Rescinded [2013-11-12] - Project Management Policy

This policy aims to achieve effective and economical management of projects with visible and clearly established project leadership.
Date modified: 1994-06-01

This page has been archived on the Web

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

More information



This policy is replaced by:

View all inactive instruments
Print-friendly XML

Note to reader

On April 1, 2012, this policy will be replaced by the Policy on the Management of Projects for departments and agencies listed in Section 2 of the Financial Administration Act. Treasury Board Secretariat is adopting a phased implementation approach, starting in 2007, that will begin with a group of departments that have agreed to participate in a pilot. Following this pilot, groups of departments will be brought on board so that, by April 1, 2012, departments and agencies will have the systems and processes in place to meet the policy requirements.

Policy objective

To achieve effective and economical management of projects with visible and clearly established project leadership.

Policy statement

It is the policy of the government that projects:

  • have well defined objectives within an accountability framework;
  • be approved in accordance with project approval requirements as set out in Chapter 2-1 of this volume;
  • employ sound project management principles;
  • be adequately resourced by departments;
  • have a comprehensive and coordinated definition of the overall scope of the project; and
  • be managed in a manner sensitive to risk, complexity and economy of resources.


This policy applies to departments and agencies listed in Schedules I and II of the Financial Administration Act.

The policy applies to projects and to capital projects as defined in the Glossary of this volume. It applies to all such projects funded in whole or in part by the federal government regardless of whether the method of funding is through outright purchase, lease-purchase, lease, or other arrangements. This policy does not apply to certain project-like activities funded by the federal government through Transfer Payments (Grants or Contributions) or assisted through loan guarantees or other contingent liabilities.

When the total projected cost of a project will exceed $100 million and the Treasury Board would assess the project as high risk, it is deemed to be a Major Crown Project (MCP). Treasury Board may direct that projects with total projected cost less than $100 million but with a current risk assessment of high be managed as an MCP. Further, Treasury Board reserves the right to require any project exceeding the sponsoring minister's delegated project approval authority to be managed as an MCP. Projects deemed to be Major Crown projects are subject to the Major Crown project policy, Chapter 2-3 of this volume.

Note: The formation of a Senior Project Advisory Committee (SPAC) is required to address procurement review requirements for all projects over $100 million. SPAC requirements are addressed in Appendix B of Chapter 2-3.

Policy Requirements

1. Accountability for projects: Sponsoring departments must establish an accountability framework for adequate definition and responsible implementation of projects. The central focus of this framework is a manager within the sponsoring department, at an appropriate level, who is appointed as the Project Leader. The project leader, for each project assigned to him or her, is accountable through the normal chain of command to the deputy minister for:

  • all external aspects including: the continuing interpretation of operational needs and wider government objectives, and the validation of planned project end-product in that context; interfaces with the senior management of the sponsoring department and participating departments; and serving as the spokesperson for the project; and
  • all internal aspects including: general supervision of the project management framework to insure that project managers will meet all objectives approved for the project; preparing project approval documents; vetting proposals to amend objectives due to changed external or internal factors; and acting as the authority for the submission of such changes as well as for progress reporting to project approval authorities.

2. Project management principles: Departments are expected to establish and approve sound internal policies, guidelines and practices to be followed by project leaders, project managers and other staff responsible for identifying, planning, approving/budgeting, defining, and implementing projects; and for participating in projects sponsored by other departments. Project leaders are to preserve the integrity of the accountability framework by ensuring that the requirement to follow standard project management principles, such as those set out in Appendix B together with those found in the Project Management Institute's project management book of knowledge are included in all pertinent project agreements.

3. Authorities and resources: From project inception, sponsoring departments must delegate authorities and allocate adequate resources appropriate to the scope, complexity and risk of the project, enabling the project leader to:

  • represent the sponsoring department on matters pertaining to the project;
  • fully define objectives for each phase of the project; and
  • be accountable for the achievement of each approved objective.

4. Project scope: Project leaders are accountable for the full definition of the scope for all projects including the wider interests of the government. This definition of scope is to be accomplished with early consultation with other departments or central agencies affected by the project. In addition to other elements, the project scope must describe all the project objectives as identified in other chapters of this volume. Project scope may also be affected by procurement review or other environmental considerations.

