ARCHIVED - Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada - Supplementary Tables

User Fee: Canadian Agricultural Loans Act (CALA) Registration Fees

Fee Type: Regulatory (R)

Fee-Setting Authority: CALA Regulations

Date Last Modified: June 18, 2009

Performance Standards: Loans from lenders registered within 15 business days of receipt. Target is 90%.

Performance Results: 100% of loans were registered within 15 business days of receipt.

Canadian Agricultural Loans Act (CALA) Registration Fees

2010-11 ($ thousands)			Planning Years ($ thousands)
Forecast Revenue	Actual Revenue	Full Cost	Fiscal Year	Forecast Revenue	Estimated Full Cost
2,482.0	1,204.9	3,004.1	2011-12	2,482.0	3,690.8
			2012-13	2,482.0	2,940.8
			2013-14	2,482.0	2,940.8

User Fee: Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act (ATIA)⁽²⁾

Fee Type: Other Products and Services (O)

Fee-Setting Authority: Access to Information Act

Date Last Modified: 1992

Performance Standards: Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request. Target is 90%. For more details please visit the Access to Information Act.

Performance Results: Statutory deadlines met 100% of the time for 2010-11.

Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act

2010-11 ($ thousands)			Planning Years ($ thousands)
Forecast Revenue	Actual Revenue	Full Cost	Fiscal Year	Forecast Revenue	Estimated Full Cost
2.1	2.2	1,229.4	2011-12	2.1	1,000.0
			2012-13	2.1	1,000.0
			2013-14	2.1	1,000.0

Other Information:

(1) The DPR instructions advised that this table be used only for revenues under the User Fee Act (UFA). The advice from our legal counsel indicated that only the CALA program as well as the fees charged under ATIA are subject to the UFA.

(2) It is the Department's practice to waive fees where the total owing per request amounts to less than $25.

Note:
According to prevailing legal opinion, where the corresponding fee introduction or most recent modification occurred prior to March 31, 2004:

• The performance standard, if provided, would not have received Parliamentary review;
• The performance standard, if provided, may not respect all established requirements under the UFA (e.g., international comparison or independent complaint address); and
• The performance result, if provided, is not legally subject to section 5.1 of the UFA regarding fee reductions for unachieved performance.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Agri-Opportunities Program (New Opportunities for Agriculture Initiatives) (Voted)

Start Date: December 14, 2006

End Date: March 31, 2011

Description:
The Agri-Opportunities program was a five-year program, ending March 2011, that focused on new innovative value-added agricultural, agri-food and agri-based products, services or processes that were not commercially produced or available in Canada and that were ready to be introduced into the marketplace. The program provided repayable contributions for commercialization projects that were expected to increase market opportunities for the Canadian agricultural industry across the value chain and to increase demand for primary agricultural products.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
The Agri-Opportunities program has signed agreements to fund 27 innovative commercialization projects for a total of $50.3 million helping to accelerate the pace of innovation in Canada. AAFC funded the establishment, modernisation or expansion of 14 facilities which collectively brought 30 products to market. 124 employees increased their skill levels and 15 organisations have increased their knowledge and expanded their capacity while creating 94 full time and 134 temporary jobs. In total, the demand for primary agricultural products was increased by $22 million, adding income to agricultural producers, while providing new revenue streams to 9 organisations each of which is now participating in a value added industry.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Science, Innovation and Adoption
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	9.0	10.3	31.1	25.4	15.1	16.0
Total Transfer Payment Program	9.0	10.3	31.1	25.4	15.1	16.0

Comment(s) on Variance(s): Despite the beginning of economic recovery, actual spending was less than planned spending because access to debt and equity financing did not reach expected levels, thereby hampering program uptake and the progress of projects.

Audit Completed or Planned: An internal audit is currently underway and will be completed in 2011-12.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation of this program was completed during 2010-11.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program (Voted)

Start Date: December 14, 2006

End Date: March 31, 2011

Description:
The Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program (ABIP) is an initiative designed to strengthen the capacity of Canadian science providers and industry through the creation of networks for research, technology development, and commercialization of agricultural bioproducts and bioprocesses.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector 

Results Achieved:
The ABIP supported nine R&D networks with activities focused on three overarching themes. These themes and examples of the results related to each are as follows:

1. Crop platforms and cropping systems that would enhance the conversion of feedstocks to agricultural bioproducts (better feedstocks).
   • As oil seed crop capacity rapidly expands to meet domestic demands for 2% renewable fuel content in diesel and heating oil, the Sustainable Cropping System Platforms for Biodiesel Feedstock Quantity and Quality (SBQQ) network has extensively tested a wide range of oil seed species and cropping systems across Canada and established those with the greatest potential for oil seed production. They have then conveyed this information to Canadian oil seed growers.
   • The BioPotato Network: a Canadian network for potato-based bioproducts (BioPotato) has developed four new varieties of pigmented potatoes with health promoting phytochemicals, as well as another potato variety with low glycemic index.
   • The Development of Commercial Feed Products from the Wheat Ethanol Process (FOBI) network is developing wheat varieties with higher yield and better disease resistance than AC Andrew, the preferred variety used in ethanol production. As compared to AC Andrew, the newly developed varieties combine high yield, higher starch content, and a better disease resistance, thus making it ideal for ethanol feedstock.
     
     
2. More effective and efficient technologies for agricultural biomass conversion (better processing).
   • The Cellulosic Biofuel Network (CBioN) has discovered three fungal endoglucanases that demonstrate strong synergism with the major Trichoderma reesei cellobiohydrolase. This innovation has generated discussion with multinational companies and will lead to enzymatic cocktails that more effectively convert lignocellulosic feedstock to bioethanol.
   • The Canadian Triticale Biorefinery Initiative (CTBI) has improved the fermentation processes for triticale grain, which has prompted Poundmaker to plan for the inclusion of triticale in future ethanol production runs.
   • Agricultural Biorefinery Innovation Network for Green Energy, Fuels & Chemicals (ABIN) has established that red mud, a toxic by-product of aluminum mining, is a suitable catalyst for upgrading the bio-oil produced by their mobile pyrolosis unit (another novel technology developed by ABIN). This process lowers the acidity of the bio-oil, rendering it less corrosive, and reduces the toxicity of the red mud. This project has had huge media exposure and attracted the interest of industry giants such as Shell.
     
     
3. Product diversification through technologies relevant to production of bioenergy, agricultural and industrial chemicals, biomaterials, and health products (more products).
   • The Natural Fibres for the Green Economy Network (NAFGEN) has developed novel cost-competitive and green technologies for the extraction of high-value lignin, hemicellulose, and waxes from flax and hemp shive/straw that can be further converted to bioproducts and biochemicals. Examples of final products include phenol-formaldehyde resins (circuit boards), cationic polymers (waste water treatment), hydrogels (wound care), and cosmetics. Further work is also being done with micro and nano fibre/cellulose to produce biocomposites (e.g., bus parts, sporting goods, casing for cell phones and marine applications) and green building materials (e.g., fibre reinforced composite blocks, building columns, walls and insulation).
   • The Pulse Research Network (PURENet) has incorporated healthy pulses into processed foods and developed several prototypes: pourable salad dressings, gluten-free cookies, gluten-free processed meats, and probiotic and yogurt beverages. They are now working with potential commercialization agents, and if certain prototypes are successfully implemented, pulse consumption in Canada could potentially double.
   • The Industrial Oil Seed Network (IOSN) has used Canola oil to develop a non-toxic, multi-purpose bio-based home lubricant that is now available on the retail market. This product will eliminate the potential for soil and water contamination from petroleum-based oil leaks. In addition, IOSN has developed bio-based hydraulic fluids that are being field tested in trash compactors by Toronto Community Housing and in the buses of Saskatoon Transit.

All the Final Reports, and the Performance Management Reports have been received from all the networks, and are currently being reviewed for approval.

The productivity output for all nine networks is as follows:

• Number of peer-reviewed publications documenting leading-edge research and development findings generated - current actual: 265;
• Number of students and professionals trained through multidisciplinary research - current actual: 900;
• Number of commercialization plans developed and implemented to bring new or improved products, processes, or services to near market - current actual: 17.

Note: The targets and current actual results noted above are for the overall output of the ABIP Networks, which includes operating and capital spending, in addition to contribution spending. 

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Science, Innovation and Adoption
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	7.3	20.5	15.7	15.7	15.7	-
Total Transfer Payment Program	7.3	20.5	15.7	15.7	15.7	-

Comment(s) on Variance(s): Expended as planned.

Audit Completed or Planned: The following audits were conducted in 2010-11:

• PURENet - Final report received in March 2011, and no major issues identified.
• CTBI - Final report received in March 2011, and no major issues identified.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: The ABIP evaluation report was officially approved by the Deputy Minister on March 25, 2011, and the report will be posted on AAFC's external website in August 2011.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Agricultural Disaster Relief Program (ADRP) / AgriRecovery (Statutory)

Start Date: December 6, 2007

End Date: March 31, 2012
During the 2010–11 fiscal year, the program authorities were extended until March 31, 2012.

Description:
The AgriRecovery framework is one of the core pillars of the business risk management suite available to producers under Growing Forward.

AgriRecovery enables federal, provincial and territorial (FPT) governments to provide timely assistance to help producers quickly re-establish their income stream and contain the long-term impacts after small- to mid-size disasters (e.g. disease, pest and weather). Programs under AgriRecovery are developed on a case-by-case basis after an assessment is completed and it is determined that there is need for assistance beyond existing programs, such as AgriInvest, AgriStability and AgriInsurance.

Under AgriRecovery, the ADRP helps focus the coordination effort, providing a process to fast-track authorities for programs to quickly fund initiatives.

Participating provinces and territories cost-share initiatives on a 60:40 FPT basis. For AgriRecovery programming outside the ADRP, funding options are negotiated with the provinces and territories on a case-by-case basis. Authorities for the program include sub-section 12(5) of the Farm Income Protection Act, as well as various agreements for individual programming developed under AgriRecovery.

Federal AgriRecovery Website

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:
12 initiatives were put in placed in 2010-11 under the ADRP to help producers deal with disaster events. The results of the initiatives put in place will be available in the 2011-12 program year. In the most recent surveys, provinces reported that almost all of the producers who received AgriRecovery assistance indicated it has helped in the recovery of their operations, surpassing the target of 75%. In the majority of cases, the producers were still in faming business one year after the disaster payments.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	1.0	3.2	54.2	-	-	54.2
Total Contributions	55.4	(9.1)	54.2	256.2	256.2	(202.0)
Total Transfer Payment Program	56.3	(5.9)	108.4	256.2	256.2	(147.8)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): The increase in spending in 2010-11 is as a result of four initiatives that were implemented to respond to wide spread excessive moisture and flooding in the western provinces.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11. An internal audit is planned for 2013-14.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: A program evaluation is currently underway and is scheduled to be completed in October 2011.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: AgriInsurance Program (Statutory)

Start Date: April 1, 2008

End Date: AgriInsurance contributions are statutory and ongoing.

Description:
The AgriInsurance program is one of the core pillars of the business risk management suite available to producers under Growing Forward.

AgriInsurance (formerly the Production Insurance program), aims to reduce the financial impact on producers of production losses caused by uncontrollable natural perils.

Authorities for the program include Section 4 of the Farm Income Protection Act (FIPA), as well as Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy and Federal Provincial AgriInsurance Agreement.

Federal AgriInsurance website
British Columbia
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
Nova Scotia
Prince Edward Island
Newfoundland

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:
The financial impacts of production losses are mitigated by providing effective insurance protection. Production losses were mitigated with indemnity payments of $1.116 billion (including $257.3 million for unseeded benefits) as 65.6 million of acres were covered for a value of $12.3 billion.

1. Value of insured production compared to the total value of all agricultural products eligible for insurance reported as follows: Percentage of Crops - The ratio of insured to eligible for insurance exceeds the target of 60% with 62.68%. This ratio shows a slight decrease from last year's ratio of 63.02%.
2. Value of agricultural products eligible for insurance compared to the value of all agricultural products reported as follows: Percentage of Crops – The value of agricultural products eligible for insurance compared to total value of all agricultural products exceeds the target of 85% at 86.95%. This ratio has remained fairly consistent over the last 2 years.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	548.3	502.9	452.0	514.9	514.9	(62.9)
Total Transfer Payment Program	548.3	502.9	452.0	514.9	514.9	(62.9)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): Actual spending in 2010-11 was higher than planned spending due to a substantial increase in premiums caused by higher grain prices which are reflected in the insurable values.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11. An audit is planned for the 2012-13 fiscal year.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. An internal evaluation is scheduled to be completed by June of 2012.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: AgriInvest Program (Statutory)

Start Date: December 19, 2007
Agreements were signed with the provinces to implement the program starting in the 2007 program year.

End Date: AgriInvest grants and contributions are statutory and ongoing.

Description:
The AgriInvest program is one of the core pillars of the business risk management suite available to producers under Growing Forward.

AgriInvest allows producers to self-manage, through producer-government funded savings accounts, the first 15% of their margin losses for a production year and/or make investments to reduce on-farm risks or increase farm revenues. Under the program, annual producer deposits of up to 1.5% of their allowable net sales are matched by government deposits. Government deposits are cost-shared 60:40 by federal and provincial/territorial governments. In combination with the AgriStability program, AgriInvest is the successor to the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program. AgriInvest provides coverage for smaller income declines, while AgriStability assists producers in managing larger losses.

AgriInvest provides producers with a secure, accessible, predictable and bankable source of income assistance to address small drops in farm income and manage on-farm risks.

Federal AgriInvest Website
AgriInvest in Quebec (La Financière agricole du Québec)

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:
About 60% of participants who suffered an income decline and triggered an AgriStability payment for the 2008 program year also made a withdrawal from their AgriInvest account. The 2010 Business Risk Management (BRM) performance indicator survey indicated that 90% of those who withdrew AgriInvest funds used them to address income declines.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	175.7	113.6	155.8	167.4	167.4	(11.6)
Total Contributions	17.7	26.7	19.0	29.2	29.2	(10.3)
Total Transfer Payment Program	193.4	140.3	174.8	196.6	196.6	(21.9)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): AgriInvest is demand-driven, rather than being funded from a set allocation for each fiscal year. Although the administrative costs of the program remain relatively constant, the variance of the year to year grant and contribution payments is directly related to both participation and commodity prices, as producer deposits and government contributions are based on a percentage of their income generated from the sale of commodities for a production year. Commodity prices were stronger in fiscal 2010-11 contributing to increased payments under the program.

Audit Completed or Planned: A performance audit initiated in fiscal 2010-11 by the Office of the Auditor General is currently underway and expected to be completed in the fall of 2011.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: A program evaluation is in progress and is scheduled to be completed in March 2012.

