actual FTEs is not provided because the Planned figure does not consider reallocations of FTEs between program activities. If the Planned figure was restated for this, it would be 1,017 compared to Actual FTEs of 1,021, resulting in a difference of 4.

In addition to Table 2-9, the CFIA also achieved the following strategic initiatives under Internal Services:

Strategic Performance Analysis

The CFIA continued to strengthen its internal management processes and systems.

• The CFIA continued to develop and implement key IM/IT initiatives in support of business development and enhancement activities. One such example was the implementation of a data centre that houses mission-critical computer systems and associated components and that is a central repository for the storage, management and sharing of data and information. This data centre includes the first large-scale adoption of InterNetworking Voice and Data Solution in the GoC.
• The CFIA continued to progress on all public service renewal commitments that respond to challenges related to planning, engagement, recruitment, building capacity, and providing supportive human resource management architecture. Accomplishments include a more integrated, inclusive and horizontal approach to planning; participation in 20 career fairs; and the development of a training and multi-year rollout plan to support meat processing inspectors that will outline the training needed to support inspection staff in all commodities before they begin performing their duties. The CFIA will continue to advance the initiatives relating to the Agency's renewal plan for 2008–13.
• As part of its long-term process to improve overall performance measurement and reporting, the CFIA continued the development of its Performance Management and Reporting Solution (PMRS), with the objective of delivering timely program management and high-level performance information that is easily accessible, robust, reliable and well-substantiated. This project aims to create an Agency-wide management tool that provides effective performance feedback to allow better reporting and to enhance performance monitoring and reporting at all levels. When fully operational, the PMRS will facilitate the production of various corporate reports.
• The CFIA's Values and Ethics Strategy is one of the most comprehensive strategies within the GoC. Its design ensures that the Agency's values are embedded in the organization and helps foster an ethically sound and vibrant culture that reflects Public Service and Agency Values and Ethics. To that end, the Agency continued the development of a comprehensive Values and Ethics training program/strategy that included an updated on-line training module, an orientation program and leadership development courses.

The CFIA focused on developing key plans for the future and improving critical areas of infrastructure.

• The federal government committed approximately $24 million over two years (2009–10 to 2010–11) to help modernize the CFIA’s laboratories so that scientists and researchers can continue to work in safe, modern facilities and continue contributing to the health and safety of Canadians. The CFIA has planned to deliver 13 initiatives comprising 30 projects in six provinces and seven laboratories. In 2009–10, the CFIA completed nine projects as planned at the following laboratories: Burnaby, Calgary, Dartmouth, Lethbridge, Ottawa and St-Hyacinthe.³⁸
• As per the new TBS policy on investment planning, the CFIA updated the Investment Planning Implementation Project (IPIP), including approval of the project charter and the dedication of its resources. Through the IPIP, the CFIA evaluated governance, planning, processes and tools for investment planning to strategically integrate and prioritize plans related to assets and acquired services. The CFIA also began the process to establish an Enterprise Project Management Office and will prepare a draft Enterprise Project Management Framework including processes, standards and templates.

Canada's Economic Action Plan

2009-10 ($ millions)
Planned Spending	Total Authorities39	Actual Spending
0	9.8	8.0
Expected Results	Performance Indicators	Targets	Performance Status
Deferred maintenance at seven laboratories (over 2 years) is addressed to modernize equipment and improve safety standards	Percentage of projects completed on time	100%	100%
	Percentage of CEAP funds spent	100%	82%*

* The 82% variance for the percentage of CEAP funds spent was due to the current construction industry climate in Canada. This industry is demonstrating significant uncertainty regarding potential bid prices and competitiveness. Projects that are very similar in scope and technical complexity but carried out in different regions of Canada are showing marked differences in bid prices. The result of these economic and industry factors is that many traditional assumptions applied to project estimates are no longer valid—resulting in large variances in bids to estimates. In the case of the 2009–10 EAP projects, this resulted in a net 18% surplus.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page