5. Management framework: Project leaders are accountable for the establishment of an adequate project management framework, for detailed project definition and to complete project implementation. For certain projects, the regime may be relatively simple with an internal, essentially self-contained management office headed by a project manager responsible for all details of the project. However, other projects may require a quite complex management framework involving several significant parallel activities and external agencies, each with its own manager or project officer. In all cases, the project leader must maintain the integrity of his or her accountability through written agreements with any previous project leaders, project managers, and any external agencies that carry out activities essential to the accomplishment of the project. These agreements are to define details of the task to be accomplished, as well as financial and progress reporting arrangements.

6. Project risk, complexity and economy: Project leaders must ensure that project managers perform adequate project planning that addresses the size, scope, complexity, risk, visibility and administrative needs of specific projects. Project leaders must ensure that the proposed project management framework and allocation of project management resources are based and optimized on the complexity and the assessed risk for the individual phases of a project. The selected project management framework is to describe risk and complexity will be managed and reduced in each phase and throughout the life of the project.

7. Project Profile and Risk Assessment (PPRA): Early in the life of a project, the project leader is to prepare a Project Profile and Risk Assessment (PPRA), in consultation with the contracting authority and, when appropriate, with participating departments and common service organizations, as part of the process of developing the management framework within for the Treasury Board approval submissions. Guidance for the preparation and documentation of the PPRA is provided in Appendix C. When appropriate, the project leader should use the PPRA document for systematic dialogue with project participants and with Treasury Board Secretariat regarding the management framework and reporting baseline for the project.

8. Project management practices: Guidance for project management practices, and the preparation of risk assessments, PPRAs, supporting documentation, and progress and evaluation reports is provided in Appendices B through F.


Project Leaders

Project Leaders must notify other federal government departments or agencies who may be affected by a specific project, inviting them to participate in an active or coordinative role as appropriate. The project leader is also responsible for ensuring that all relevant project submissions and approvals have been obtained prior to initiating any part of the project. It also includes the submission of updated project information to appropriate authorities for significant changes beyond the reporting baseline established in the original or amended approvals.

The project leader should consult as early as possible, with Treasury Board Secretariat, particularly for larger projects of higher risk and complexity, proposing a suitable management framework for staff concurrence. Project leaders are to ensure that a specific project is managed in accordance with the approved management framework. Updated project documentation may also propose a change in management framework should the risk assessment conducted in accordance with the guidelines in Appendix C demonstrate a decrease (or increase) in project risk.

Project Managers

Project Managers are responsible for the day-to-day management of the project as set out in the charter or agreement with the project leader.

Participating departments

Participating departments are to determine the nature and degree of the effect of the proposed project on their operations, asset base or other interests. They then respond to the project leader defining the nature and extent of proposed participation in the project. Joint commitment to any project specific activity to be carried out by a participating department that is deemed essential to the success of the project must be documented in an appropriate interdepartmental agreement.

Participating departments are to select their project officers based upon an established human resources management profile, project management experience and abilities, and in consideration of the significance, scope, complexity, risk, and visibility of the project.

Contracting Authority

The Contracting Authority is responsible:

  • for participating in the project as a participating department (as per paragraph 3 above);
  • to ensure the legal soundness of any contract and to maintain the government standards of prudence, probity and equity when dealing with the private sector;
  • to support the project in accordance with any existing legislation or general interdepartmental arrangements;
  • to provide any project-specific services (such as procurement) as described in any agreement or MOU concluded with the sponsoring department; and
  • to make submissions to the Treasury Board for authority to enter into contracts and to amend contracts as set out in the Contracting volume of the Treasury Board Manual.


The Treasury Board Secretariat will monitor departmental compliance with this policy through review of the quality of the Project Management Framework and other relevant sections of project approval submissions, and by reviewing adherence to the content of Treasury Board decisions.

The effectiveness of this policy will be reviewed periodically by the Administrative Policy Branch of the Treasury Board Secretariat.