Note:
The Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program was replaced by the AgriStability and AgriInvest programs as of April 1, 2008.
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: AgriStability Program (Statutory)

Start Date: December 19, 2007
Agreements were signed with the provinces to implement the program starting in the 2007 program year.

End Date: AgriStability grants and contributions are statutory and ongoing.

Description:
The AgriStability program is one of the core pillars of the business risk management suite available to producers under Growing Forward.

AgriStability is a margin-based program that provides support when a producer experiences larger farm income losses, which are drops in their margin (eligible farm income, less eligible farm expenses) for the program year of more than 15% of the producer's average margin from previous years (i.e., their reference margin). Thus, a payment is triggered under the program when a producer's program year margin drops below 85% of their reference margin. AgriStability also includes coverage for negative margins, as well as mechanisms to advance a participant a portion of their expected payment during the year when a significant decline in income is expected (interim payments and Targeted Advance Payments). In combination with the AgriInvest program, it is the successor to the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program. AgriInvest provides coverage for smaller income declines where AgriStability assists producers in managing larger losses.

AgriStability Website

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:
Results reported in 2010-11 relate to farming activities in the 2008 program year. This reporting lag is due to the fact that final program payments are based on information the producer provides in filling income tax for the year. This information must then be processed for all producers and summary information collected from all program administrations to allow for reporting on performance results.

Participation in the 2008 program year declined largely due to improved farm incomes. The percentage of market revenues covered by AgriStability for the 2008 program year was 68%. AgriStability program payments brought producers' current year margin up to 65% of the reference margin based on the 2008 program year.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	105.2	95.3	39.5	39.5	55.8
Total Contributions	340.5	419.5	500.0	332.0	332.0	168.0
Total Transfer Payment Program	340.5	524.7	595.3	371.5	371.5	223.8

Comment(s) on Variance(s):
AgriStability is a demand-driven program rather than being funded from a set allocation for each fiscal year. Although the administrative costs remain relatively constant, the variance of the year to year grant and contribution payments is directly related to participation and the needs of the agricultural industry. As such, in good years, the program will cost governments less, while in bad years (i.e., years with dropping commodity prices, disasters, etc.) the costs of the program will be higher.  Finally, AgriStability payments are affected by the level of assistance provided by other programs; payments received by recipients through these programs may reduce the amount of AgriStability funding disbursed.

Actual spending under the AgriStability program was lower than planned in 2010-11 primarily due to stronger commodity prices and payments provided by the AgriInsurance and AgriRecovery programs. These factors contributed to reduced funding requirements under the AgriStability program.

Audit Completed or Planned: A performance audit initiated in fiscal 2010-11 by the Office of the Auditor General is currently underway and expected to be completed in the fall of 2011.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: A program evaluation is in progress and is scheduled to be completed in March 2012.

Note:
The Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization (CAIS) program was replaced by the AgriStability and AgriInvest programs as of April 1, 2008.
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Canadian Cattlemen's Association Legacy Fund (Statutory)

Start Date: June 27, 2005

End Date: March 31, 2015

Description:
The purpose of the Canadian Cattlemen's Association Legacy Fund is to support the Canadian beef sector to develop markets for beef cattle, beef cattle genetics, beef and beef products in a post-BSE environment. A grant totalling $50 million over 10 years will be provided.

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:

• McDonald's Canada made a strong commitment to the Canadian Beef Advantage (CBA) by displaying the CBA brand mark on their website. They are one of many partners who promote the brand and healthfulness of ground beef.
• Several branded initiatives with US partners were developed to utilize 100% Canadian beef including the first US restaurant chain, Stonefire Grill, to brand a menu mainstay as Canadian beef. In all, 97 Canadian beef brand license agreements were signed with partners.
• Total beef exports to Japan, Taiwan and Russia in 2009 doubled from 2008, totalling 19,500 tonnes, despite the global recession. Exports in 2009 were down 5% to Mexico from 2008 due to decreased tourism, H1N1 and a change in Canadian packer ownership leading to reduced volumes.
• New international markets for Canadian beef were established including a staged, full market access agreement with China, entry into medium-high end restaurants in Hong Kong and securing large family restaurants in Japan and Taiwan. New markets were established for Canadian beef genetics in Colombia and Panama.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Trade and Market Development
Total Grants	7.0	10.0	5.0	8.4	8.4	(3.4)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Transfer Payment Program	7.0	10.0	5.0	8.4	8.4	(3.4)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): In developing the spending profile for the Legacy Fund, annual expenditures were estimated by prorating the $50 million fund over the ten year time frame at $5 million per year. However, funds are actually allocated based on the requirements outlined in the annual business plan which reflects the priorities of the fund recipients. As such, the funds needed in any particular year will vary depending on the marketing plan developed for that year. These forecasts are made even more difficult by challenges in predicting when Canadian beef might actually regain access to a key market (e.g. South Korea).

Audit Completed or Planned: AAFC initiated a compliance audit in March 2010, the audit is expected to be completed by December 2011.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to support the Specified Risk Material Innovation Program (Voted)

Start Date: June 17, 2010

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
The three-year, up to $40 million Specified Risk Material Innovation Program (being delivered under the name of Slaughter Waste Innovation Program (SWIP)) provides industry with the ability to capitalize on the knowledge, experience and technology advancement gained in dealing with the first three years of the Enhanced Feed Ban (EFB) and to move towards implementing longer term solutions that have the potential to improve the competitiveness of the sector. The objective of SWIP is to support research, development and commercialization or adoption of innovative technologies or processes related to the removal, disposal or use of Specified Risk Material (SRM) to reduce handling costs and to create potential revenue sources from SRM.

Eligible recipients include provincially and federally inspected slaughterhouses, and standalone businesses handling SRMs, including rendering plants, and to support pre-commercial research and development work, research or engineering firms in partnership with livestock industry associations or slaughter facilities. Recipients must be Canadian legal entities, including Canadian subsidiaries of foreign companies, and capable of entering into legally binding contracts.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
The Slaughter Waste Innovation Program has signed agreements to fund four projects to reduce the cost of processing SRM for a total of $18 million helping to increase the efficiency of the cattle industry in Canada.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Agri-Business Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	-	9.0	3.1	(3.1)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	-	-	9.0	3.1	(3.1)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): There was no planned spending reported as this program was approved after the 2010-11 RPP. Program expenditures have been on track and are in line with expectations.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. This program is included in the Evaluation of Cattle Slaughter Industry Assistance that is planned to be completed in 2013-14.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions in support of the Assistance to the Pork Industry Initiative (Statutory)

Start Date: September 22, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2014

Description:
The Assistance to the Pork Industry Initiative is composed of two programs:

1. Hog Industry Loan Loss Reserve Program (HILLRP) - was established to assist viable hog operations with their short term liquidity pressures by having the Government of Canada share the risk with financial institutions by consolidating short term debt into long term loans. It was designed to increase access to credit for eligible producers currently producing hogs in Canada, who can provide a business plan which demonstrates that the business is or can be viable and has a reasonable prospect of repaying the loan. Producers had until March 26, 2010 to apply for a HILLRP loan.

   The terms of the loans are negotiated between lenders and applicants but shall not exceed 15 years. Where possible, a maximum 10-year term will be encouraged. Lenders are responsible for assessing applications, extending and managing loan amounts in accordance with the program's terms and conditions, managing their Reserve Fund and for any losses beyond those that can be drawn from the Reserve Fund. As such, lenders continue to bear a proportion of the risk for loans extended under the HILLRP. 

2. Hog Farm Transition Program (HFTP) - Delivered by the Canadian Pork Council (CPC), it is designed to help the hog industry to restructure by providing payments to those hog producers who agree to set aside all hog production in their enterprises for a minimum of three years. Hog producers tender bids equal to the amount of funds they would require to shut down their total production for the three-year period. 

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:
HILLRP
The maximum total loan loss reserve that AAFC could provide under HILLRP was $404 million. There were 21 signed contribution agreements between AAFC and financial institutions, 263 loans issued under the program for a total of $408.1 million which represents a reserve amount of $243.8 million. To date there has been no withdrawals from the financial institutions' reserve fund. Producers had until March 26, 2010 to apply for a HILLRP loan. The program is now closed and reserve funding under the HILLRP was spent during the 2009-10 fiscal year. There is no authority for new spending. 

HFTP
HFTP is a $75 million program. A total of 446 hog producers were successful bidders in four tender events for a total of $71.9 million or an average of $838.35 per animal unit equivalent, resulting in an estimated annual reduction of 2.7 million hogs.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	285.8	39.1	36.0	36.0	3.1
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	285.8	39.1	36.0	36.0	3.1

Comment(s) on Variance(s):
HFTP: After having successfully bid in the tender events, approximately 50 producers withdrew from the program as market hog prices began to rise.

Audit Completed or Planned:
HILLRP
A program under development audit was concluded in June 2010. It found that the governance, risk management and control framework established for the HILLRP were adequate and provide a reasonable expectation that funds were used for their intended purpose. Commendable management practices were identified. A program audit framework will be developed by program officials by December 2011.

HFTP
A program under development audit was concluded in April 2010. It found that the governance, risk management and control frameworks established for the HFTP are adequate to provide a reasonable expectation that funds will be used for their intended purpose and that planned outcomes will be achieved. Controls are in place over Program payments, and payments are made in accordance with the provisions of the contribution agreement, Program Terms and Conditions, the Treasury Board Policy on Transfer Payments, and the Financial Administration Act. A compliance audit for the period of August 15, 2009 to March 31, 2010 had similar findings with respect to the implementation of the agreement by the CPC. 

Evaluation Completed or Planned:
HILLRP
The intermediate outcome will be based on the percentage of hog producers who have received a reserve-backed loan that continue to repay the loan without defaulting. This information will be collected through annual reports and/or notifications from the participating financial institutions.

HFTP
An interim evaluation of the HFTP was undertaken in 2010-11 by the CPC. The evaluation found that the performance of the Program was strong; appropriately structured and delivered to meet its objectives as defined in the Contribution Agreement. The speed of the Program launch was a notable strength. The application of the Program was consistent and the Animal Unit Equivalent (AUE) concept was a strong Program feature. Both recipients and non-recipients were satisfied with the overall Program management. The CPC must complete a final program evaluation by September 30, 2014.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions for Rural and Co-operatives Development (Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
The programming for Rural and Co-operatives Development covers the following two initiatives:

Rural development programming, whose objective is to support local, regional, and national stakeholders to develop collaborative activities that contribute to the engagement, knowledge development and knowledge transfer activities to address barriers to rural competitiveness, innovation and amenities development. This is part of Canada's Rural Partnership (CRP). 

Co-operative Development Initiative (CDI) which provides support for the development, innovation and growth of co-operatives, by:

• Providing advisory services and funding innovative co-op projects, delivered by the two national co-operative associations; and
• Funding research to build knowledge contributing to co-op development.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
Rural development
As part of Canada's Rural Partnership, 38 rural community initiatives were undertaken to engage community partners in identifying issues and seizing opportunities for development, ranging from improving access to local foods to building capacity to capture new opportunities in the production of alternative energy.

In addition, 14 rural development tools were developed or adapted and disseminated throughout rural Canada to assist communities and local decision-makers in overcoming barriers and engaging in sustainable regional planning; 15 rural communities identified and assessed their local natural and cultural amenities as a means of increasing their competitiveness; and 23 resource-reliant rural communities worked to innovate and diversify their economies through the use of updated or adapted information and tools.

Co-operative Development Initiative
Under the Co-operative Development Initiative (CDI), 21 national and provincial co-op sector associations have created an integrated co-op development advisory services network that provides information, education, advice and technical assistance to community groups and organizations. These activities have resulted in significant improvements in the number and quality of technical assistance and other co-op development services available to Canadians. In 2010-11, 75 new co-operatives were created (target was 40) and 281 existing co-operatives had their operations consolidated/strengthened (target was eight). In addition, 127 innovative co-op projects were approved (target was 25), testing new and innovative applications of the co-op model to address economic, social and environmental challenges at the community level. Finally, a national project was approved to stimulate research and knowledge development on co-operatives. Six more projects were positively assessed and should be implemented in the next fiscal year (target is five by 2013).

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Rural and Co-operatives Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	4.6	7.5	7.5	5.3	2.1
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	4.6	7.5	7.5	5.3	2.1

Comment(s) on Variance(s):
Rural development
Although higher when compared to the previous year, actual program funding was lower than expected. As rural communities are recovering from the economic slow down, their needs are changing towards activities generating more concrete economic activity. Adjustment of the program to match this evolving need occured over the last few months of the year when program changes were implemented to offer funding to initiatives offering more concrete benefits to rural communities.

Co-operative Development Initiative
A slight spending shortfall occurred in the CDI: During the year, CDI faced challenges in the implementation of its Research and Knowledge Development component. The call for proposals and selection of projects was completed during the last quarter, hence project spending was delayed until the end of the fiscal year.

Audit Completed or Planned:
Rural development
The Community Development Program was audited in 2010-11 as part of the Horizontal Audit of Grants and Contributions Programs of the Office of Audit and Evaluation.

Co-operative Development Initiative
A compliance audit of the Canadian Co-operative Association (CCA) and Conseil Canadien de la Coopération et de la Mutualié (CCCM), responsible for the administration of two of three CDI program components, was completed in 2010-11. The auditors confirmed that recipients comply in general with the signed agreement. The scope of the report was limited to the first year of the agreement (2009-10) and it identified a small number of clarifications and non-critical issues that, when corrected, will ensure full compliance to the contribution agreement and improved operational efficiencies. A number of issues were related to the start up and were already corrected at the time of the audit.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. An evaluation for the Canada's Rural Partnership is planned for 2012-13.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to accelerate the Pace of Innovation and Facilitate the Adoption of New Technologies (Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
The program is designed to accelerate industry led innovation activities leading to the development and commercialization of new products, practices and processes by supporting the required academia, industry and government foresight and applied science, technology and development activities.

The program initiatives are designed to work systematically along the three phases of the innovation continuum; they are:

• Discovery Phase: the creation of new knowledge and ideas;
• Pre-commercialization Phase: the further development of ideas into new technologies to address challenges and opportunities; and
• Commercialization, Adoption and Marketing Phase: the realization of economic and social benefits from the technologies that generate new practices, products and processes.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
Agri-Science Clusters (Clusters), and Developing Innovative Agri-Products (DIAP) are initiatives within the federal-only Growing Canadian Agri-Innovations Program. All remaining contribution agreements were signed in 2010-11; and all 10 Clusters and most of the 25 DIAP projects were fully operational by the end of 2010-11.

As most projects started in 2010-11, significant achievements of the research results are limited. However, a few early success stories have been identified, such as the following with the Organic Science Cluster:

Organic farmers in Prince Edward Island (PEI) are seeking high-value options for production and identified a market for specialty fruits including black currants. The Organic Science Cluster (OSC) conducted trials on two farms in PEI to identify optimum methods of weed control for promoting black current bush size, harvest-ability yield and fruit quality. Preliminary results indicate the use of landscape fabric for weed control increased plant growth by up to 50%, and concentrations of nutrients in leaf tissue were higher. Plants will be further evaluated in the next few years to determine if this increase translates into larger root reserves, higher yield and greater fruit quality. Already, farmers in PEI are seeing the increase in plant growth and potential labour savings are planning to adopt similar weed control practices.

The OSC has reached over 1000 farmers/producers, processors and manufacturers across Canada over the past 18 months through technology transfer events such as field days, meetings with farmer associations and producers updates.

The Bilateral Agreements to implement Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy specify that the Parties shall prepare annual performance reports containing information and provide them to the other Party on or before August 31 in respect of activities carried out under Designated Programs by Thematic Area in the previous fiscal year (consistent with Schedule 1: Part C: Performance Indicators and Targets). As such, performance information relating to Growing Forward cost-shared programs will not be available for inclusion in this Departmental Performance Report. Once performance results for this program are available, they can be found at: Growing Forward Reporting.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Science, Innovation and Adoption
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	25.2	60.6	49.9	48.5	12.0
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	25.2	60.6	49.9	48.5	12.0

Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between planned spending and total authorities was due to planned spending being based on estimated program costs, due to timing of the 2010-11 RPP. Actual spending was slightly less than authorities due to timing of program implementation and additional time required in the planning stages, reviewing and assessing areas of priority that required further action under this initiative. This included discussions with provincial partners and key industry stakeholders. A portion of this variance could potentially be carried forward into 2011-12.

Audit Completed or Planned: Two audits of Growing Forward cost-shared programs will be completed by 2012 for British Columbia and Prince Edward Island.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: Under the Growing Forward Bilateral Agreement, Provincial and Territorial governments are to report the results of their Growing Forward evaluation to AAFC by March 2012.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to enable Competitive Enterprises and Sectors (Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
Agri-Business Development provides support for provincial and territorial activities and to national organizations to increase the use of sound business management practices by producers and agri-businesses to enable businesses to be profitable.

Eligible programs and initiatives equip producers and agri-businesses with the skills, knowledge and expertise needed to understand their businesses' financial situation, assess opportunities, respond to change, and realize business goals. It also enables agri-businesses to be profitable and invest where needed to manage the natural resource base sustainably, and produce and market safe food and other products.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
The Bilateral Agreements to implement Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy specify that the Parties shall prepare annual performance reports containing information and provide them to the other Party on or before August 31 in respect of activities carried out under Designated Programs by Thematic Area in the previous fiscal year (consistent with Schedule 1: Part C: Performance Indicators and Targets). As such, performance information relating to Growing Forward cost-shared programs will not be available for inclusion in this Departmental Performance Report. Once performance results for this program are available, they can be found at: Growing Forward Reporting.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Agri-Business Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	22.8	23.5	55.4	40.0	(16.5)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	22.8	23.5	55.4	40.0	(16.5)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variances between Planned Spending and Total Authorities are due to Planned Spending being based on estimated program costs, due to timing of the 2010-11 RPP. There is an increase between Planned Spending and Actual Spending, as some provinces modified the eligibility criteria and the level of benefits for some of their cost-shared programs which resulted in higher spending than planned. As well, strong levels of uptake of cost-shared programs have also resulted in higher spending than anticipated.

Audit Completed or Planned: Two audits of Growing Forward cost-shared programs will be completed by 2012 for British Columbia and Prince Edward Island.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: Under the Growing Forward Bilateral Agreement, Provincial and Territorial governments are to report the results of their Growing Forward evaluation to AAFC by March 2012.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to enhance the Safety and Security of Canada's Food System (Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
Programming for the Contributions to enhance the Safety and Security of Canada's Food System is comprised of the following components:

Food Safety Systems Development
Food Safety Systems Development focuses on the development of voluntary science-based food safety systems by national organizations to effectively minimize food safety risks. It supports national (or equivalent) organizations in developing on-farm and/or post-farm Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) based food safety systems. Intended clients are national or regional non-profit organizations that are not represented by entities at the national level. 

Food Safety Systems Implementation
Food Safety Systems Implementation facilitates the early adoption of government-recognized food safety systems by producers and non-federally registered food-processing enterprises through financial incentives. Eligible projects could include the implementation of good manufacturing practices towards HACCP or ISO 22000 standards in non-federally registered processing plants and the implementation of government reviewed HACCP-based food safety systems on farms. Implementation is administered by provinces and territories under Growing Forward.  

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk 

Results Achieved:
Food Safety Systems Development
National on-farm organizations and post-farm organizations are in the process of developing food safety systems which are ready to submit to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) for Technical Review Part 1 or 2 under the CFIA food safety recognition program. The target is six for on-farm and seven post-farm by March 2013. Since 2009 six on-farm organizations have submitted to CFIA for technical reviews. In 2010-11 CFIA issued two Letters of Completion for Technical Review Part 1 to the Ontario Veal Association and the Fédération des producteurs de bovins du Québec bringing the total to six on-farm organizations receiving letters of completion since 2009. The Canadian Sheep Federation started a second Technical Review Part 1 because of major changes to their on-farm food safety program. The Chicken Farmers of Canada also started a Technical Review Part 1 for free range chickens and the Turkey Farmers of Canada submitted to CFIA for a Technical Review Part 2. No post-farm organization has submitted to CFIA for a Technical Review Part 1 because the technical review process is in the final stages of development by CFIA. However AAFC has approved an application from Canadian Produce Marketing Association that will allow this association in 2011-12 to submit to CFIA for a post-farm Technical Review Part 1. In 2010-11 seven agreements were signed (five post-farm, two on-farm), one project was approved to start in 2011-12 and four applications are under review. In the first two years of this initiative 19 food safety development agreements have been signed and seven projects have been completed. 

Food Safety Systems Implementation
The Bilateral Agreements to implement Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy specify that the Parties shall prepare annual performance reports containing information and provide them to the other Party on or before August 31 in respect of activities carried out under Designated Programs by Thematic Area in the previous fiscal year (consistent with Schedule 1: Part C: Performance Indicators and Targets). As such, performance information relating to Growing Forward cost-shared programs will not be available for inclusion in this Departmental Performance Report. Once performance results for this program are available, they can be found at: Growing Forward Reporting.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Food Safety and Biosecurity Risk Management Systems
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	10.7	19.0	28.0	18.0	0.9
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	10.7	19.0	28.0	18.0	0.9

Comment(s) on Variance(s): For the Food Safety Systems Development component, the actual spending was lower than planned with 58% of available funds contractually committed of which 88% was spent by clients. This variance is due to the lower than expected demand for food safety systems development by post-farm organizations at this time, as well as the fact that many on-farm organizations have simply been maintaining their systems rather than progressing through the recognition process. 

Audit Completed or Planned: The Food Safety and Traceability Programs Division Compliance Audit Plan provided for three project-specific audits for 2010-11. These three audits are on-going and are scheduled to be completed in 2011-12. Two audits of Growing Forward cost-shared programs will be completed by 2012 for British Columbia and Prince Edward Island.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: Evaluations are scheduled as follows: in 2011-12 for Food Safety Systems Implementation and in 2012-13 for Food Safety Systems Development. Under the Growing Forward Bilateral Agreement, Provincial and Territorial governments are to report the results of their Growing Forward evaluation to AAFC by March 2012.

Note:
Eligible projects under Food Safety Systems Development are comprised of activities that allow organizations to support, develop, and prepare for implementation of food safety systems as follows: Phase 1 (P1) projects: establish a national integrated food safety strategy; Phase 2 (P2) projects: develop a food safety system; a management system; and the training, audit and communication materials to prepare in implementing the system and Review (R) projects: Enhancement of an existing food safety system. The following indicates the organizations who have entered into agreement with AAFC during 2010-11, their project phase and the date of any news releases issued prior to June 30, 2011: Canadian Produce Marketing Association (P1); Canadian Bottled Water Association (P2); Canadian Vintners Association (P2 - Nov 27, 2010); Jewish Community Council of Montreal (P1); Canadian Cattlemen's Association (P2 + R); Canadian Grains Council (R); Canadian Celiac Association (P1). To see news releases about some of the organizations and their projects please visit the AAFC Newsroom site and the AAFC Proactive Disclosure site. 

Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to minimize the Occurrence and Extent of Risk Incidents (Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
Programming for the Contributions to minimize the Occurrence and Extent of Risk Incidents is comprised of the following components:

Biosecurity Standards Implementation
The approved national Biosecurity Standards form the basis for implementation of the minimum biosecurity requirements for a particular sector at the farm level. Provinces and territories are responsible for farm-level implementation and are able to impose additional standards to respond to a particular, unique need of the local industry.

Traceability Industry Infrastructure
Investment in Traceability Industry Infrastructure will enhance the industry's ability to follow the movement of a food through specific stages of production, processing and distribution. It supports the development and implementation of industry infrastructure to participate in the National Agriculture and Food Traceability System. This program invests in the development of industry-led systems that collect and verify identification and movement data, and accelerates industry capacity. 

Traceability Enterprise Infrastructure
The Traceability Enterprise Structure provides funding to individual businesses to assist in the purchase and installation of traceability infrastructure and the training of staff to implement traceability systems for plants, animals and products. This could include implementation of animal handling systems, equipment and data systems necessary to record and report data to industry databases. These actions will enable recipients to participate fully in the National Agriculture and Food Traceability System.

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk 

Results Achieved:
Biosecurity Standards Implementation and Traceability Enterprise Infrastructure
The Bilateral Agreements to implement Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy specify that the Parties shall prepare annual performance reports containing information and provide them to the other Party on or before August 31 in respect of activities carried out under Designated Programs by Thematic Area in the previous fiscal year (consistent with Schedule 1: Part C: Performance Indicators and Targets). As such, performance information relating to Growing Forward cost-shared programs will not be available for inclusion in this Departmental Performance Report. Once performance results for this program are available, they can be found at: Growing Forward Reporting.

Traceability Industry Infrastructure
There is a target of 10 organizations or private entities implementing industry-led traceability systems by March 2013. Since 2009-10, 12 national organizations have entered into 19 agreements. Seven of these projects are completed and 12 are on-going. AAFC is funding three implementation projects for the following two organizations: Canadian Pork Council and Canadian Animal Health Coalition. The remaining nine projects involve systems development activities. Two projects have been approved to start in 2010-11 and six applications are undergoing review.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Food Safety and Biosecurity Risk Management Systems
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	12.9	32.6	27.8	17.8	14.8
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	12.9	32.6	27.8	17.8	14.8

Comment(s) on Variance(s): For the Traceability Industry Infrastructure component, the actual spending was lower than planned with 81% of available funds contractually committed of which 87% was spent by clients. This variance is due to normal program year to year fluctuations caused by lower than planned expenditures by clients and the fact that the program spending is demand driven. However the program's contractual commitments and demand based on current applications received is expected to fully utilize the total funding available for this program. 

Audit Completed or Planned: The Food Safety and Traceability Programs Division Compliance Audit Plan provided for five project-specific audits for 2010-11. Two audits were completed with no significant findings and three audits are on-going and are scheduled to be completed in 2011-12. Two audits of Growing Forward cost-shared programs will be completed by 2012 for British Columbia and Prince Edward Island.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: Evaluations are scheduled as follows: in 2011-12 for Biosecurity Standards Implementation and Traceability Enterprise Infrastructure and in 2012-13 for Traceability Industry Infrastructure. Under the Growing Forward Bilateral Agreement, Provincial and Territorial governments are to report the results of their Growing Forward evaluation to AAFC by March 2012.

Note:
Eligible projects under Traceability Industry Infrastructure will support activities related to traceability systems development on a national or regional basis. Eligible activities may include: Phase A (PA) – systems development activities such as: strategic assessments and industry systems development and Phase B (PB) industry systems implementation activities such as: data management systems, technology adoption and testing, data auditing and verification. The following indicates the organizations who have entered into agreements with AAFC during 2010-11, their project phase and the date of any news releases issued prior to June 30, 2011: Canadian Cattle Identification Agency (PA - March 11, 2011 – three agreements); Agri-Tracabilite Quebec (PA); Federation des producteurs acericoles du Quebec (PA - February 15, 2011); Canadian Pork Council (PA and PB); Canadian Sheep Federation/Canadian National Goat Federation (PA -January 31, 2011). To see news releases about some of the organizations and their projects please visit the AAFC Newsroom site and the AAFC Proactive Disclosure site.

Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to promote Environmentally Responsible Agriculture (Voted)

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) supports farmers through agri-environmental risk assessment and planning; providing expertise, information and incentives to increase the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices at the farm and landscape levels; investigating and developing new approaches that encourage and support the adoption of sustainable agriculture practices; and increasing the recognition of the value of sustainable agriculture practices. This program supports environmental stewardship and helps reduce the sector's overall impact on the environment. It contributes to a cleaner environment and healthier living conditions for Canadian people, and a more profitable agriculture sector.

Strategic Outcome: An environmentally sustainable agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
Environmental Knowledge, Technology, Information and Measurement
On target - tools are being investigated and added to improve functionality of modelling and economic models. Scaling-up options for extrapolating Watershed Evaluation of Beneficial Management Practices (WEBS) findings beyond the immediate watershed where they occur are under active investigation. Development of a fully-distributed model application at one of the sites will enhance decision support capabilities for all sites.

On-Farm Action
The Bilateral Agreements to implement Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy specify that the Parties shall prepare annual performance reports containing information and provide them to the other Party on or before August 31 in respect of activities carried out under Designated Programs by Thematic Area in the previous fiscal year (consistent with Schedule 1: Part C: Performance Indicators and Targets). As such, performance information relating to Growing Forward cost-shared programs will not be available for inclusion in this Departmental Performance Report. Once performance results for this program are available, they can be found at: Growing Forward Reporting.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Environmental Knowledge, Technology, Information and Measurement
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	1.2	2.9	2.4	2.1	0.7
Total Environmental Knowledge, Technology, Information, and Measurement	-	1.2	2.9	2.4	2.1	0.7
Program Activity: On-Farm Action
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	50.6	67.1	73.4	55.9	11.3
Total On-Farm Action	-	50.6	67.1	73.4	55.9	11.3
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	51.8	70.0	75.8	58.0	12.0

Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between planned spending and total authorities was due to planned spending being based on estimated program costs, due to timing of the 2010-11 RPP. There is a decrease between total authorities and actual spending due to timing of program implementation and additional time required in the planning stages, reviewing and assessing areas of priority that required further action under this initiative. This included discussions with provincial partners and key industry stakeholders. A portion of this variance could potentially be carried forward into 2011-12.