This policy replaces Chapter 542 and the project management aspects provided in Chapter 540 of the Treasury Board Administrative Policy Manual. It is issued under the authority of Section 7 of the Financial Administration Act. It should be read in conjunction with the other chapters in this volume and other Treasury Board policies, particularly those dealing with Real Property, Risk Management, Materiel Management, Information Technology Management, Contracting and Common Service Organizations.


For enquiries related to policy interpretation or concerning submissions related to contracts for specific projects, departments should contact the Executive Director, Procurement and Project Management Policy Directorate, Comptrollership Branch, Treasury Board Secretariat.

For questions relating to details of specific projects, departments should contact their analyst within the Treasury Board Secretariat Program Sectors and, as appropriate, their specialist analyst in the Real Property and Materiel Policy Directorate, or the Chief Information Officer Branch.

Appendix A - Jointly Funded Initiatives

Within the limitations defined in the application paragraph, this appendix applies to the management of projects jointly funded by federal departments with other levels of government or foreign government agencies. Cabinet may appoint a specific department as lead department for such a project, however, normally the federal department sponsoring the project acts as lead department. The lead department provides the project leader, who performs the role and assumes the responsibilities defined in this chapter.

Project leaders should coordinate with all project participants (including Treasury Board Secretariat), an appropriate project management framework based upon a current project profile and risk assessment (PPRA). The management arrangements must be consistent with this policy and must be documented in Interdepartmental agreements, Memoranda of Understanding or equivalent documentation. The agreements must include how any deviations such as cost overruns will be treated. They must include a termination option should funding be deemed insufficient.

Submissions to amend approvals for jointly funded project approvals must specify how any additional costs or obligations will be shared.

These provisions also apply to projects funded totally or in part by the federal government but that are covered by agreements providing for implementation by another party.

Contributions, loans, loan guarantees and similar financial instruments are frequently used for federal government funding or joint-funding of project-like initiatives falling outside the application limitations of this policy (for example, foreign aid). Policy and requirements for the management of such financial instruments are provided under Chapter 4-1 and in the Financial management volume of the Treasury Board Manual.

Appendix B - Guidelines on Basic Concepts for Project Management

The Project Management Council (PMC)

Several federal government departments have agreed to participate in a PMC. The PMC's mandate includes:

  • providing advice to the Treasury Board Secretariat and assisting it in the development, revision, and evaluation of policy for the management of projects; and
  • fostering within the government project management community: communications, professional development, training and orientation, improved methodologies, exchange of "lessons learned" and liaison with external organizations to increase efficiency and effectiveness of project management.

Basic project management concepts


Several departments maintain detailed manuals for the management and delivery of projects. There are also many commercial texts providing theoretical and practical principles and guidance for project management.

The following high-level concepts are not intended to replace or to supplement existing project management manuals nor provide sufficient detail to assist experienced project managers. They are intended as background for project leaders and as a common reference for communication with senior management within the sponsoring department and with other participating departments, Treasury Board Secretariat and Treasury Board. As documents and manuals are amended, departments should attempt, through the PMC, to harmonize the terms and concepts in this guideline and those used in their related departmental manuals.

Departments that are developing or amending internal project management manuals at a greater level of detail than provided here are encouraged to standardize their documentation through coordination with members of the Project Management Council.


Project leader: The project leader establishes the context and resource allocations of a specific project and is the interface between the project and senior management of the sponsoring department, with participating departments and with Treasury Board Secretariat. This includes ensuring that all relevant project submissions are made and approvals obtained prior to initiating any portion of the project. The project leader prepares a project profile and a risk assessment and uses it to establish, with all project participants and with Treasury Board Secretariat, an appropriate management framework for the project.

Departments may assign a group of projects that are related in some significant way, but that do not form a single entity for change control purposes, to an individual Project Leader for overall management. Submissions to Treasury Board, when required, may request approval of the group of projects or individual projects as appropriate. Care should be taken to ensure that there is no perception of "project splitting" to avoid approval authority limits or an adequate definition of a complex project. The accountability of the Project Leader for each specific project is unchanged by this approach. However, the Project Leader may be held accountable for defining and managing the relationship between the projects when this is a factor in project approval considerations and for dealing with any significant change in departmental program delivery resulting from the cumulative effect of the group of projects.