Audit Completed or Planned: Two audits of Growing Forward cost-shared programs will be completed by 2012 for British Columbia and Prince Edward Island.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: Under the Growing Forward Bilateral Agreement, Provincial and Territorial governments are to report the results of their Growing Forward evaluation to AAFC by March 2012.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to strengthen the competitiveness of Canada's red meat packing and processing industry / Slaughter Improvement Program (SIP) (Voted)

Start Date: June 4, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2012

Description:
The national, applications-based Slaughter Improvement Program (SIP) provides eligible red meat packers and processors with repayable federal contributions to implement sound business plans for projects aimed at improving the operations of federally inspected packing plants. The program aims to allow industry stakeholders to strengthen their competitiveness by supporting new investments that could support profitability for red meat packers. These new investments focus on reducing operating costs, increasing revenues, adopting innovation to meet future business conditions and consumer expectations and addressing slaughter capacity gaps in regions where it can be demonstrated that this factor is constraining sector growth.

Recipients must also be involved or present a business plan to be involved in the slaughter of red meat. They must be federally inspected red meat packing and processing plants; provincially inspected plants implementing projects to become federally inspected to market their products beyond provincial boundaries; or legal entities planning to establish a federally inspected plant in a region where a deficit in slaughter capacity is constraining sector growth. The program is applications-based, and functions under a request-for-applications approach.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
Fifteen contribution agreements have been signed, two are currently being negotiated and one still remains conditionally approved. Two of the approved SIP projects have submitted final claims, however, since they have not completed their reporting year, there are no specific results available at this time.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Agri-Business Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	7.0	19.6	29.6	15.3	4.3
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	7.0	19.6	29.6	15.3	4.3

Comment(s) on Variance(s): Budget 2010 announced an additional $10M for the SIP bringing Total Authorities to $29.6M. Actual spending was less than the planned spending due to the timing of the approval of the projects as well as the multi-year nature of most of the proposals. Unspent funding is expected to be carried forward for use in 2011-12.

Audit Completed or Planned: A "Program Under Development Audit" was conducted between February and May 2010 in accordance with the 2009-12 Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Risk-Based Audit Plan. A further audit has not been scheduled at this time.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. An evaluation of the program is currently planned in the AAFC Five-Year Strategic Evaluation Plan (2011-12 to 2015-16) to begin in 2013-14 with planned completion by 2014-15.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to support the Canadian Agricultural Adaptation Program (Voted)

Start Date: May 28, 2009

End Date: On-going, subject to evaluation of relevance and effectiveness by March 31, 2014.

Description:
The Canadian Agricultural Adaptation Program (CAAP)'s objective is to facilitate the agriculture, agri-food, and agri-based products sector's ability to seize opportunities, to respond to new and emerging issues, and to pathfind and pilot solutions to new and ongoing issues in order to help it adapt and remain competitive. Launched as a successor to the Advancing Canadian Agriculture and Agri-Food (ACAAF) program, CAAP will continue to support industry-led initiatives at the national, regional and multi-regional levels.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
CAAP supports industry-led initiatives at the national, regional and multi-regional levels. Most projects funded take place over several years and longer-term impacts materialize a few years after project completion. Since CAAP is currently in the early stages (with a focus on longer-term projects), the program measures short-term outcomes with two performance indicators:

1. Improved knowledge of potential innovative products, processes or technologies
2. Improved knowledge of solutions/strategies analyzed/tested to address issues/opportunities

Information available on national and industry-led projects indicate that:

• 82 projects initiated in 2010-11 will improve knowledge of potential innovative products, processes or technologies; and
• 113 funded projects initiated in 2010-11 will improve knowledge of solutions/strategies analyzed/tested to address issues/opportunities.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Science, Innovation and Adoption
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	31.1	33.4	35.1	35.1	(1.8)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	31.1	33.4	35.1	35.1	(1.8)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): The program has been very well received at the regional level, resulting in more applications than anticipated and higher than expected spending for 2010-11. 

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. An evaluation is planned for 2013-14 to support program renewal.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contributions to transform Canada's Strengths into Domestic and Global Success (Voted) (related funding is found under Grant payments for the Organization for the Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (Voted))

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
The programming for transforming Canada's Strengths into Domestic and Global Success is composed of the following:

The AgriMarketing Program (AMP) provides a platform to equip industry, including small and medium-sized enterprises, for success in global markets. AgriMarketing cost-shares with industry associations for international market development, export promotion activities and in-depth research to form long-term international strategies that contribute and build on the Canada Brand. 

The Enabling Research for Competitive Agriculture (ERCA) Program supports research, complements AAFC policy analysis and development, and contributes to a more informed policy dialogue by engaging the external policy research community on priority issues that can be used by industry groups and producers to assist them in identifying new opportunities, markets and ways to enhance productivity and improve competitiveness to improve their success in global and domestic markets.

A small component of the ERCA initiative provides a grant to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) to enhance research on priority issues for Canada in the global context through collaborative activities, thereby providing a unique, global perspective on Canada's competitiveness. 

Market Information and Export Capacity Building
Initiatives falling under this category aim to perform market analysis on Canada's performance in key markets and emerging countries to aid exporting companies and producers in capitalizing on global market opportunities and trends, and strengthen the capacity of the agriculture and food sector to maintain and enter new foreign markets.

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:
AgriMarketing Program

• 45 Contribution Agreements totalling almost $22 million with industry associations, alliances and technical marketing institutions were completed.
• We are still working to enhance our economic analysis of the Program's outcomes. Based on our initial work year-over-year economic data has proven to be of limited value as it varies widely due to a host of factors. However, a longer term analysis has indicated that overall exports for supported sectors (where reliable data is available), grew on average by 16 percent per year between 2003 and 2010. Increased capacity of industry associations to deliver market development and branding projects;
• To increase the effectiveness of market development and branding projects undertaken by industry associations a policy was developed to make participation and the use of the Canada Brand mandatory in 2011-12.
• AMP facilitated the market development efforts of 45 associations and their related small and medium enterprises by cost sharing a range of marketing and branding initiatives including: trade shows, market development and training missions, and the development and translation of promotional material.

ERCA Program
Grant to OECD (part of ERCA):

• Supported methodological development of the OECD General Services Support Estimate to improve accuracy and cross-country consistency of data and analysis; and
• Provided further support to OECD work on risk management and will push further into the area of livestock risk management issues.

ERCA Contributions:
Five Contribution Agreements were signed in October 2009 with four canadian universities for a total of $5.2M over 4 fiscal years (from 2009-2010 to 2012-2013), thus creating five networks of experts in the following areas: Consumer and Market Demand (CMD), Environment (ENV), Innovation and Regulation (IR), Trade and Competitiveness Research (TCR), Structure and Performance of Agriculture and Agri-Food Industry (SPAA).

There are 160 researchers involved in this program: CMD: 30, ENV: 28, IR: 33, TCR: 43, SPAA: 26. There were 68 graduate students funded at Canadian universities in Canada through this program: CMD: 11, ENV: 14, IR: 13, TCR: 14, SPAA: 16. There were 48 projects funded directly by ERCA in 2010-2011: CMD: 12, ENV: 2, IR: 19, TCR: 8, SPAA: 7. There were 344 research reports, policy briefs, professional articles, working papers, and other publications released by network members including projects directly funded by ERCA and papers focuses on issues related to the network activities. The networks hosted along with the Canadian Agriculture Economic Society a major policy conference in Ottawa in January, 2011. There were 16 total conferences/workshops hosted or partially sponsored by the networks in 2010-11: CMD: 5, ENV: 4, IR: 1, TCR: 4, SPAA: 2.

Market Information and Export Capacity Building
The Bilateral Agreements to implement Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy specify that the Parties shall prepare annual performance reports containing information and provide them to the other Party on or before August 31 in respect of activities carried out under Designated Programs by Thematic Area in the previous fiscal year (consistent with Schedule 1: Part C: Performance Indicators and Targets). As such, performance information relating to Growing Forward cost-shared programs will not be available for inclusion in this Departmental Performance Report. Once performance results for this program are available, they can be found at: Growing Forward Reporting.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Trade and Market Development
Total Grants	-	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1	-
Total Contributions	-	21.5	22.7	28.0	26.3	(3.6)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	21.6	22.8	28.1	26.4	(3.6)

Comment(s) on Variance(s):
AgriMarketing 
The variance between total authorities and actual spending is primarily as a result of some of the associations' inability to spend all of their approved funding related to AgriMarketing. Since recipients of AgriMarketing funding are associations which are undertaking activities in foreign markets, some of the associations were unable to undertake and complete some of their activities due to resource limitations and/or changes to timing and planning as a result of shifting market conditions.

ERCA Contributions
2010-11 Actual Spending was slightly lower than authorities due to some of the variable expenses for the networks not being as high as anticipated.

Market Information and Export Capacity Building
The variance between total authorities and actual spending is due to timing of program implementation and additional time required in the planning stages, reviewing and assessing areas of priority that required further action under this initiative. This included discussions with provincial partners and key industry stakeholders. A portion of this variance could potentially be carried forward into 2011-12.

Audit Completed or Planned:
AgriMarketing: AMP completed one audit in 2010-11. There are three audits planned for 2011-12.

Grant to OECD (part of ERCA): There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

ERCA Contributions: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Market Information and Export Capacity Building: Two audits of Growing Forward cost-shared programs will be completed by 2012 for British Columbia and Prince Edward Island.

Evaluation Completed or Planned:
AgriMarketing: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Grant to OECD (part of ERCA): There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

ERCA Contributions: The Recipient Audit Unit of the Centre of Program Excellence conducted an initial risk assessment of the 5 ERCA programs and deemed them to be of low risk. The Office of Audit and Evaluation has initiated an Evaluation of the Trade and Market Development Initiative (of which ERCA is a part of) starting in June, 2011 that will conclude in June, 2012.

Market Information and Export Capacity Building: Under the Growing Forward Bilateral Agreement, Provincial and Territorial governments are to report the results of their Growing Forward evaluation to AAFC by March 2012.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Control of diseases in the hog industry - Phase 2 (Voted)

Start Date: September 4, 2008

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
The overarching goal of the Initiative for the Control of Diseases in the Hog Industry is to improve the health of the Canadian hog herd, which will help sustain the long-term viability and profitability of the sector. The Initiative for the Control of Diseases in the Hog Industry Phase 2 is a mid to long-term strategy to establish the foundation of a risk management framework for the Canadian hog sector. It is aimed at developing the capacities and structures within the hog industry to achieve long-term health and stability of the Canadian hog herd. This phase of the program is being delivered by the industry-led Canadian Swine Health Board (CSHB). CSHB is responsible for:

• The development of a national biosecurity and best management practices standard for the industry;
• The funding of research relative to circovirus and the establishment of a structure to facilitate and coordinate research on this and other emerging diseases; and
• The establishment of long-term risk-management solutions to help the industry mitigate the impacts of new and emerging diseases.

Circovirus Inoculation Program

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk 

Results Achieved:
Under the Biosecurity Pillar, the National Biosecurity Standard was completed; Under the Research Pillar, 13 research projects are underway and 6 post doctoral fellowships were established; Under the Long Term Disease Risk Management Pillar, development of a pork mortality insurance product is underway.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Food Safety and Biosecurity Risk Management Systems
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	2.6	4.0	37.9	37.9	8.9	28.9
Total Transfer Payment Program	2.6	4.0	37.9	37.9	8.9	28.9

Comment(s) on Variance(s): Actual Spending in 2010–11 was less than Planned Spending largely due to timing in program implementation. Budget 2011 announced an extension to the Initiative for the Control of Diseases in the Hog Industry Phase 2 for an additional two years to March 31, 2013. This will enable the Canadian Swine Health Board to complete initiatives directed at national biosecurity standards and best management practices. As such, the majority of unspent funding from 2010-11 is expected to be carried forward for use in future years.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. According to AAFC's five year Strategic Evaluation Plan, the program is expected to be evaluated in 2014-15 with a number of other recent assistance programs for the hog sector.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: EcoAgriculture Biofuels Capital Initiative (Voted)

Start Date: March 29, 2007

End Date: March 31, 2013

Description:
The ecoAgriculture Biofuels Capital initiative (ecoABC) is a six-year, federal initiative that provides conditionally repayable contributions towards the construction or expansion of biofuel facilities that have equity investments from farmers and use agricultural feedstock. The initiative, which is part of the federal renewable fuels strategy, is providing an opportunity for farmers to benefit from the emerging renewable fuels industry while helping the government to achieve its targets for renewable fuel content in gasoline and diesel fuel through domestic production. Eligible recipients include corporations (including but not restricted to co-operatives), individuals, and partnerships, which are not subject to a controlling interest by a federal, provincial or municipal government, which can demonstrate that their equity investments from agricultural producers are equal to or exceed five percent of projected eligible project costs, and which intend to build plants or expand existing facilities to produce renewable transportation fuels in Canada from agricultural feedstock.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
EcoABC has committed $53 million to 9 biofuels projects representing 690 million new litres per year of biofuels production and $48 million of investment by 534 farmers.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Science, Innovation and Adoption
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	17.4	1.5	65.3	36.9	33.1	32.2
Total Transfer Payment Program	17.4	1.5	65.3	36.9	33.1	32.2

Comment(s) on Variance(s): Planned Spending was higher than actual because, due to the timing of the RPP, the Planned Spending did not reflect the reallocation of funding over the two-year extension of the program from March 2011 to March 2013. Under this extension, program parameters were broadened and, in response to the poor economic conditions of 2008-09, more time was provided for projects to be completed and better aligned with other programs under the federal Renewable Fuels Strategy.