Project manager: The project manager works totally within the context established by the Project Leader in an agreement or charter, carrying out the more detailed day-to-day management of project activities.

Project charter: The project leader and the project manager should prepare and commit to a project agreement or charter. This is a document that sets out the approved project objectives, and the project manager's responsibilities, delegated authorities and allocated resources. The project charter should be updated after any significant change to these items.

Responsibilities of the project manager: They include:

  • based on a fully scoped view of the project, establishing an appropriate organizational structure for managing the project itself, and assigning and detailing roles and responsibilities identified in pertinent internal and interdepartmental agreements;
  • negotiating and obtaining written agreements with participating departments when project-specific resource commitments or activities need to be documented in the interests of effective management of the project. A model interdepartmental agreement is provided in Appendix E. Project managers should be cautious in planning any arrangements with private sector companies that could be deemed to be "joint ventures", as the government could incur unintended legal and financial liabilities. In such instances policy requirements in Chapter 4-1 may apply. Project Managers considering any such arrangements should consult first with Treasury Board Secretariat;
  • applying systematic techniques to define (or to complete the definition of) the project for approval and to manage the project as approved. The application of these techniques could include:
  • organizing the project using planning and analytical tools for work breakdown, responsibility assignment, and schedule preparation;
  • using these tools to estimate benefits and costs for project alternatives;
  • using these tools to estimate risk and to plan for risk reduction;
  • phasing the project to limit risk, with the aim of achieving improvement in accuracy of project cost, schedule and performance objectives with each phase;
  • implementing a suitable database system to track key objective and numerical information for the project. A simple database structure suitable for virtually any commercial database management system supported by a personal computer is outlined in Appendix D;
  • implementing a Project Performance Management System (PPMS) appropriate to the size and complexity of the project. For a small procurement project, this could be as simple as noting and following up on delivery dates and acceptance criteria in the contract. For other projects, periodic contractor management, financial, configuration and test reports controlled by formal data item descriptions in the contract may be appropriate. For more complex projects, a comprehensive cost-schedule-performance management system may be necessary. A government standard (Canadian General Standards Board CGSB # 187.1.93) for project cost/performance management has been agreed between government and industry and accepted by several departments, details of which are available from the Project Support Branch of Government Services Canada. It is strongly recommended this standard be used in developing a PPMS for a specific project;
  • implementing a systematic method to report progress to internal management (and to Treasury Board if required). A suggested format for a progress report is provided in Appendix D; and
  • drafting a communications plan and keeping it up-to-date. Should the project not proceed as expected, or experience technical or financial difficulty, the project manager should be prepared to support the project leader in responding to inquiries from the media and the general public;
  • preparing documentation in support of the project leader for dialogue with senior management of project participants and for submission to ministerial and Treasury Board approval authorities, as necessary;
  • preparing, for the project leader, a timely request for consideration of amended project objectives when it is clear that the existing ones cannot be met;
  • identifying specific performance milestones in the work plan where withdrawal or termination would be practical, should the project cease to be viable during execution; and
  • submitting, when specified by project approval authorities, an evaluation of the performance of the project. The evaluation should be prepared in coordination with the project leader. The evaluation should be submitted within a reasonably short period of time following project completion (for example, three months). A suggested outline for a project evaluation is provided in Appendix F.

Appendix C - Project Risk Assessment and Management Guideline


Adequate risk assessment and management is important for all projects regardless of dollar value. This guideline provides a framework for conducting risk assessments, for preparing the Project Profile and Risk Assessment (PPRA) document, for describing risk in project approval submissions, for considering the effect of the state of the risk estimate on estimating cost, and for the ongoing management of project risks. An adequate risk assessment usually requires the contribution and expertise of the contracting authority as well as any participating departments. This is particularly important during the initial assessment, which necessarily would be based upon early project planning data.


Departments should refer to the Treasury Board policy on Risk Management, which sets out requirements for identifying and managing of all types of risk to government activities including, but not limited to, those due to accident (insurable risk).

Risk assessment and cost estimates

Project leaders should ensure that cost estimates, including their classification (see definitions in the Glossary) reflect the assessed risk for the various phases of projects and that they have been developed using appropriate and comprehensive risk estimating practices in conjunction with other cost impact assessments. Commercial risk assessment software packages are available to assist the project leader in determining internal project risk.

Project risk assessment

External risk factors are circumstances over which project management cannot exert a controlling influence. These factors include such elements as externally imposed deadlines, cooperative development obligations or statutory requirements.

Internal risk factors are circumstances that project management can control. These factors include such elements as the allocation of adequate resources and the reliability of cost estimates.

Both internal and external risk factors should always be considered in the overall risk assessment. Internal risk factors may be more tangible and their impacts on cost estimated with a greater degree of confidence. For external risk factors, it may not always be possible to provide cost impacts. However, these external risks must be identified and sufficiently detailed in project management and project approval documents to apprise approval authorities of their existence and potential impacts on the success of the project.

Levels of risk

The risk assessment should indicate an overall project risk level as either high, medium or low. As project definition progresses, the risk assessment should be periodically updated to reflect the additional information available.

Assessment of Risk

The following is a list of the type of factors that should be considered when assessing risk. These factors are only indicators of the possibility of risk. The assessment should consider the significance of these indicators for a specific project:

  • the department's allocation of resources to the project may be affected by changes in government priorities;
  • the schedule is externally imposed or the project is susceptible to time delays resulting from: relatively minor changes in technology; requirements of participating departments; available windows of opportunity with international partners; seasonal considerations (for example, access to the Arctic); the need for regulatory approvals (such as environmental assessments), or other similar factors;
  • at the time of the assessment, the private sector does not have the requisite capability in terms of the technology, expertise, industrial practices, management techniques or skilled and stable labour force required to undertake the project;
  • the sponsoring department is not experienced in managing and developing cost estimates for a project of a particular magnitude or type (for example, international cooperation including the effect of exchange rates), or cannot assign sufficient in-house expertise;
  • the project is particularly large in scale and complexity, involving more participating departments or contractors than similar projects previously sponsored by the department;
  • there are no feasibility studies, test or user trial programs, pre-production appraisals, similar production items, reliable construction estimates, or other similar data upon which the base a risk assessment;
  • project deliverables require research, development and testing of unproven technology or assemblies of products;
  • the project requires that work critical to the end-product be done in several different locations, particularly when the locations are isolated or environmentally sensitive;
  • the project involves inherent hazards of a biological, chemical, environmental, radiological, explosive, toxic or other similar nature;
  • the continuity or availability of a portion of project funding or other project activity is contingent upon the ability of other participants, especially non-federal government participants, to meet their obligations when and as defined in project agreements; and
  • the impact of potential contingent or residual liabilities arising from participation in joint or shared funded projects including liabilities caused by withdrawal from the project by one or more participants.

Examples of arrangements addressed by the last two factors include sharing of financial responsibilities in federal/provincial or government/private sector joint projects. To the extent the private sector is involved in the project, the assessment of these risk factors must involve a review of the technical and financial stability of the firm and of the industry or environment the firm operates within. Where there are third-party financial backers, the assessment of these risk factors must examine the stability of these companies in view of the security they have offered the Crown.

Assessment of high risk

A project (or element of a project) may be assessed as high risk if one or more of the above hazards exist in a significant way and, unless mitigated, would result in probable failure to achieve project objectives. Project management should prepare approaches to reduce this risk through strategies such as phased development, funded system design by private industry, prototyping, pilot systems and user trials. Project management should ensure that senior departmental management is kept fully briefed regarding these plans as well as project progress and be prepared to quickly request access to sources of expertise within the sponsoring and any participating departments as well as the contracting authority.

Assessment of medium risk

A project (or element of a project) may be assessed as medium risk if some of the above hazards exist but have been mitigated to the point that allocated resources and focused risk management planning should prevent significant negative effect on the attainment of project objectives.