Audit Completed or Planned: EcoABC was part of the Horizontal Audit of Grants and Contribution Programs during 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: An evaluation of this program was completed during 2010-11.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Orchards & Vineyards Transition Program (Voted)

Start Date: October 25, 2007

End Date: March 31, 2011

Description:
This Orchards and Vineyards Transition program (OVTP) funded plant removal to support replanting orchards and vineyards or planting other crops to help producers compete in changing global markets. The program responded to market pressure by funding strategic planning activities to increase the industry's knowledge and decision-making. The program operated in British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, and ended on March 31, 2011.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
The objective of the program was to ensure acreage was readily available for replanting of more marketable crops, and to develop an improved understanding of the opportunities for the orchards and vineyards sector. The OVTP resulted in fruit trees and grape vines being removed from 7,000 hectares, which made land available for the planting of more marketable varieties of tree fruits, grapes and other crops. The program encouraged producers to make the adjustments necessary to become more competitive.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Agri-Business Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	11.4	11.0	9.2	11.3	11.1	(2.0)
Total Transfer Payment Program	11.4	11.0	9.2	11.3	11.1	(2.0)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between the planned spending and the actual spending in 2010-11 is due to higher than expected demands for the program in the province of Quebec.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: A lessons learned exercise for the program is expected to be finalized in 2011-12. Under the federal-provincial agreements, the provinces are responsible for evaluating the activities carried out under the agreements.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Over Thirty Months Payment Program (Voted)

Start Date: June 17, 2010

End Date: March 31, 2011

Description:
This program, also referred to as the Abattoir Competitiveness Program (ACP), was a one year, $25 million program which ended on March 31, 2011. The program provided direct payments (grants) to eligible recipients based on the volume of specified risk materials produced from over thirty month old (OTM) cattle during the 2010 calendar year. ACP was designed to:

• Help federally, provincially and territorially registered cattle slaughter facilities address short-term competitiveness issues;
• Facilitate improved management of specified risk materials; and
• Contribute to maintaining a critical slaughter capacity in Canada for OTM cattle while industry makes efforts to better manage the cost differential with the U.S.

Strategic Outcome: An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector

Results Achieved:
The short-term assistance provided under this program has been well received by industry with 16 applications received from federally inspected facilities and 217 applications received from provincially inspected facilities for a total of 233 applications received nationally. The expected result was that Canadian OTM (over thirty months old) slaughter capacity be maintained, the target being 75% of the 2009 value. This target was exceeded, as capacity was maintained at 98%.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Agri-Business Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	23.0	22.7	(22.7)
Total Contributions	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	-	-	23.0	22.7	(22.7)

Comment(s) on Variance(s): There was no planned spending reported as this program was approved after the 2010-11 RPP.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. This program is included in the Evaluation of Cattle Slaughter Industry Assistance that is planned to be completed in 2013-14.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Payments in connection with the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act (AMPA) / Advance Payments Program (Statutory)

Start Date: 1997

End Date: On-going under AMPA

Description:
The Advance Payments Program (APP) is a financial loan guarantee program that guarantees cash advances to producers, enabling them to produce and market their agricultural products when conditions are most ideal. Producers can receive cash advances of up to $400,000 per production period, the first $100,000 of which is interest-free. Advances can be on a variety of crops and/or livestock and producers have up to 18 months (usually from April until September of the following year) to use their cash advance for whatever purpose they feel necessary. The producer must repay their advance (as they are selling/delivering their product) in full before the end of the 18 month production period.

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Results Achieved:
For the 2010-11 production period, 64 agreements were signed to deliver the APP with producer organizations. Approximately $1.57 billion was issued in advances to approximately 39,566 producers. The uptake of the program fluctuates from year to year. 2010-11 saw an increase in the number of participants but a decrease in the amount advanced. This is likely due to lower commodity prices and a decrease in the amount that livestock producers are borrowing under the program.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Business Risk Management
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	37.0	28.5	184.0	34.0	34.0	150.0
Total Transfer Payment Program	37.0	28.5	184.0	34.0	34.0	150.0

Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance between planned and actual spending was primarily due to the fact that in 2010-11, fewer guarantee payments related to advances provided for the 2008 production period were made than originally expected due to two separate stays of default. Low interest rates during the fiscal year also resulted in a large cost savings.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: The Advance Payments Program (APP) is enacted and governed by the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act (AMPA). The AMPA requires that a legislative review take place every five years in consultation with the Minister of Finance (the next five year anniversary being November 27, 2011).

The legislative review is currently underway and is comprised of 3 distinct activities: a program evaluation, a review of program delivery, and an evaluation of administrative efficiency. In spring 2011, targeted engagement sessions were conducted across Canada with industry stakeholders, APP administrators and producer organizations. Additionally, 3,000 individual producers were selected to complete a questionnaire, and 20 key stakeholders were selected for personal interviews.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Plum Pox Eradication Program (PPEP) (Voted)

Start Date: April 19, 2004

End Date: March 31, 2011

Description:
The Plum Pox Eradication Program (PPEP) provided funding for activities aimed at eradicating the Plum Pox Virus (PPV) from the Niagara region of Canada while ensuring the viability of the tender fruit industry (peaches, plums, apricots, nectarines). The bulk of the funding supports an extensive survey of tender fruit orchards, research and financial assistance for tender fruit producers whose orchards are affected by the PPV. The program also includes an asset loss compensation component. This seven-year program (2004-05 to 2010-11) was a follow-up of the original three-year program (2001-02 to 2003-04).

The program is jointly funded by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA).

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Results Achieved:
During 2010-11, the number of trees and orchards that have been identified as PPV positive were 211 cases and 58 cases respectively. One of the program's key performance targets was a 15% reduction in PPV incidences annually between 2004-2011. While this target had been met during the first six years of the program, a significant increase in positive tested trees during 2010-11 resulted in an annual reduction of 11% (a reduction from 942 PPV positives in 2004 to 211 PPV positives in 2010) when the program was terminated as of March 31, 2011.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Food Safety and Biosecurity Risk Management Systems
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	8.6	8.6	8.6	8.6	8.6	-
Total Transfer Payment Program	8.6	8.6	8.6	8.6	8.6	-

Comment(s) on Variance(s): Funding has been fully spent as planned.

Audit Completed or Planned: There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: The final evaluation report and management responses for the Plum Pox Eradication Program are expected to be completed in September 2011.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Transfer Payment Program: Programming related to the Agricultural Flexibility Fund (Voted)

Start Date: June 18, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2014

Description:
Agricultural Flexibility Fund (AgriFlexibility) initiatives will fall under three project categories or elements:

1. Investments to help reduce the cost of production or improve environmental sustainability;
2. Investments in value-chain innovation and sectoral adaptation; and
3. Investments to address emerging opportunities and challenges.

Strategic Outcomes:

• An environmentally sustainable agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector;
• A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk; and
• An innovative agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector.

Results Achieved:
As the Agricultural Flexibility Fund was meant to be flexible, no targets were set at the beginning of the fund for provincial, territorial and industry initiatives in partnership with the federal government. Provinces, territories and industry identified needs for the sector and presented proposals accordingly. Targets for individual contribution agreements/bilateral agreements were then established. In general, targets are for the duration of the agreements. Performance indicators, specific to the nature of each initiative, were developed and included in contribution/bilateral agreements. As most AgriFlexibility projects/initiatives are taking place over several years, it is a challenge to report annually on the achievement of specific targets. It should also be noted that targets may change, as provinces and territories are allowed to change their targets annually under their contribution agreements. From the beginning of the Fund to March 31, 2011 a total of 36 proposals received from provinces, territories and industry have been approved for a total value of about $149.4 million.

Under the Agri-Processing Initiative (API), a federal initiative established under AgriFlexibility, 20 facilities completed upgrades before the end of March 2011 compared to a target of 35 facilities. Another eight projects had agreements signed in the reporting period but projects will not be completed until 2011-12 and later. In total, by the end of March 2011, API had 33 contribution agreements signed for a total of $19.1 million compared to a target of 53 agreements and $20.7 million.

($ millions)

	2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
Program Activity: Environmental Knowledge, Technology, Information, and Measurement
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	2.6	0.9	-	2.6
Total Environmental Knowledge, Technology, Information, and Measurement	-	-	2.6	0.9	-	2.6
Program Activity: On-Farm Action
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	22.8	11.6	0.9	21.9
Total On-Farm Action	-	-	22.8	11.6	0.9	21.9
Program Activity: Food Safety Biosecurity Risk Management Systems
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	17.7	10.9	0.2	17.4
Total Food Safety Biosecurity Risk Management System	-	-	17.7	10.9	0.2	17.4
Program Activity: Trade and Market Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	12.1	7.2	2.4	9.7
Total Trade and Market Development	-	-	12.1	7.2	2.4	9.7
Program Activity: Science, Innovation and Adaptation
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	4.1	28.8	25.8	14.8	14.0
Total Science, Innovation and Adaptation	-	4.1	28.8	25.8	14.8	14.0
Program Activity: Agri-Business Development
Total Grants	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Contributions	-	-	2.1	6.0	4.3	(2.2)
Total Agri-Business Development	-	-	2.1	6.0	4.3	(2.2)
Total Transfer Payment Program	-	4.1	86.1	62.3	22.7	63.4

Comment(s) on Variance(s): As announced in Budget 2010, a total of $42M of 2010-11 planned spending was transferred to the Slaughter Improvement Program (SIP), the Over Thirty Months Payment Program (OTMPP) and the Slaughter Waste Improvement Program (SWIP), and is not reflected in the AgriFlexibility actual spending. A portion of the unspent funding is expected to be carried forward into future years.

Audit Completed or Planned: A "Program under Development Audit" was completed in January 2011. Observations from the audit were generally positive. Most of the expected elements of the governance, risk management and control frameworks of the Agricultural Flexibility Fund were found to be in place and working appropriately. Roles and responsibilities were clear, a senior-level committee provided appropriate oversight, key risks were identified and controls implemented to mitigate the assessed risks, templates consistent with the approved terms and conditions were used to assess projects, and funding agreements were generally complete and consistent with program terms and conditions.

An internal audit is planned for 2013-14.

Evaluation Completed or Planned: A mid-term evaluation was planned for 2011-12. Given that the scope of the audit was broader than anticipated, it was determined that the mid-term evaluation was no longer necessary and a complete evaluation will take place in 2015-16.

Note:
Due to rounding, figures may not add to the totals shown.

Name of Recipient: Canada Pork International (CPI)

Start Date: June 22, 2009

End Date: September 30, 2013

Total Funding: $17.0M

Description:
The Marketing Fund provides support to Canada Pork International (CPI) to assist the sector in adding value to Canadian pork products allowing for greater differentiation from the competition. This funding will be used by CPI to bolster critical market development; undertake strategic activities to capture greater value from export markets; gain recognition for Canadian pork products and building markets; increase market access for Canadian pork products; and enhance capacity that responds to identified industry needs.

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based product sector that proactively manages risk

Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient:
In 2010, Canadian pork exports totalled 1,097,694 metric tonnes valued at $2.8 billion, compared to 2009 exports of 1,075,314 metric tonnes valued at $2.6 billion. 2010 pork exports were up 10% over 2007, and up 2% compared to 2009.

Exports to Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea, and Australia declined when compared to 2009. However, exports increased to a number of countries in 2010, including United States (2%), Philippines (0.5%) and more significantly to Russia (48%), Mexico (67%), and China (88%). Canada continues to diversify its exports, exporting to more than 100 countries in 2010. Technical seminars, promotional materials and promotions helped to sustain (and increase) export levels.

Japan also continues to be a strategic market; Canada Pork International established their first office outside of Canada in Tokyo in order to further strengthen relationships.

Program Activity: Business Risk Management
($ millions)

2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
-	17.0	-	-	-	-

Comments on Variance(s):
The CPI agreement was signed on August 10, 2009 and the full amount was paid to the recipient in the 2009-10 fiscal year to be drawn down in accordance with the cash flow requirements set out in their annual business plans and ending in March 31, 2013. As of March 31, 2011 $7.8 million has been drawn down.

Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient During the Reporting Year and Future Plan:
There was no evaluation undertaken for this program in 2010-11. Performance evaluations will be completed by the recipient, with interim and final reports due September 30, 2011 and September 2013 respectively.

Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient During the Reporting Year and Future Plan:
There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11. No audits are currently planned.

Name of Recipient: Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute (CAPI)

Start Date: December 14, 2006

End Date: March 31, 2022

Total Funding: $15.0M

Description:
The conditional grant for CAPI encourages independent policy research benefitting the Canadian agricultural sector. It will help ensure continued success in building an inclusive and forward looking dialogue on the future of Canadian agriculture, and provide a stable and sustained forum to discuss issues of importance to the industry.

Strategic Outcome: A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based product sector that proactively manages risk

Summary of Results Achieved by the Recipient:
During the 2010-11 fiscal year and in line with its Business Plan, CAPI achieved the following:

• Establishment of three Leadership Panels on "food and wellness connection", "sustainability", and "viability";
• Publication in May 2010 of a synthesis report: "Challenging Our Past: Preparing for the Future; Ideas and Questions for Agriculture and Agri-Food Policies" summarizing the key findings from the three Leadership Panels;
• Publication in February 2011 of the Destination report, "Canada’s Agri-Food Destination: A New Strategic Approach";
• Nineteen (19) commissioned papers; and
• Several key meetings, in addition to the meetings of the Leadership Panels were held during the fiscal year.

Program Activity: Business Risk Management
($ millions)

2008-09 Actual Spending	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-11 Planned Spending	2010-11 Total Authorities	2010-11 Actual Spending	Variance between Planned Spending and Actual Spending
-	-	-	-	-	-

Comments on Variance(s):
The CAPI agreement was signed on March 31, 2007 and the full amount was paid to the client in the 2006-07 fiscal year in the form of an endowment to be drawn down at the rate of $1 million per year for 15 years ending March 31, 2022.

Significant Evaluation Findings by the Recipient During the Reporting Year and Future Plan:
The June 2010 evaluation by an independent third party covering the 2007-2009 period concluded that: "CAPI has successfully established its foundation as an independent, non-partisan, not-for-profit organization aiming to provide a neutral venue for policy dialogue and influence policy development in the agriculture and agri-food domain.", and that "CAPI is now beginning to establish its reputation as a policy catalyst and develop a brand among current and potential stakeholders."

The evaluation report findings are summarized below:

• CAPI had moderate success undertaking what it had planned during the time period evaluated;
• CAPI was on the right course to deliver the current strategic plan;
• CAPI’s activities were aligned with the Funding Agreement and scope of the Charter;
• CAPI has had limited success in becoming relevant to its stakeholders over its first few years;
• CAPI was somewhat effective during the evaluation timeframe; and
• CAPI was quite efficient given the available amount of resources that it had available.

To deal with the findings of the interim performance evaluation, CAPI received approval from their Board of Directors in July 2009 on their 3-year strategy. This served as the basis for both the FY 2010-11 Business Plan which was submitted in January 2010, and the 2011-12 Research and Business Plan which was submitted in February 2011.

Further performance evaluation reports by an independent auditor are scheduled for 2015, 2020 and 2022.

Significant Audit Findings by the Recipient During the Reporting Year and Future Plan:
There was no audit undertaken for this program in 2010-11.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: Agricultural Regulatory Action Plan of Growing Forward

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Regulatory Efficiency Facilitation

Start Date: April 1, 2008

End Date: March 31, 2013

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date): $94.9 million over five years

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

This initiative targets four specific regulatory issues that were identified by agri-food stakeholders, namely: 1) minor use pesticides and pesticide risk reduction; 2) veterinary drugs; 3) health claims, novel foods, and ingredients; and 4) food fortification. The Agricultural Regulatory Action Plan supports the general principles of the Government of Canada's Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation. The Plan specifically addresses the development of regulatory frameworks based on the accumulation of sound science, as well as advancing the transparency, timeliness, responsiveness, efficiency, public interest, and government collaboration to minimize regulatory burden for stakeholders.

Shared Outcomes:

Addressing key regulatory obstacles to promoting a competitive and innovative sector, while protecting and advancing the public interest

Governance Structure:

Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) between AAFC and Health Canada set out the roles and responsibilities for the management of this initiative. The Deputy Ministers of the two departments oversee the governance process that includes the following levels of management in accordance with the MOUs:

• An Assistant Deputy Ministers' (ADM) Committee oversees the management of the MOUs and reports back to the Deputy Ministers.
• Joint Management Committees (JMC), composed of directors general or equivalent level representatives, have been established to manage the implementation of the MOUs and report semi-annually to the ADM Committee.

Performance Highlights:

The plan continued to foster government collaboration while supporting the development, implementation and enhancement of regulatory frameworks to address issues identified by stakeholders. In the area of minor use pesticides and pesticide risk reduction, project prioritization and expedited regulatory reviews increased the number of approved minor use pesticides. Enhanced guidance to stakeholders and the improved uptake of joint review opportunities increased the number of veterinary drugs available for food-producing animals in Canada. In the area of health claims, novel foods, and ingredients, key matters of food regulatory modernization were identified to accompany food industry innovation efforts and scientific substantiation of health claims. Finally, policy options continued to be explored, informed by nutrition-related data in the area of food fortification.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
Due to rounding, figures may not add up to the totals shown.
AAFC	Regulatory Efficiency Facilitation	Minor Use Pesticides and Pesticide Risk Reduction	36.2	9.1	8.5	Increased minor-use pesticides and reduced risk pest management tools permissible or available for use	Data and information were generated for 80 minor-use pesticides submissions and 20 new reduced risk tools, resulting in increased pesticide risk reduction tools, practices and technologies available to growers.
		Health Claims, Novel Foods, and Ingredients	16.1	3.6	3.4	Enhanced sector ability to navigate the food regulatory system, which should lead to improved sector understanding of regulatory processes/requirements	Sector analysis-based input led to several regulatory policy updates and advice including scientific, provided to industry and sector groups resulted in two health claims and two novel food submissions meeting regulatory requirements.
Health Canada	Pesticide Regulation	Minor Use Pesticides and Pesticide Risk Reduction	16.0	4.0	4.0	New minor uses of pesticides available to growers through a dedicated minor use review process	Developed a new approach to streamline the regulatory submission process, and registered 135 new pesticide minor uses. Six transition strategies were developed.
	Health Products	Veterinary Drugs	5.0	1.2	1.2	Reduction in review times for veterinary drug submissions and increased availability of drugs for food-producing animals	Completed the first Minor Use Minor Species submission. Eliminated the backlog of submissions and reduced the review time of new drugs.
	Food and Nutrition	Health Claims, Novel Foods, and Ingredients	17.4	3.5	3.5	Modernized and efficient policy and regulatory approaches and pre-market processes leading to new, innovative and safe food products and claims, focusing on health benefits	Drafted amendments to modernize the Food and Drugs Act. Completed 14 regulatory amendments and 12 Interim Marketing Authorizations, published summaries of assessment for two new health claims, and classified 600 products at the food/natural health product interface.
		Food Fortification	4.3	1.2	1.2		Increased staff capacity to deliver Temporary Market Authorisation Letters, while continuing to explore policy options for the voluntary addition of vitamins and mineral nutrients to foods.
Total			94.9	22.5	21.8

Comments on Variances: Not applicable

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners: Not applicable

Contact information:

Lynn Stewart, Director
Food Regulatory Issues Division
Sector Development and Analysis Directorate
Market and Industry Services Branch
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Room 242, Floor 2, Tower 5
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-0153
lynn.stewart@agr.gc.ca

Note:

AAFC's Growing Forward is the five-year policy framework that replaced the Agricultural Policy Framework as of the 2008–09 fiscal year. Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010–11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been brought into the Department's reference levels during 2010–11, due to the timing of the 2010–11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved TB Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: Agricultural Flexibility Fund

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity:

The Agricultural Flexibility Fund contributes to several program activities within AAFC: Environmental Knowledge, Technology, Information and Measurement; On-Farm Action; Food Safety and Biosecurity Risk Management Systems; Trade and Market Development; Science, Innovation and Adoption; and Agri-Business Development.

Start Date: July 21, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2014

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date):

$412.2 million (of which $140.6 million is funding through Canada’s Economic Action Plan)

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

The Agricultural Flexibility Fund (AgriFlexibility) is a five-year fund (2009–2014) that helps implement new initiatives, both federally and in partnership with provinces, territories and industry. AgriFlexibility’s goal is to improve the sector's competitiveness and help the sector adapt to pressures through non-business risk-management measures that will reduce costs of production, improve environmental sustainability, promote innovation, and respond to market challenges. AgriFlexibility initiatives can be implemented federally (Federal Initiatives), in partnership with provinces and territories (Cost-Shared Federal-Provincial/Territorial Initiatives) or by the industry (Industry-led initiatives).

Funding for industry-led initiatives is provided through a contribution agreement while funding for federal-provincial cost-shared initiative is provided through a bilateral agreement. This Horizontal Initiative is part of the Canada's Economic Action Plan.

Three federal initiatives under AgriFlexibility have been announced and implemented. They are: Livestock Auction Traceability Initiative (LATI); AgriProcessing Initiative (API); and Canada Brand Advocacy Initiative (CBAI).

Shared Outcomes:

• Producers/partners/industry to improve their environmental practices
• Producers/partners/industry to reduce their costs of production
• Improved food safety, biosecurity, traceability, and risk management measures
• Increase in value-chain efforts focussed on innovation and adaptation
• Agri-industry implement actions to respond to market threats and take advantage of emerging market opportunities

Governance Structure:

The following is a description of the internal governance for approval/rejection of AgriFlexibility proposals:

• AgriFlexibility is administered within the Agriculture Transformation Programs Directorate. Once AgriFlexibility proposals have been assessed, they are presented to the Directors General Innovation (DGI) Committee which is comprised of Directors General from across the Department and is co-chaired by: the Director General of Agriculture Transformation Programs Directorate, Farm Financial Programs Branch, and the Director General, Innovation Directorate, Research Branch. This Committee reviews proposals, verifies program eligibility, provides expert advice; makes a recommendation to one of the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) boards: the Policy, Programs and Results Board (PPRB) or Horizontal Management Board (HMB). The DGI Committee also reviews the financial status and status reports of AgriFlexibility on a regular basis.
• PPRB and HMB are comprised of ADMs from across the Department. Since these two boards have very similar membership and meet on alternate weeks, either one or the other is used to review AgriFlexibility proposals and make funding recommendations, in order to make decisions on proposals in a timely manner.
• Final approval of proposals is granted by the Minister, with a recommendation from the Deputy Minister.

Performance Highlights:

A lesson learned from AgriFlexibility is that providing industry, provinces and territories the ability to develop proposals to address specific needs enables industry to take action and a leading role in addressing specific issues of relevance to them. As of March 31, 2011 a total of 36 projects/initiatives from provinces, territories and industry have been approved for a total value of about $149.4 million in funding under the AgriFlexibility.

As most AgriFlexibility projects/initiatives are taking place over several years, and results are known at the end of activities, it is a challenge to report on an annual basis on the achievement of targets. Provinces and territories are to provide an annual report in the fall on the progress of their initiatives.

It should also be noted that provinces and territories are allowed to change their targets annually under their bilateral agreements.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
*As most AgriFlexibility projects are taking place over several years, it is not possible to report annually on the achievement of specific targets. It should also be noted that targets may change, as provinces and territories are allowed to change their targets annually under their contribution agreements. A total of 36 projects from provinces, territories and industry have been approved for a total value of about $149.4 million in funding under AgriFlexibility.
AAFC	Various program activities	Agricultural Flexibility Fund	412.2	121.4	28.9	Producers and industry improve their environmental practices	N/A*
						Producers and industry reduce their costs of production	N/A*
						Improved food safety, biosecurity, traceability and risk management measures	N/A*
Total			412.2	121.4	28.9

For more information on AgriFlexibility visit: http://www.agr.gc.ca/agriflexibility.

Comments on Variances:

As announced in Budget 2010, a total of $42M of 2010-11 planned spending was transferred to the Slaughter Improvement Program (SIP), the Over Thirty Months Payment program (OTMPP) and the Slaughter Waste Improvement Program (SWIP), and is not reflected in the AgriFlexibility actual spending. A portion of the unspend funding is expected to be carried forward into future years.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:

Overall the same results are to be achieved by provincial and territorial partners.

Contact information:

Linda Parsons, Director General
Agriculture Transformation Programs Directorate
Farm Financial Programs Branch
Room 220, Floor 8, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-1900
linda.parsons@agr.gc.ca

Note:

Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010–11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010–11, due to the timing of the 2010–11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved Treasury Board Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: AgriInsurance

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Business Risk Management (BRM)

Start Date: April 1, 2008

End Date:

AgriInsurance contributions are statutory and ongoing.

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date):

As the program is statutory and demand-driven, actual spending may vary. Total federal funding allocation is $1,629.4 million over four years (2008–09 to 2011–12).

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

AgriInsurance (formerly known as Production and Crop Insurance) aims to reduce the financial impact on producers of production losses caused by uncontrollable natural perils.

Authorities for the program include Section 4 of the Farm Income Protection Act, as well as Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy and the Federal/Provincial AgriInsurance Agreement.

The program links to the departmental strategic outcome of a competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk and the Government of Canada's outcome of Strong Economic Growth.

For more information, visit the following websites:

Federal AgriInsurance
British Columbia
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick
Nova Scotia
Prince Edward Island
Newfoundland

Shared Outcome:

To mitigate the financial impacts of production losses by providing effective insurance protection

Governance Structure:

AgriInsurance is part of the comprehensive Growing Forward agricultural policy framework developed by federal, provincial and territorial (FPT) Ministers of Agriculture, and falls under the BRM priority.

AgriInsurance is a provincial-territorial program to which the federal government contributes financially under the FPT AgriInsurance Agreement. The program is administered provincially in all provinces. The federal and provincial governments cost-share a portion of the premium costs together with program participants. Governments also fully cost-share the administrative costs of the program (60:40 federal-provincial).

Governance structure includes various national standards outlined in Canada Production Insurance Regulations. Like the other BRM programs, the governance structure for the program consists of working groups and committees, including the FPT AgriInsurance Working Group (AIWG), the FPT BRM Policy Working Group and the FPT Administrators Working Group, as well as the National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) which includes FPT government officials and industry representatives. These groups examine BRM policy and program issues and, as requested, develop options to be brought forward to senior management, including FPT Assistant Deputy Ministers (ADMs), FPT Deputy Ministers and FPT Ministers.

Performance Highlights:

The value of insured to eligible production for insurance for 2009-10 exceeded the target of 60% with 62.68%. Production losses were mitigated with indemnity payments of $1.116 billion (including $257.3 million for unseeded benefits). The value of insured production amounted to $12.3 billion as 65.6 million of acres were covered.

The value of agricultural products eligible for insurance for 2009–10 compared to the total value of all agricultural products exceeded the target of 85% at 86.95%. This ratio has remained fairly consistent over the last two years.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
AAFC	Business Risk Management	AgriInsurance	1,629.4 over four years (2008-09 – 2011-12)	413.6	517.2	The financial impacts of production losses are mitigated by providing effective insurance protection.
						Indicators: Value of insured production compared to the total value of all agricultural products eligible for insurance - Target 60 %.	The ratio of insured to eligible production for insurance for 2009-10 exceeds the target of 60% with 62.68%.
						Value of agricultural products eligible for insurance compared to the value of all agricultural products - Target 85 %.	The ratio exceeded the target of 85% at 86.95% in 2009-10.
Total			1,629.4	413.6	517.2

Comments on Variances:

Actual spending was higher than planned spending for 2010–11 due to a substantial increase in premiums caused by higher grain prices that are reflected in the insurable values.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:

Planning and development activities are done jointly with the provinces. Therefore, the expected results are the same, but the achieved results will vary by province.

Contact information:

Danny Foster, Director General
Business Risk Management Program Development
Room 241, Floor 3, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-2100
danny.foster@agr.gc.ca

Note:

Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010–11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010–11, due to the timing of the 2010–11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved Treasury Board Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

This program is statutory and demand-driven; therefore, actual spending could vary. See also the related horizontal initiatives on AgriStability, AgriInvest and AgriRecovery.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: AgriInvest

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Business Risk Management (BRM)

Start Date:

Agreements were signed with the provinces December 19, 2007, to implement the program for the 2007 program year.

End Date:

AgriInvest grants and contributions are statutory and ongoing.

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date):

As the program is statutory and demand-driven, actual spending may vary. Total federal funding allocation is $843.0 million over five years (2007-08 to 2011-12).

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

AgriInvest allows producers to self-manage, through producer-government savings accounts, the first 15% of their margin losses for a production year and/or make investments to reduce on-farm risks or increase farm revenues. Under the program, annual producer deposits of up to 1.5% of their allowable net sales are matched by government deposits. Government deposits are cost-shared 60:40 by federal, provincial and territorial (FPT) governments. In combination with the AgriStability program, AgriInvest is the successor to the Canadian Agricultural Income Stabilization program. AgriInvest replaces coverage for smaller income declines while AgriStability assists producers in managing larger losses.

AgriInvest provides producers with a secure, accessible, predictable, and bankable source of income assistance to address small drops in farm income and manage on-farm risks.

Authorities for the program include Section 4 of the Farm Income Protection Act, as well as Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy and the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Agreement with Respect to AgriStability and AgriInvest.

The program links to the departmental strategic outcome of a competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk and the Government of Canada's outcome of Strong Economic Growth.

For more information, visit the following websites:

Federal AgriInvest
AgriInvest in Quebec (La Financière agricole du Québec)

Shared Outcome:

To provide producers with flexibility in how they choose to manage and/or mitigate small income losses through the availability of timely and predictable funds

Governance Structure:

The AgriInvest program is part of the comprehensive Growing Forward agricultural policy framework developed by FPT Ministers of Agriculture, and falls under the BRM priority. Program costs, including program payments and administrative costs, are cost shared by the federal government and the provinces and the Yukon Territory on a 60:40 basis, respectively.

As a transitional measure, the deposit requirement was waived for the 2007 program year. Producers were required to make a deposit for the 2008 program year in order to receive matching government funding. The federal government held the AgriInvest accounts for both of these years except in Quebec.

For the 2009 program year, the AgriInvest program continued to be delivered by the federal government in all provinces except Quebec. However, governments worked with financial institutions to set up the infrastructure necessary to establish and hold AgriInvest accounts. Producers were able to make deposits under the AgriInvest program with financial institutions in the summer of 2010 for the 2009 program year. In Quebec, the AgriInvest program is, and will continue to be, delivered provincially by La Financière agricole du Québec.

Like the other BRM programs, the governance structure for the program consists of working groups and committees, including the FPT BRM Policy Working Group and FPT Administrators Working Group, as well as the National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) which includes FPT government officials and industry representatives. These groups examine BRM policy and program issues and, as requested, develop options to be brought forward to senior management, including FPT Assistant Deputy Ministers (ADMs), FPT Deputy Ministers and FPT Ministers.

Performance Highlights:

About 60% of participants who suffered an income decline and triggered AgriStability payments in the 2008 program year also made withdrawals from their AgriInvest accounts, suggesting that the majority of producers are using the program to manage income declines. The 60% target was met.

The 2010 BRM performance indicator survey indicated that 90% of those who withdrew money from the accounts used it to address income declines, which is far better than the target of 75%.

AAFC has also established the target of 65% for the percentage of producers participating in AgriInvest. Participation in AgriInvest reached over 70% of all Canadian producers in the 2008 program year, which was similar to the first year of the program.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
*As most AgriFlexibility projects are taking place over several years, it is not possible to report annually on the achievement of specific targets. It should also be noted that targets may change, as provinces and territories are allowed to change their targets annually under their contribution agreements. A total of 36 projects from provinces, territories and industry have been approved for a total value of about $149.4 million in funding under AgriFlexibility.
AAFC	Business Risk Management	AgriInvest	843.0	168.2	208.8	Producers have the flexibility in managing small financial risks. Producers use program account balances to address income declines or to make investments to reduce on-farm risks or increase farm revenues.	The following results are based on the 2008 program year, the latest year for which processing is complete and data is available.
						Indicators: Percentage of AgriInvest producers receiving AgriStability payments and making withdrawals from their AgriInvest saving accounts – Target: at least 60% of AgriInvest producers	About 60% of participants who triggered AgriStability payments in 2008 also made withdrawals from their AgriInvest accounts.
						Percentage of producers indicating that they use their funds to address income declines or make investments to reduce on-farm risks or increase to farm revenues – Target: at least 75%	90% of those who withdrew money from the accounts used it to address income declines.
Total			843.0	168.2	208.8

Comments on Variances:

AgriInvest is demand-driven, rather than being funded from a set allocation for each fiscal year. Although the administrative costs of the program remain relatively constant, the variance of the year-to-year grant and contribution payments is directly related to both participation and commodity prices, as producer deposits and government contributions are based on a percentage of their income generated from the sale of commodities for a production year.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:

Coordination of program oversight and delivery with the federal government will ensure that the program is delivered consistently and that program objectives and reporting requirements are met.

Contact information:

Danny Foster, Director General
Business Risk Management Program Development
Room 241, Floor 3, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-2100
danny.foster@agr.gc.ca

Note:

Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010-11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010-11, due to the timing of the 2010-11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved TB Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

This program is statutory and demand-driven; therefore, actual spending could vary. See also the related horizontal initiatives on AgriStability, AgriInsurance and AgriRecovery. Total allocation does not include funding for the one-time federal-only 2007 AgriInvest Kickstart program.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: AgriRecovery – Agricultural Disaster Relief Program (ADRP)

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Business Risk Management (BRM)

Start Date: December 6, 2007

End Date: March 31, 2012

During the 2010-11 fiscal year, the program authorities were extended until March 31, 2012.

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date):

Total federal funding allocation is $814.1 million over five years (2007–08 to 2011–12 fiscal years).

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

AgriRecovery enables federal, provincial and territorial (FPT) governments to provide timely assistance to help producers quickly re-establish their income stream and contain the long-term impacts after small- to mid-size disasters (e.g. disease, pest and weather). Programs under AgriRecovery are developed on a case-by-case basis after an assessment is completed and it is determined that there is need for assistance beyond existing programs, such as AgriInvest, AgriStability and AgriInsurance.

Under AgriRecovery, the ADRP helps focus the coordination effort, providing a process to fast-track authorities for programs to quickly fund initiatives under AgriRecovery.

Participating provinces and territories cost-share initiatives on a 60:40 FPT basis. For AgriRecovery programming outside the ADRP, funding options are negotiated with the provinces and territories on a case-by-case basis.

Authorities for the program include sub-section 12(5) of the Farm Income Protection Act, as well as various agreements for individual programming developed under AgriRecovery.

The program links to the departmental strategic outcome of a competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk and the Government of Canada's outcome of Strong Economic Growth.

For more information, visit: http://www.agr.gc.ca/agrirecovery.

Shared Outcome:

To reduce the economic impact of catastrophic natural disasters on producers through timely assistance not otherwise provided by other programs

Governance Structure:

The AgriRecovery framework, including the ADRP, is part of the comprehensive Growing Forward policy framework developed by FPT Ministers of Agriculture, and falls under the Business Risk Management (BRM) priority. Under the ADRP, program costs, including program payments and administrative costs, are expected to be cost-shared by the federal government and the provinces and territories on a 60:40 basis, respectively. For AgriRecovery programming outside the ADRP, funding options are negotiated with the provinces and the territories on a case-by-case basis, however the 60:40 cost share requirement remains in effect.

Like the other BRM programs, the governance structure for the program consists of working groups and committees, including the FPT BRM Policy Working Group and FPT Administrators Working Group, as well as the National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) which includes FPT government officials and industry representatives. These groups examine BRM policy and program issues and, as requested, develop options to be brought forward to senior management, including FPT Assistant Deputy Ministers (ADMs), FPT Deputy Ministers and FPT Ministers.

Specific to AgriRecovery and the ADRP are FPT Task Teams, which are initiated on a case-by-case basis when requested to assess and analyze a disaster and its impacts and, if needed, develop options for an individual disaster assistance initiative to be brought forward to participating FPT Ministers.

Performance Highlights:

Producers affected by a disaster situation benefit from financial assistance from federal, provincial and territorial governments. Since the inception of AgriRecovery, about 58,000 producers have received payments under various initiatives.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
AAFC	Business Risk Management	AgriRecovery (including ADRP)	814.1	121.7	256.9	Farm business operations resume operations following a natural disaster	Thirteen initiatives were put in place in 2010–11 under the ADRP to help producers deal with disaster events.
						Producers affected by a disaster situation benefit from financial assistance	The results of the initiatives put in place will be available in the 2011–12 program year.
						Indicators: Percentage of producers who believe that the financial assistance provided under the program played a role in the recovery. Target is 75%	For 2009–10, provinces reported that almost all of the producers who received AgriRecovery assistance indicated it has helped in the recovery of their operations, surpassing the target of 75%.
						Percentage of producers still farming one year after the disaster. Target is 70% of producers still farming one year later	In the majority of cases, the producers were still in business one year after the disaster payments.
Total			814.1	121.7	256.9

Comments on Variances:

The increase is as a result of four initiatives that were implemented to respond to wide spread excessive moisture and flooding in the western provinces.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:

Joint planning and execution (federally and provincially) will be undertaken so that results are consistent.

Contact information:

Danny Foster, Director General
Business Risk Management Program Development
Room 241, Floor 3, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-2100
danny.foster@agr.gc.ca

Note:

Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010–11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010–11, due to the timing of the 2010–11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved Treasury Board Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

This program is statutory and demand-driven; therefore, actual spending could vary. See also the related horizontal initiatives on AgriStability, AgriInvest and AgriInsurance.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: AgriStability

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Business Risk Management (BRM)

Start Date:

Agreements were signed with the provinces December 19, 2007, to implement the program for the 2007 program year.

End Date:

AgriStability grants and contributions are statutory and ongoing.

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date):

As the program is statutory and demand-driven, actual spending may vary. Total federal funding allocation is $3,141.1 million over five fiscal years (2007–08 to 2011–12).

For the period of 2007–08, funding in the amount of $561.1 million pertains to the Canadian Agriculture Income Stabilization (CAIS) program, which preceded AgriStability.

Included in the total allocation is $14.8 million ($3.0 million for 2009-10 and $11.8 million for 2010–11) for the transfer of delivery from the federal administration of the program to British Columbia and Saskatchewan, which is a Canada Economic Action Plan Initiative.

Description of the Horizontal Initiative:

AgriStability is a margin-based program that provides support when producers experience large farm-income losses that result in drops in their margins (eligible farm income, less eligible farm expenses) for a program year of more than 15% relative to their average margins from previous years (i.e., their reference margins). Thus a payment is triggered under the program when producers' program-year margins drop below 85% of their reference margin. AgriStability also includes coverage for negative margins, as well as mechanisms to advance to participants a portion of their expected payments during the year when significant declines in incomes are expected (interim payments and Targeted Advance Payments). In combination with the AgriInvest program, AgriStability is the successor to the CAIS program. AgriInvest replaces coverage for smaller income declines while AgriStability assists producers in managing larger losses.

Authorities for the program include Section 4 of the Farm Income Protection Act, as well as Growing Forward: A Federal-Provincial-Territorial Framework Agreement on Agriculture, Agri-Food and Agri-Based Products Policy and Federal/Provincial/ Territorial Agreement with Respect to AgriStability and AgriInvest.

The program links to the strategic outcome of a competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk and the Government of Canada's outcome of Strong Economic Growth.

For more information, visit the following websites:

Federal AgriStability
AgriStability in British Columbia
AgriStability in Alberta (Agriculture Financial Services Corporation (AFSC))
AgriStability in Saskatchewan
AgriStability in Ontario (Agricorp)
AgriStability in Quebec (La Financière agricole du Québec)
AgriStability on Prince Edward Island (PEI Agricultural Insurance Corporation)

Shared Outcome:

To mitigate the short-term impacts of large income losses

Governance Structures:

The AgriStability program is part of the comprehensive Growing Forward agricultural policy framework developed by Federal, Provincial and Territorial (FPT) Ministers of Agriculture, and falls under the BRM priority. Program costs, including program payments and administrative costs, are cost-shared by the federal government and the provinces/territory on a 60:40 basis, respectively.

In British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec, and Prince Edward Island, the AgriStability program is delivered provincially. The AgriStability program is administered by the federal government in Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Yukon Territory.

Like the other BRM programs, the governance structure for the program consists of working groups and committees, including the FPT BRM Policy Working Group and FPT Administrators Working Group, as well as the National Program Advisory Committee (NPAC) which includes FPT government officials and industry representatives. These groups examine BRM policy and program issues and, as requested, develop options to be brought forward to senior management, including FPT Assistant Deputy Ministers (ADMs), Deputy Ministers and Ministers. NPAC provides advice through FPT ADMs.

Performance Highlights:

Participation in the 2008 program year declined largely due to improved farm incomes, particularly in the grains and oilseeds sector. Although participation was below the 75% target, the program continues to play a significant role in the management of risk on Canadian farms with the percentage of market revenues covered by the program being 68%.

For producers receiving AgriStability payments, their current year margins improved from about 24% of their historical average margin to 63% in the 2008 program year, slightly below the target of 65%.

AAFC has established a target of 97% for accuracy of payments for the federal delivery of AgriStability. In 2010-11, the accuracy rate for federal payments for the 2008 program year was 98.3%.

In addition, for timeliness of payments, a target has been set to process 75% of all final applications in a program year within 75 days of receipt. The percentage of applications processed within 75 days by all administrators of the program, although still below the 75% target, improved significantly from 52% in 2007 to 68% in the 2008 program year.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
Note: The performance measures reported in the RPP supplementary table have been revised to better target the objectives and outcomes of the AgriStability program.
AAFC	Business Risk Management	AgriStability	3,141.1 for 2007–08 to 2011–12	657.8	395.9	Short-term impacts of large income losses are reduced	The following results are based on the 2008 program year, the latest year, for which processing is complete and data is available.
						Indicators: Participants' farm market revenues compared to total farm market revenues for the industry. Target is 75% of total farm market revenues are covered by the program (see note below).	The percentage of market revenues covered by the program in the 2008 program year was 68%.
						Participant's production margin with payments compared to reference margin. Target is that program payments bring producer's margin up to 65% of reference margin (see note below).	Program payments, brought producer’s current year margin to 63% of the reference margin in the 2008 program year.
Total			3,141.1	657.8	395.9

Comments on Variances: Fiscal requirements for the AgriStability program decreased in 2010–11 primarily due to stronger commodity prices and payments from AgriInsurance and AgriRecovery which reduced the funding requirements of the program.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:

Coordination of program oversight and delivery with the federal government will ensure that the program is delivered consistently and that program objectives and reporting requirements are met.

Contact information:

Danny Foster, Director General
Business Risk Management Program Development
Room 241, Floor 3, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-2100
danny.foster@agr.gc.ca

Note:

Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010–11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010–11, due to the timing of the 2010–11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved Treasury Board Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

This program is statutory and demand-driven; therefore, actual spending could vary. See also the related horizontal initiatives on AgriInvest, AgriInsurance and AgriRecovery. Total allocation does not include funding for the one-time, federal-only 2007 AgriInvest Kickstart program.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: Canada's Rural Partnership

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Rural and Co-operatives Development

Start Date:

Start date under the Growing Forward Framework: April 1, 2008 (Original start date under Agricultural Policy Framework: April 1, 2003)

End Date: March 31, 2013

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date):

$52.9 million over five years (including in-year transfers)

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

The Canada's Rural Partnership (CRP) leads an integrated, government-wide approach through which the government aims to co-ordinate its economic, social, environmental, and cultural policies towards the goal of economic and social development and renewal of rural Canada.

Shared Outcomes:

• Collaboration between rural communities and stakeholders to address barriers and challenges to local development
• Information and tools are used by rural communities and regions to develop local amenities and other assets
• New economic activities are being implemented in rural Canada

Governance Structures:

The CRP is managed by the Rural and Co-operatives Secretariat. It has instituted mechanisms that contribute to raising awareness and inclusion of rural Canada in federal policies and programs, as well as engaging government and non-government partners to stimulate economic development in rural Canada. This includes:

• the Rural Development Network, a policy-maker forum involving 28 federal departments and agencies;
• the National Rural Research Network that brings together research partners from both academia and government to focus on enhancing knowledge about rural issues to better inform policy making;
• the Community Information Database, a free web-based resource that provides comprehensive and reliable information on economic, social and demographic factors at the community level, to support decision-making and action; and
• the Community Development Program that offers funding to assist rural and northern regions to obtain information and to access or develop the expertise, tools and processes needed to respond to challenges and opportunities in order to become more competitive and to generate economic activities.

Performance Highlights:

As lead of CRP, AAFC funded 19 rural community initiatives with partners in 2010-11 (bringing the total to 38) that enhance capacity for innovative rural development and develop and transfer knowledge (information, expertise, tools and processes) to rural communities and regions to assist them in responding to barriers to development.

AAFC was involved in 39 partnership initiatives in 2010-11 with government organizations and rural stakeholders to help address barriers to development and capture new economic development opportunities. More specifically, barriers to access to services were identified in over 160 communities in 18 regions. AAFC is engaging with rural stakeholders to address those that would have the most impact on economic development.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
AAFC	Rural and Co-operatives Development	Canada's Rural Partnership	52.9	10.3	11.1	40 Rural communities and regions are using information, tools and processes to develop local natural and cultural amenities and other assets	32 rural communities used new and updated/adapted information and tools to innovate and diversify their economies
Total			52.9	10.3	11.1

Comments on Variances:

Building on the partnership experience over the last two years, AAFC staff has fostered partnerships and/or participated in networks with the purpose of connecting rural communities to useful and quality information and tools to innovate and diversify their economies. The results, although lower than anticipated, will increase in future years; this is due to the fact that building partnership is a complex process that takes time.

Moreover, fewer projects than planned were funded; actual project funding spent ($1.5 million) was also lower than planned ($3.2 million). Project proponents' difficulty in securing matching contributions and the time necessary to build a project with communities and stakeholders involvement have been significant factors in lower than expected program participation.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners: Not applicable

Contact information:

Michaela Huard
Executive Director
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariat
Room 125, Floor 2, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-2916
michaela.huard@agr.gc.ca

AAFC's Growing Forward is the five-year policy framework that replaced the Agricultural Policy Framework as of 2008-09. Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010-11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010-11, due to the timing of the 2010-11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved Treasury Board Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: Co-operative Development Initiative

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Rural and Co-operatives Development

Start Date:

Start date under the Growing Forward Framework: April 1, 2008 (Original start date under Agricultural Policy Framework: April 1, 2003)

End Date: March 31, 2013

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date):

$23.6 million over five years (including in-year transfers)

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

Through the Co-operative Development Initiative, the Rural and Co-operatives Secretariat provides advice on policies and programs affecting co-operatives, and builds partnerships within the federal government and with industry, provinces and other key stakeholders in the implementation of initiatives to support the development of co-operatives. The Secretariat manages a grants and contributions program, which includes:

• providing advisory services and funding innovative co-op projects, delivered by the co-operative sector; and
• funding research to build knowledge contributing to co-op development.

Shared Outcomes:

• Access to services across the country creates an enabling environment for co-operative development and growth
• More and stronger co-operatives respond to public policy challenges
• Canadians are better able to utilize the co-operative model to meet their economic and social needs

Governance Structure:

The Co-operatives Secretariat (now integrated into a single Rural and Co-operatives Secretariat) was created as a focal point between Canadian co-operatives and federal departments and agencies. It has instituted mechanisms to raise awareness and inclusion of co-operatives in federal policies and programs. These include dialogue and collaboration with key federal departments as well as with provincial counterparts and the sector.

Performance Highlights:

AAFC continued its partnership with the two national co-op sector organizations in program delivery to provide advisory services and fund innovative co-operative projects across Canada.

As a result of this partnership, an integrated co-op development information and support referral system (utilizing the Internet and a toll-free line) is in place across the country. AAFC has also invested in a partnership with the co-op sector and the academic community towards the elaboration of a knowledge sharing platform that will serve to better link researchers and stakeholders and improve knowledge for co-operatives development.

In 2010–11, the Secretariat began discussions with the Business Development Bank of Canada to develop a financing product to help meet co-operatives’ capitalization and expansion needs. The Secretariat also embarked on a joint research initiative with Industry Canada to study the applicability of various co-op models for business succession in communities that fall under the definition of official language minority communities included in the Federal Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality 2008–2013.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date) ($ millions)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
AAFC	Rural and Co-operatives Development	Co-operatives Development Initiative	23.6	4.7	5.1	25 Innovative co-operative development projects are implemented	82 co-operative innovation projects were approved and implemented Another 45 projects were approved to be implemented in 2011–12.
Total			23.6	4.7	5.1

Comments on Variances:

Demand for both advisory services and project funding remains strong. Three calls for proposals were administered in 2010–11. The number of projects approved and implemented is significantly higher than the target. This is explained by the strong demand seen from all parts of the country. Program administrators are also processing proposals that are more focussed and smaller in scope. The median recommended contribution is correspondingly smaller than would normally have been expected were the projects multi-phased and faceted.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners:

Program delivery is through third party and the above-noted expected results and measures are to be achieved by the partners.

Contact information:

Michaela Huard
Executive Director
Rural and Co-operatives Secretariat
Room 125, Floor 2, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-2916
michaela.huard@agr.gc.ca

Note:

AAFC's Growing Forward is the five-year policy framework that replaced the Agricultural Policy Framework as of 2008-09. Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010-11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010-11, due to the timing of the 2010-11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved Treasury Board Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.

Name of Horizontal Initiative: Growing Forward non-BRM Cost-Shared Programs (formerly known as the Growing Forward Program Initiatives Development)

Name of Lead Department: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC)

Lead Department Program Activity: Food Safety and Biosecurity Risk Management Systems

Start Date: April 1, 2009

End Date: March 31, 2013

Total Federal Funding Allocation (from start date to end date): $20.8 million over four years

Description of the Horizontal Initiative (including funding agreement):

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between AAFC and Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) sets out the general terms, roles and responsibilities for the management and funding of the various components of the Canadian Integrated Food Safety Initiative (CIFSI), funded under AAFC's Growing Forward Framework Agreement. The following initiatives are delivered by CFIA, in collaboration with AAFC:

1. CFIA System Recognition and Scientific and Technical Support element under the National Food Safety Systems component of the CIFSI:
   The CFIA-led System Recognition will provide government recognition of on-farm and post-farm food safety systems developed by national (or equivalent) industry organizations. CFIA will continue to develop and deliver food safety system recognition programs. Under the Scientific and Technical Support element, CFIA will continue to provide scientific and technical advice to support food safety system development based on Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points (HACCP).
   
   
2. National Biosecurity Standards Development:
   The National Biosecurity Standards Development will allow CFIA to focus on developing nationally consistent plant and animal biosecurity standards. These standards will be developed with industry, commodity organizations and provinces. Once the biosecurity standards are approved by CFIA, they will become the national biosecurity standard for that particular commodity.
   
   
3. Traceability Information Sharing Solution element under the Developing National Traceability Systems component of the CIFSI:
   The Traceability Information Sharing Solution will explore potential solutions for accessing and querying traceability information between industry and government partners in a planned, measured and constructive way. The allocation of funding will be used to develop materials necessary to define and document the high level requirements and initial project planning for the national Traceability Information Sharing Solution, which may lead to preliminary project approval. This initiative will be managed through joint leadership between CFIA and AAFC and coordinated through the Traceability Management Office.
   
   
4. Traceability Management Office Legislative and Regulatory Infrastructure element under the Developing National Traceability Systems component of the CIFSI:
   The Traceability Management Office will be established to collaboratively undertake the work relating to the overall government legislative and regulatory infrastructure necessary to put traceability authorities, agreements and protocols in place. The allocation of funding to CFIA will be used to develop the legislative and regulatory infrastructure for the initiative.

Shared Outcomes:

This initiative contributes to the following strategic outcomes of AAFC:

• An environmentally sustainable agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector
• A competitive agriculture, agri-food and agri-based products sector that proactively manages risk

Governance Structures:

The overall administration of the MOU for:

1. AAFC is delegated to:
   Director General - Agriculture Transformation Programs Directorate
   Director General - Sector Policy Directorate
   Director General - Food Value Chain Bureau
   and
2. CFIA is delegated to:
   Executive Director - Food Safety and Consumer Protection Directorate
   Executive Director - Animal Health Directorate, Programs
   Executive Director - Plant Health and Biosecurity
   Chief Information Officer - CFIA
   Executive Director - Domestic Policy Directorate

Performance Highlights:

To better reflect the CFIA progress towards obtaining final acceptance by Federal-Provincial-Territorial (FPT) governments of the On-Farm and Post-Farm Food Safety Recognition Programs, this memorandum was amended by changing the target dates for acceptance to May 2012 and December 2012 respectively.

The National Farm Level Biosecurity Standard for the Beef Sector has been drafted and is in the final phase of consultation.

The Traceability Information Sharing Solution is proceeding as planned. This is subject to a separate MOU with CFIA, with a complementary, but different governance structure.

The CFIA is in the process of seeking authority to develop a legislative and regulatory framework for traceability.

Federal Partners	Federal Partner Program Activity	Names of Programs for Federal Partners	Total Allocation (from start to end date)	2010-11 ($ millions)
				Planned Spending	Actual Spending	Expected Results	Results Achieved
Due to rounding, figures may not add up to the totals shown.
AAFC	Food Safety and Biosecurity Risk Management Systems	CFIA System Recognition and Scientific and Technical Support	N/A - funds transferred to CFIA	N/A - funds transferred to CFIA		Work performed by CFIA	Results reported by CFIA
		National Biosecurity Standards Development	N/A - funds transferred to CFIA	N/A - funds transferred to CFIA		Work performed by CFIA	Results reported by CFIA
		Traceability Information Sharing Solution	N/A – funds transferred to CFIA	N/A – funds transferred to CFIA		Planned to be completed by March 31, 2010	Completed March 31, 2010
		Traceability Management Office Legislative and Regulatory Infrastructure	N/A – funds transferred to CFIA	N/A – funds transferred to CFIA		Work performed by CFIA	Results reported by CFIA;
CFIA	Food Safety and Nutrition Risks	CFIA System Recognition and Scientific and Technical Support	7.3	2.1	1.8	Continuous improvement of the On-Farm Food Safety Recognition Program and the Post-Farm Food Safety Recognition Program	Completed the draft of the on-farm recognition procedures manual for Phase II, implementation and third party audit and Phase III implementation assessment. The post-farm recognition procedures manual for Phase I – Technical Review nearly completed and Phase II development has started.
						Ongoing technical review and assessment of on-farm and post-farm food safety programs for recognition	Technical review of one national producer organization (NPO) was completed. Three reviews currently in process. Two 18-month reviews conducted. Other reviews suspended until 2011-12.
						Scientific and technical support provided as needed to AAFC and AAFC stakeholders	Six application reviews conducted as submitted by NPOs under the Growing Forward Food safety development component of AAFC.
	Animal Health Risks and Production Systems	National Biosecurity Standards Development	9.5	2.0	1.7	Review and approval process adopted	The Canadian Swine Health Board has developed a National Farm Level Biosecurity Standard for the swine sector and review of the standard is in process.
	Plant Health Risks and Production Systems					Environmental scan of current state of biosecurity within a commodity sector	Two new expert groups established for Sheep and Grains and Oilseeds increasing the total to seven. Benchmark tools and national sampling plans developed for dairy, bees (alfalfa leaf cutting) and in the process of being developed for potato and bees (bubble bee and honey) and sheep.
						National biosecurity standard approved	None of the agri-commodity specific biosecurity standards have been completed this year. Beef, Dairy and Bees standards are scheduled to be completed by the end of 2011-12.
						Production and dissemination of standard	Multi-species plant and animal biosecurity planning templates have been finalized to assist the provinces in their design and development of biosecurity implementation programming.
						Production and dissemination of educational and training material	Communication products have been developed and disseminated for these agri-commodities: Beef, Potato, Bees and Dairy.
						Quarterly progress report and annual presentation to FPT Committee of Officials and/or Food Safety Biosecurity and Traceability (FSBT) Programs Working Group	Several presentations were made to the FPT FSBT Programs Working Group
	Animal Health Risk and Production Systems	Traceability Information Sharing Solution	1.1	0.0	N/A	Planned to be completed by March 31, 2010	Completed March 31, 2010
		Traceability Management Office Legislative and Regulatory Infrastructure	3.0	0.9	0.9	Establish a National Legislative Framework for Traceability	A recommended option for traceability was presented to FPT ministers in July 2010 and CFIA is proceeding forward pursuant to FPT Ministers’ direction. CFIA is in process of seeking authority to develop a legislative and regulatory framework for traceability.
						Ongoing amendment and continuous improvement for a regulatory framework for traceability	Health of Animals regulations were amended so all non-electronic cattle tags initially approved were revoked to support movement reporting.
						Develop information sharing agreements with Canadian provinces	Traceability information sharing negotiations started with British Columbia and still ongoing with Quebec, Manitoba and Ontario.
						Develop a policy framework for traceability	CFIA has advanced the policy framework document through internal governance for approval. Working with AAFC to develop implementation plans for the four priority species (cattle, sheep, hog and poultry) identified in the FPT ministers’ commitment.
						Initiate Privacy Impact Assessments (PIA)	The results of the PIA for the Canadian Cattle Identification Agency is now in the process of being published on the CFIA web site. Additional PIA with NPOs are being planned.
Total			20.8	5.0	4.4

Comments on Variances:

Actual spending is $600,000 less then expected because 1) the delay in re-establishing the FPT Food Safety Recognition sub-committee, 2) the delay in a NPO starting the post-farm food safety recognition program, 3) delays in hiring two CFIA staff to conduct 18-month reviews and 4) the extensive time needed for consultation in the development of biosecurity national standards.

Results Achieved by Non-Federal Partners: Not applicable

Contact information:

Linda Parsons, Director General
Agriculture Transformation Programs Directorate
Farm Financial Programs Branch
Room 220, Floor 8, Tower 7
1341 Baseline Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C5
613-773-1900
linda.parsons@agr.gc.ca

Note:

AAFC’s Growing Forward is the five-year policy framework that replaced the Agricultural Policy Framework as of 2008–09. Planned spending figures are consistent with the 2010–11 RPP. They represent the amounts included in Main Estimates. They do not include any additional amounts that may have been allocated to this initiative during 2010–11, due to the timing of the 2010–11 RPP. Total Federal Funding Allocation reflects all currently approved Treasury Board Submissions and reallocations. Total allocation, planned spending and actual spending are net of indirect costs.