Assessment of low risk

A project (or element of a project) should be assessed as low risk if the above hazards do not exist or have been reduced to the point where routine project management control should be capable of preventing any negative effect on the attainment of project objectives.

Management of project risk

Project leaders should ensure that project management:

  • initiates, during the project planning phase, a continuing process for assessing project risk;
  • includes, during the project definition phase (when applicable), formal steps to reduce project risk;
  • prepares outline plans for dealing with actual project contingencies;
  • prepares a Project Profile and Risk Assessment as defined in this Guideline and keeps it up-to-date;
  • specifies these measures in the project management framework sections of project approval documentation;
  • prepares revised project approval documentation when the project risk assessment changes significantly; and
  • prepares an outline of a communications plan for high risk activities that may attract media or public attention, including the appointment of a spokesperson.

Project Profile and Risk Assessment (PPRA)

The Policy Requirements section states that the sponsoring department is to prepare a Project Profile and Risk Assessment for all projects for consultation with project participants, including Treasury Board Secretariat, regarding the appropriate management framework for an individual project. This is the management framework that will be developed and specified in the submission document for Treasury Board ministers to approve. A PPRA document that is coordinated with Treasury Board Secretariat should record the concurrence or views of other participants in the project, or members of the SPAC, if applicable. Particular use of the PPRA is to obtain concurrence from project participants to propose to Treasury Board that the management framework for a project:

  • that has a projected total cost exceeding $100 million, may be tailored based on the current risk assessment; or
  • that has a projected total cost less than $100 million but a current risk assessment of high, should include part or all of the MCP framework management controls (include proposed SPAC membership).

When a department has created a database with the structure outlined in Appendix D, revised PPRA documents reflecting the current status of knowledge concerning the project could be generated very quickly.

The PPRA should be prepared as early as possible after the project leader is assigned and be updated as necessary. It should address the following:

  1. an outline of the political, international or strategic context in which the project is proceeding, including direction given by Cabinet as part of approval-in-principle, if applicable;
  2. the reporting relationships (including membership of the SPAC, if applicable) that the sponsoring department has established or proposes for the project;
  3. the status and major effects of any proposed or finalized agreements;
  4. the results of the current project risk assessment, including the estimated effect on project costs, and risk management strategies proposed; and
  5. the proposed management framework.

Appendix D - Project Progress Reports and Databases for Project Management Guideline

Departments should encourage the use of information technology to generate, store and retrieve key data relative to projects.

Content of project progress reports

Project progress reports, when required, should be prepared in accordance with the Treasury Board Submissions Guide (TBSG), with content consistent with this list of topics. These topics are intended to relate directly to, and can be drawn from, a project database. The report should be prepared with very little additional text. Departments may wish to delegate authority for the submission of reports to the project leader. The procedure to be followed for this delegation is provided in the TBSG. Information to be provided in the progress report should include:

Security classification:
Report number:
Treasury Board Decision number:
Report Item (using relevant supporting database field names that follow in the database section of this guideline):

Project Leader Date:
Deputy Minister Date:
Minister Date:

Representative databases for project management

The simple data field descriptions given below can be incorporated into a project database supported by virtually any personal computer (PC) database software. These database definitions are intended to be a starting point for future electronic interchange of data (EDI) concerning projects.

Field name


Sponsoring Department

See Glossary

Project Title

As chosen by sponsoring department

Project Number

As assigned by sponsoring department

Treasury Board (TB) Number

Provided by Treasury Board Secretariat with the Decision letter

Project Summary

Include relationship to any Cabinet direction, department's roles and missions; and net change in service or function, PYs or O&M costs

Project Life-Cycle Cost

Total estimated cost during the life of the project


Estimated duration of the overall project

Risk Assessment

Short summary of the risk assessment and reference to substantiating documents

PM Framework

Short description of the project management framework (include provisions to address assessed risk level)

Project Plan

Short description of the project plan

Class of Estimate

For the current phase

Cost Objective

The authorized expenditure for the current phase

Cash Flow

The estimated cash flow by year until project completion

Regional Expenditures

Estimated project expenditures by region

Schedule Objective

For the current phase

Performance Objective

For the current phase

IRB Objectives

Industrial and Regional Benefits (IRBs) objectives for the current phase

Other Objectives

Other project objectives for the current phase


Short description of the status of contracts awarded, with name of contractor and contract value

Actual Expenditures

As of the most recent update of the database

Estimate at Completion

Estimate at completion consists of the sum of the actual expenditures for the current phase plus the associated latest estimate of costs for work remaining in that phase

Elapsed Schedule

In relation to the approved schedule (in months)

Time to Complete

To meet the approved objectives for the current phase, as of the most recent update of the database

Estimate at Completion

A calculated field totalling "Actual Expenditures" plus "Cost to Complete"

Cost Deviation

A calculated field totalling "Estimate at Completion" less "Cost Objective"

Schedule Deviation

A calculated field totalling "Elapsed Schedule" plus "Time to Complete" less "Schedule Objective"

Objective Deviation

A short recapitulation of the achievement of performance, IRBs and any other objectives compared to those approved by Treasury Board for the phase

Lessons Learned

A summary of lessons learned during the phase and after its completion, focusing on key words to assist in subsequent database searches

Appendix E - Model Interdepartmental Agreement

This model agreement may also be used for interdepartmental arrangements with appropriate revisions.


(sponsoring department) "A" and (participating department) "B"

Preamble (to establish the context for the agreement)

"A" has initiated a project to (description of project), requiring performance of. . .(certain specific functions, e.g. conducting an assessment of environmental impact); and

"B" is capable of undertaking the performance of a specific function; and

"A" and "B" have agreed that the performance shall be undertaken by "B" according to the terms of this agreement,

IT IS AGREED THAT (specific agreements)


Delegated authorities, naming individuals responsible to act for the parties.

Scope of agreement in project context, possibly an attached statement of work and schedule.

Specific undertakings, including financial arrangements, e.g. cost recovery basis and method, commitment to use approved project management principles, etc.

Project management organization and representation


This agreement shall come into force on . . . and shall expire on . . ., unless . . .


This agreement shall be subject to amendment as mutually agreed by . . .,

signature block

signature block

Appendix F - Project Evaluation Guideline

Project leaders should ensure that a project evaluation is performed for all projects. Project evaluations should be prepared within three months after completion of project implementation and with content consistent with this guideline. The evaluation report should be filed with other formal project documentation as well as with those departmental authorities responsible for coordinating project management policy and procedures. These project evaluation reports would form a valuable resource of "lessons learned" to support improvements to policy and procedures.

When warranted by the nature of a specific project, project approval authorities (either departmental or Treasury Board in the case of projects beyond the approval authority of the sponsoring minister) may require the submission of a report evaluating the implementation of a project. When preparing such a report, the nature and depth of the evaluation should be coordinated between the project leader and project approval authorities. It is possible that a separate evaluation of the project definition phase may also be required. Such a report should be prepared in accordance with the Treasury Board Submissions Guide and submitted within three months after the end of the project definition phase.

This guideline provides some general advice on the structure and content of the project evaluation. However, the project leader should ensure that an evaluation is prepared with depth and detail appropriate to the particular size and nature of the project. Other departments involved in the implementation of the project should be invited to submit their evaluation and associated lessons learned. Further, project leaders may wish to refer to this guideline for purposes of periodic in-progress evaluation.

Evaluation factors

The evaluation should be based on the originally approved project objectives, and any subsequently approved changes. The following factors should be considered:

  • attainment of objectives;
  • effectiveness of any agreements between sponsoring and participating departments;
  • effectiveness of the project plan, the project organization and management systems;
  • appropriateness of the project management principles and practices of the sponsoring and any participating departments;
  • adherence to policies and practices and interpretation of guidelines,

deficiencies and problems experienced, such as:

  • delays in obtaining approvals;
  • unplanned work stoppages;
  • personnel shortages;
  • outstanding items or activities not completed by project management personnel at the time of project evaluation.

Evaluations should conclude with an identification of lessons learned and suggested improvement of these guidelines for the conduct of future projects.

Date modified: