Becoming a Special Operation Agency
(Publié aussi en français sous le titre Devenir un organisme de service spécial)
Table of Contents
Introduction
What Is A Special Operating Agency?
1.1	General Description
1.2	Underlying rationale
1.3	Best Candidates
1.4	Sources of Delegation
1.5	Freedoms and Flexibilities
1.6	Documentation Required
1.7	Accountability and Governance Structure
1.8	Summary: who, what, where, when and why:
2.	Five Common Misunderstandings
2.1	MYTH: SOAs Must Collect Revenue And Operate Commercially
2.2	MYTH: SOAs Are A First Step Toward Privatization
2.3	MYTH: SOAs Are Separate From the Department and Less Accountable to the Deputy
2.4	MYTH: Any Constraint Can Be Eliminated
2.5	MYTH: Agency Employees Are No Longer Public Servants
3.	Putting an Agency in Place.
3.1	Three Basic Steps
3.2	Preparation
3.3	Developing a Management Contract Developing a Management Contract
3.4	Approval
4.	Conclusions Part
Annex A  Program Review Tests
Annex B  Typical Content of a Framework document
Annex C  The SOA Business Plan
Annex D  Existing SOAs, Links, and Contacts

Introduction
This document provides a general overview of SOAs; what they are, why they exist and how they work. It is intended for the use of management and staff in organizations that are considering Agency status. Although not a complete "guidebook" it will answer most questions. 
Part 1, outlines the Agency model, characteristics of the best candidates and the kinds of freedoms and flexibilities available. Subsequent Parts dispel some common misunderstandings surrounding SOA status and outline the process of putting an Agency in place. Finally, Part 4 and the Annexes provide general conclusions along with more detailed, technical information.
The SOA initiative is first and foremost about "culture change" at the point of service delivery -- about encouraging efficiency and improved focus on client service. In the process, it should allow individual managers and employees greater opportunity to exercise initiative and enterprise to the benefit of their colleagues, their clients and the public at large. 
We hope that this document helps you decide whether the Agency concept suits your organization and, if so, how to proceed.
What Is A Special Operating Agency?
1.1	General Description 
The SOA concept is designed to achieve a balance between the philosophy of control (and risk avoidance) and the desire to encourage innovation and promote initiative. Agencies support a set of values -- including innovation, enhanced authority at the front line, client-centred operation, self-regulation, better management of people and accountability for results -- which will lead to greater efficiency of operation and improved service quality.
In essence, SOAs give service delivery units increased management flexibility in return for agreed upon levels of performance and results. SOAs are not independent legal entities – no legislation is required to establish an SOA. They remain part of their departmental organization, their employees continue as public servants and union representation stays intact. They remain accountable to their home department for results.
However, unlike other departmental units, SOAs operate under a tailor-made, written understanding with the department. This understanding (consisting of a "framework agreement" and a business plan) covers the results and service levels expected, the flexibilities that have been granted and the resources available to do the job. 
In short, the SOA model is intended to provide greater freedom from department and government-wide administrative rules in return for commitment to clear performance levels. Agencies will be treated “specially”. In general, their managers and employees have greater latitude to act than those of other departmental branches. 
Many functions of government lend themselves to the SOA approach. SOAs should be viewed as one of several potential options for improving the delivery of government services within the broader context of Alternative Program Delivery. 
1.2	Underlying rationale 
The SOA approach is based on five relatively simple propositions:
−	The government wants a service-oriented, client centred Public Service;
−	There is always room for improvement; this means finding better, more cost-effective ways to do the job;
−	Choice of organizational form makes a real difference;
−	Central rules should not inhibit good management or the ability to do things that make sense; and
−	Within a core of central values, there can be diversity in the way that service operations are managed and in the authorities that are provided to do the job.
In short, government is prepared to eliminate certain bureaucratic controls if the risks are mitigated by a commitment to improved performance. In turn, this approach can support a client-based culture that is concerned less with control and more with initiative, creativity, delegation of authority and results.
Over time, SOAs are intended to:
−	improve customer service, client consultation and monitoring of service quality; 
−	promote cost-effective and more businesslike service delivery;
−	delegate more responsibility for operational matters throughout the organization;
−	make better use of information technology;
−	demonstrate government action and concern for efficient management; 
−	promote innovation and initiative in the workplace; and
−	emphasize effective management of people, including support for training and career development.
Consistent with this, Agencies should be oriented toward making costs visible, setting targets for improvement, developing better performance measurement systems and techniques, applying better methods, processes and ways of doing business, ensuring that deliverables are responsive to customer needs and allocating resources to their most productive purposes. In other words, Agencies should be oriented toward good management.
1.3	Best Candidates
SOAs are to be considered within the overall context of Alternative Service Delivery. Prior to establishing an SOA, it should be determined whether the Agency meets the Program Review tests (particularly the role of government test and the partnership test – see Annex A for details) and whether the SOA is the preferred alternative delivery mechanism. It should be clear what performance improvements are expected from the SOA and in what time frames. Broader consultation with stakeholder groups during the set-up process is to be encouraged and would help to create more acceptance of the rationale for the SOA. 
The best candidates share a set of common characteristics:
−	are primarily concerned with the delivery of services (rather than internal policy advice);
−	operate under a stable policy framework with a clear, ongoing mandate; 
−	are able to be held independently accountable within the parent department; 
−	are amenable to the development of clear performance standards; 
−	represent discrete unit of sufficient size to justify special consideration;
−	are staffed by managers and employees who are committed to the SOA approach; and
−	require no significant ongoing ministerial involvement.
For those organisations that exhibit these general characteristics, the preferred alternative delivery mechanism is a legislated Service Agency. However, an SOA should be considered where a legislated Agency would be inappropriate. The principal reasons for such a determination include the following:
−	the program has such a significant or sensitive public policy purpose that the higher degree of autonomy found in the Service Agency may not be appropriate,
−	legislation would be inappropriate or impractical,
−	in some cases, the SOA may be intended at the outset to be of finite duration (e.g. because the program is to have a fixed life span), or
−	the program is too small to justify separate organizational and legal status. 
It is worthwhile noting that SOAs do not have to collect revenue and/or operate on a full cost recovery basis. The collection of revenue is not a necessary condition of SOA status. This point is discussed again in section 2.1. 
1.4	Sources of Delegation 
Increased operating authority and flexibility comes from the parent department, the Treasury Board and other common service organizations. 
Potential SOAs often find that many of the flexibilities they require already exist in the department, but have not been delegated downward from executive levels or outward from central-corporate groups. SOA discussions can identify these cases and lead to solutions.
While there are some particular authorities that must be obtained from the Treasury Board, the SOA initiative is more about delegating authority downward and outward within the department.
1.5	Freedoms and Flexibilities 
SOAs represent a non-legislative approach. Flexibilities granted must come from authorities available for delegation under existing legislation. This challenges all involved to find creative ways to deregulate under the legislative status quo.
There is no "template" or set of flexibilities that define Agency status. Each SOA is different and has a unique set of "business" circumstances and management challenges. Accordingly, individual negotiations will establish the kinds of flexibilities that are appropriate. 
Illustrative flexibilities have included:
−	Consistent with the business plan, full authority to set and adjust rates.
−	Special financial arrangements such as approval to establish a separate revolving fund.
−	Increased authority to enter into service contracts.
−	Authority to approve a variety of administrative matters such as hospitality etc.
One last consideration is common to the development of all Agencies. Each SOA must present a sound business case justifying how proposed flexibilities will contribute to improved service or more efficient or cost effective operations. Basic documentation supporting this business case is discussed below.
1.6	Documentation Required
The Framework Document 
The basis for each Agency's operation is set out in a framework document and a business plan. The framework document represents the Agency's "constitution" or "operating charter."  It includes:
−	the mission;
−	the policy environment, the general business lines and the services that will be provided;
−	the major risks, issues and challenges facing the Agency;
−	the guiding principles on which the Agency will be judged;
−	the accountability for results, including monitoring and reporting approaches and a description of how the achievement of each strategic objective will be evaluated; 
−	all special flexibilities and the limits of the Agency’s authority (what it must and must not do); and
−	the Agency's overall relationship with the parent department and with other organizations.
Framework documents spell out how Agency management will be held accountable for results as well as how often (and in what form) they will report to the parent department. The framework document is developed collaboratively by the Agency and its department and is approved by the responsible Minister.
All framework documents are subsequently approved by Treasury Board. In reviewing the document, the Board focuses particularly on two elements -- the guiding principles on which the SOA will be judged (i.e. financial/operational performance, levels of customer service etc.) and the managerial flexibilities that are required to do the job.
In the final analysis, framework agreements are intended to provide a basis for stability. Although they contain a core of common elements, each will be different; tailored to the precise needs of the entity. As conditions change throughout the Agency's life, the framework document will be revised to reflect those changes. 
Subsequently, the Framework Document should be reviewed at least every three years by TBS in the context of the spring Reports on Plans and Priorities, to ensure that the SOA continues to meet the Program Review tests.
Business Plan
Potential SOAs must also develop a business plan that is approved by the accountable deputy head and Minister. In its broadest sense, the Plan covers the financial and service objectives (by service line), the human and financial resources, and strategies necessary to meet them. Its main purposes are to:
−	better manage the SOA;
−	establish the operational and financial targets for the coming year; and
−	define what the Agency needs from its department and from Treasury Board in terms of mandate, resources and authorities.
The Deputy Minister, in consultation with the Minister, should determine the need for an advisory board or other mechanism to provide advice to Agency Heads on the business plan.
Generally speaking, the business plan should assure the Minister that Agency management has a clear sense of direction, is dealing with the right issues and is managing its affairs accordingly. The plan should also clearly indicate in business terms where the SOA is going over the next five years, how it intends to get there and how it will measure progress.
The first SOA business plan is submitted to the Treasury Board at the same time as the framework document that establishes the Agency. Thereafter, business plans are submitted annually as part of the Report on Plans and Priorities of the parent department.
The process of developing a first framework document and business plan is outlined in Part 3. Annexes B and C provide further detailed information on these documents.
1.7	Accountability and Governance Structure
SOAs remain part of their parent department and continue their accountability to Parliament through a responsible minister and deputy head. However, these accountabilities are strengthened and clarified under the Agency approach. SOAs should report to the Deputy Minister. 
Clearly, the Deputy may delegate these responsibilities. However, Deputy Ministers (on behalf of Ministers) should be accountable for:
−	negotiating appropriate Framework Agreements, approving the Business Plan and establishing a performance contract with the Agency Head
−	establishing a performance contract between the Head of the agency and the Deputy Minister wherein there is a clear understanding as to what constitutes acceptable performance and on the nature of any rewards or penalties
−	setting and approving Agency objectives, priorities and strategic directions
−	setting realistic performance targets and re-negotiating when circumstances change
−	delegating adequate authority to ensure success and
−	ensuring the Agency has corporate support and information systems to measure performance and manage risk.
The framework document and the business plan are central to SOA accountability. On one hand, the framework document sets out the Agency mission and its relationships with other parties. On the other, the business plan represents a detailed performance contract between the department and SOA management that is renewed annually. In submitting the plan, the Chief Operating Officer of the SOA is committing to be held accountable for the achievement of specific objectives and performance levels. In approving the plan, the Minister is agreeing to allow Agency management to pursue the broad direction and strategies in the plan, within the freedoms set out in the framework document. 
Framework documents themselves are generally treated as public documents and are made available, on request, to any Canadian.
Each Agency will also produce an annual report that covers:
−	main aims and activities;
−	matters essential to understanding the reports and accounts, including service and financial objectives;
−	a review of performance against the business plan, including activities over the past year and the results achieved relative to the resources allocated; and
−	general management priorities over the coming year.
SOAs and / or their parent departments (particularly those operating in a commercial environment), are encouraged to establish advisory boards or councils consisting of representatives from their major clients, suppliers and other stakeholders. Review of business plans by the advisory board can provide useful input to the Agency head or Deputy Minister.
In the final analysis, Agency accountability should be focused on performance and results. The presumption is that, provided management is operating within the strategic direction set out in the framework agreement, it will be left as free as possible to manage its ongoing affairs.
1.8	Summary: who, what, where, when and why: 
In summary form, the "W-5" of SOAs is as follows ...
WHO:	Operational, service delivery units with a clear policy mandate, sufficient size to justify change and a willingness to monitor and improve performance. Agency management and staff maintain their public service employment status.
WHAT:	They receive increased authority from their parent department, from the Treasury Board and, where appropriate, from common service organizations in return for a commitment to improved performance.
WHERE:	SOAs remain part of the public service, within their home department and with accountabilities intact and strengthened. 
WHEN:	Agencies are established via a Treasury Board decision seeking authority to establish the SOA and approval of the Framework Document. Submissions include a business plan and the framework document (the SOA mission, flexibilities and operating relationships). Both are approved by the responsible Minister, who decides when a unit is ready to be considered by the Board.
WHY:		To promote cost-effective, client-centred service; while improving the management of resources, demonstrating initiative and improving results.
2.	Five Common Misunderstandings
A number of misunderstandings have arisen in discussions of the Agency concept. This Part outlines five of these and clarifies the issues.
2.1	MYTH: SOAs Must Collect Revenue And Operate Commercially
Although a number of Agencies operate commercially, producing and marketing their goods and services on a full cost recovery basis, the collection of revenue has never been a requirement.  
To qualify for SOA status, the organization must be operational in nature (as opposed to policy), must provide a definable service(s) and must have clearly measurable outputs and results (so that performance commitments can be made and tracked). But there is no requirement to collect revenue.
2.2	MYTH: SOAs Are A First Step Toward Privatization
The establishment of an Agency does not signal government's desire to "privatize" the function. Rather, the decision to create an Agency means that (a) the government foresees a continuing need to provide the service and (b) it wants to improve the effectiveness and operational efficiency of the unit.  
2.3	MYTH: SOAs Are Separate From the Department and Less Accountable to the Deputy
The opposite is true. Agencies remain a part of the home department, albeit with enhanced management authority. At the same time, accountability to the deputy head is strengthened. This occurs via the framework document (that details the Agency's domain of activity, its powers, its reporting requirements and its mode of operation) and the business plan (that sets out performance commitments). Experience suggests that the very act of going through the process can force a new clarity to the unit's accountability. 
Beyond this, the SOA model provides the deputy head with a tool to manage change. Where a deputy wishes to reorient a major operational area, the Agency model provides a business planning discipline and an accountability regime -- along with a set of new management flexibilities to facilitate the work. Change can then occur within a clearly agreed-upon framework. In short, accountability to the deputy head is strengthened under the SOA model.
2.4	MYTH: Any Constraint Can Be Eliminated
Not so. There are limits to the kinds of flexibilities that can be granted. Firstly, SOAs are a non-legislative approach. Only those flexibilities that can be delegated without legislative change can be considered. Secondly, SOAs, like any unit of government must support certain core values essential to the fabric of the Public Service; for example, equity and fairness, entitlement and neutrality. No authority will be granted in areas that would compromise prudence and probity in public expenditure, employment equity, official languages, sound principles of financial management and other like matters. 
2.5	MYTH: Agency Employees Are No Longer Public Servants
Employees retain their public service status and union representation. Staff are able to move to other Public Service organizations and have identical opportunities for promotion and transfer as others. SOA managers continue to operate within the requirements of basic Public Service legislation -- e.g. the Public Service Employment Act, the Public Service Staff Relations Act (PSSRA) and others. The only matter to significantly change the operation would be designation of the Agency as a separate employer under Part II of the PSSRA. If this occurred, the employee's union would bargain (and reach a separate collective agreement) with management of the Agency rather than with the Treasury Board of Canada. This would allow for the development of a new pay and classification regime.
3.	Putting an Agency in Place.
3.1	Three Basic Steps
By definition, considering a move to SOA status means being concerned with the management of change. Successful change requires assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the existing organization, defining what better service means in the specific context, identifying the type and source of management delegation necessary to improve performance, carefully attending to people, communicating well with staff and acting with persistence.
This Part outlines the steps involved in moving to SOA status, focusing on three elements:
(a)	Preparation;
(b)	Developing a "Management Contract"; and
(c)	Approval.
3.2	Preparation
Typically a new SOA can take from four to eight months or more to bring to the stage of a Treasury Board decision -- that is, approval to implement and operate under new authorities.  The preparation phase consists of three concurrent activities:
(a)	making a preliminary assessment;
(b)	garnering support; and
(c)	building an initial business case.
This phase ends with a decision by the deputy head and minister on whether or not to pursue Agency status for the unit in question. 
Prior to establishing an SOA, it should be determined whether the Agency meets the Program Review tests (particularly the role of government test and the partnership test) and whether the SOA is the preferred alternative delivery mechanism  (see Annex A). It should be clear what performance improvements are expected from the SOA and in what time frames. Broader consultation with stakeholder groups during the set-up process is to be encouraged and would help to create more acceptance of the rationale for the SOA. 
While the preferred alternative delivery mechanism for those organisations that exhibit these general characteristics is a legislated Service Agency, an SOA should be considered where a legislated Agency would be inappropriate. The principal reasons for such a determination would include the following:
−	the program has such a significant or sensitive public policy purpose that the higher degree of autonomy found in the Service Agency may not be appropriate
−	legislation would be inappropriate or impractical
−	in some cases, the SOA may be intended at the outset to be of finite duration (e.g. because the program is to have a fixed life span) or
−	the program is too small to justify separate organizational and legal status. 
The department needs to be satisfied that, on the face of it, SOA status makes sense -- that the unit meets "best candidate" characteristics. In making this preliminary assessment, managers are well advised to contact the TB Secretariat at an early stage. TBS officials can provide informal, early feedback on the current schedule of SOA-related activities and on the extent to which the unit in question meets the Agency profile. If this initial screen is passed, the manager might well contact the Heads of existing SOAs. The CEOs or Chief Operating Officers of current SOAs are able to provide practical advice on approaches and development strategies that might best be used. 
Presuming a positive prognosis, (and the deputy minister's agreement to continue) managers must now go about a series of activities focused on garnering support among senior departmental decision makers and internal employees. Here, the focus is on explaining the Agency concept, anticipating likely concerns and having the right answers. Potential Agency managers should be prepared to answer questions like:
−	What's in it for the unit to move to Agency status?
−	What's in it for the department?
−	What kind of increased authority is the SOA going to demand from finance, personnel, and other central groups in the department?
−	Does this mean downsizing and loss of jobs?
−	Why does this unit need special treatment?
−	How do terms of employment change?  
−	Can employees still compete for jobs in the department?
−	Is this unit being set up to be privatized?
−	and a host of others.
The key to garnering support is to have a solid case in hand -- to have thought through the process -- while being prepared to communicate with employees, with their union representatives and with other departmental managers. Drawing on the experience of current SOA heads can be invaluable as the potential SOA manager works through this process.
To provide substance to the effort, managers must develop an initial business case or justification of how new flexibilities can contribute to more cost effective operations. Certain key elements will have to be addressed, including:
−	a clear statement of the aims and objectives of the unit and a consideration of the most appropriate Agency organization; 
−	an assessment of the adequacy of internal financial and management systems;
−	an overview of existing resources, outputs, unit cost achievements and proposed changes;
−	an overview of existing and planned performance measures and targets; 
−	an assessment of the personnel and human resource environment of the agency; and
−	an assessment (in performance terms) of the benefits to accrue from each "deregulation" proposal.
Assuming that (i) the SOA model fits the organization (ii) deregulation proposals can be defined and supported (iii) the employees and key departmental senior managers are supportive and (iv) the deputy head concurs, the potential SOA is now free to enter into the next phase of the process.
3.3	Developing a Management Contract Developing a Management Contract
Developing a management contract means defining, documenting and agreeing on what the agency intends to achieve, how it will account for results and how it will be empowered to do the job. In practical terms, it means being involved in simultaneous discussions on two fronts:
−	with corporate management groups in the parent department to establish a framework document and business plan; and
−	with TBS and others on flexibilities to be delegated from the centre.
In the final analysis, SOAs receive increased authority through normal lines of accountability -- via the Minister and the deputy head. The deputy head should ensure that the Agency has sufficient delegated authority to ensure success.
For authorities already existing in the department, flexibility is delegated to the Agency from the Minister and deputy. In other cases, Treasury Board, the PSC or one of the common service organizations (CSOs) will delegate authority to the Minister and deputy, for the sole use of the Agency.
The extent of PSC and CSO involvement depends on the nature of initial deregulation proposals. Wherever warranted, TBS ensures that these organizations (as well as PCO) are involved in discussions leading to the creation of each SOA.
TBS applies a team approach to its discussions with potential Agencies, with separate negotiating teams established for each case. Negotiation teams are led by Program Sector officials and regularly draw on the expertise of other TBS officers knowledgeable of the personnel, financial, policy or other matters involved. As required, they can also include officials of the PSC, DSS or DPW. 
Based on experience, TBS officials expect that discussions between SOAs and the centre will be collaborative in nature. TBS teams and potential SOA managers are expected to work closely together in the identification of problems and solutions. 
TBS is not prescriptive as to how potential Agencies and their parent departments should organize themselves for discussions. It is clear, however, that officials involved should include both department and Agency personnel, that the number of officials should be small and that they should be at a relatively senior level with sufficient negotiating responsibility and authority to undertake the work.
3.4	Approval
The final step is a submission to the Treasury Board. Each submission includes the framework document and business plan, accepted by the Minister. In their review of the case, TB Ministers will approve:
−	designation of the unit as an Agency;
−	the Framework Document
−	authority for new management flexibilities from TB; and
−	performance levels/targets as set out in the business plan.
Departmental management will want to ensure that all major issues are dealt with prior to the forwarding of a submission. For their part, TBS officials and TB Ministers will be looking for the submission to indicate that the potential Agency has a clear sense of direction, a commitment from staff and management to improve client service and performance and a sound plan to achieve these results.
In many cases, potential SOAs will wish to seek provisional status first. Provisional status is an affirmation from TB that the function should become an SOA but recognizes that additional time is necessary before the requirements for full status can be satisfied. For example, more time may be required to put in place a new financial management system, develop an appropriate performance monitoring regime or establish Separate Employer status. Provisional status will allow some limited flexibilities to be granted during the interim period and establish some momentum for the Agency to proceed.
Following Treasury Board approval, the Agency is free to operate with new flexibilities in accordance with the approved business plan.
Beyond this, with the agreement of their deputy and Minister, SOAs retain the right to return to the Treasury Board in the future with requests for further management flexibility. In these cases, the normal test of a sound business case will again be applied. Subsequent business plans are submitted annually by the Agency as part of the parent department's planning process.
4.	Conclusions Part
SOAs are not hypothetical. Their development is a matter of government policy. Treasury Board intends to extend the use of Agencies and refine the model over time.
The reasons are simple -- Canadians want a leaner, more service-oriented public sector. There is no choice but to respond by fostering a culture based on client service. Doing this means satisfying certain "needs": the need to emphasize leadership, concern for people and effective internal and external communication; the need to monitor service quality and client satisfaction; and the need to adapt structures, systems and technology in support of it all.
Agencies work off the idea that current approaches - whether they involve management of people, systems, technology, communications or strategy - should be streamlined and tailored as far as possible to the mandate of the organization, while retaining certain fundamental values of a unified Public Service. 
In the end, success depends on people and the enthusiasm they bring to the job 

Annex A	Program Review Tests
Public Interest Test
1.	Does the program area or activity continue to serve a public interest?
2.	Does the program area or activity deliver a good/service that is essential to meeting the future needs of Canadians?
3.	Is the program necessary to fulfil the legal mandate of the department?
4.	How would you compare the relative contribution to the public interest of this program or activity based on its overall societal benefits and its costs?
Role of Government Test
1.	Is there a legitimate and necessary role for government in this program area or activity?
2.	Is this an appropriate role for government to play?
3.	What would be the impact of abandoning the activity or program?
Federalism Test
1.	Is the current role of government appropriate, or is the program or activity a candidate for realignment with the provinces?
2.	Why must the federal government be present in this area?
•	Is it a constitutional or legal responsibility?
•	What would be the consequence if the federal government withdrew from this area?
3.	Could satisfactory results be achieved if the program was delivered by another order of government - the provinces or local authorities - and at what cost?
Partnership Test
1.	What activities or program should or could be provided in whole or in part by the private/voluntary sector?
2.	Could satisfactory results be achieved through private/voluntary sector action and at what cost?
3.	Under what conditions and at what cost could/should the program be transferred?
Efficiency Test
1.	If the program or activity continues, how could its efficiency be improved?
2.	What changes could be made to provide equal or better service at lower cost?
Affordability Test
1.	Is the resultant package of program/activities affordable within the fiscal constraint?
2.	Are the programs/activities that are considered essential to serve the public interest and represent an appropriate and necessary role for the federal government affordable given available financial resources?
3.	If not, what programs/activities would be abandoned?

Annex B	Typical Content of a Framework document
The framework document represents the Agency's "constitution" or "operating charter."  It is developed collaboratively by the SOA and its department and is approved by the responsible Minister. Framework documents are approved by the Treasury Board prior to designation of the unit as an SOA. Subsequently, there should be a review of the Framework Document at least every three years to ensure the continuing applicability of the arrangements.
In its review of the framework document, the Treasury Board is particularly interested in the guiding principles by which the SOA will be judged (i.e. financial/operational performance, levels of customer service etc.), the accountability regime and in the managerial flexibilities required to do the job.
Each framework document will be different, tailored to the individual needs of the Agency. There is no required format or length for a framework document.
For illustrative purposes, this annex provides the main chapter headings of a typical Framework Document.

SOA Framework Document
Preamble
1.	Mission and Objectives
	Mission
	Objectives
	Strategic Objectives
	Operating Principles
	Operational Objectives
	Services
	Markets
	Geographic Coverage
2.	Accountability and Relationships
	Deputy Minister/Ministerial Responsibility
	Chief Executive/Operating Officer
	Responsibility to Clients
	Relations with Central Agencies and Common Service Organizations
	Delegations
	Relationship With the Department
	Relationship With Advisory Board
3.	Planning and Reporting
	Framework
	Annual Business Plan
	Annual Reports
4.	Financial Principles
	Accounting
	Revolving Fund
	Appropriations
	Fee policy
	Audits/Evaluation
	Access to Capital
5.	Human Resources
	Human Resource Levels
	Staffing and Classification
6.	Authorities
	Initial Authorities
	Additional Authorities
7.	Review of the Charter document
8.	Performance Measurement and Indicators
9.	Performance Improvements

Annex C	The SOA Business Plan
This annex provides general guidance on the content of an SOA business plan and on the use of the plan as an accountability instrument. 
I.	Rationale
The main purposes of the plan are to: 
−	better manage the Agency in both the short and long term;
−	establish a contract for what targets and performance will be achieved; and
−	define what the agency needs of the government in terms of mandate, investment and authorities.
The plan represents a detailed performance contract between the department and Agency management. It is updated and renewed annually. In submitting the plan, the SOA head commits to achieving specific objectives and levels of performance. In approving the plan, the Minister agrees to allow SOA management to pursue the broad direction and strategies of the plan within the freedoms set out in the Framework Document. The Agency accounts for its performance regularly through submission of an Annual Report.
II.	Nature of the document
Generally speaking, the business plan should provide the Minister with assurance that management has a clear sense of direction, is dealing with the right issues and is managing its affairs accordingly. The plan should clearly indicate where the Agency is going over the next five years, how it intends to get there and how it will measure progress. 
Production of the final document is not an end in itself but rather an integral part of a planning process that is in place within the SOA. A written plan is produced both to communicate the results of this planning process and to provide a useful reference for Agency management. 
The core component is a five-year resource plan that shows how stated objectives will be achieved within approved resource levels. Operating  and (if appropriate) capital budgets should be used to provide greater detail for the first year of the plan. 
As the basis for accountability, the plan must clearly identify both the long and short-term objectives and performance levels that management is committing to achieve. Given its annual nature, the accountability focus will be on planned achievements for the first year and on the reasons for any significant difference between planned targets and actual results. 
Business plans should:
−	establish targets and commitments with reference to the established performance indicators for each objective. These performance goals should be as clear and concrete as possible with appropriate time frames for realising them;
−	allow for re-negotiation of performance targets when key contingency factors change (e.g. resources, authorities) and 
−	form a visible part of the Departmental / Portfolio Business Plan.
Should there be any significant changes required to the plan during the course of the year, the Agency would be expected to seek approval of a revised business plan. 
III.	Process
The first business plan is submitted to the Treasury Board concurrent with the Framework Agreement that establishes the Agency. Thereafter, business plans are submitted annually as part of the spring Report on Plans and Priorities of the parent department. For some very commercial types of Agencies, sufficient information must be provided to Treasury Board at the time of the Estimates to allow for resource allocation. The detailed business plan would be provided to the Deputy Minister before the start of the fiscal year.
The plan must be based on approved resource levels -- approved reference levels together with any additional policy resource approvals. If additional resources are being sought, the business plan must show how these would be used in a manner that is cleanly severable from the base plan to cover the eventuality that they are not approved.
The accountability "loop" is closed through an Annual Report. This is a separate document, provided within three months of the end of the SOAs fiscal year. The annual report should contain an update on performance since the last report, year-to-date results at the time of the report and revised year-end projections. The report should also detail service performance indicators (both quantitative and qualitative) and indicators of financial results. 
IV.	Typical Business Plan Content 
For illustrative purposes, a general business plan outline is provided below. In practice the format, level of sophistication and degree of detail will vary from Agency to Agency.
SUMMARY
A brief description of major issues confronting the SOA, its proposed strategy and the specific approvals being sought.
Situation Analysis
Mission and Mandate - The formal or legal mandate, how it is articulated (or elaborated on) by management; how management intends to implement the mandate or mission that it has set; management priorities.
Organization - The kind of organization that management wants the Agency to be, the values being promulgated within the SOA that shape external perception; how the Agency is organized, the activities that characterize its operations.
Environmental Assessment - Social, environmental, technological, economic, regulatory, political, competition, geographical etc.
Existing Clients, State of Markets and Competitors - Location, strengths and weaknesses.
Service Levels - Key indicators.
Finances - Operating results, capital assets and working capital. How resources are managed and allocated, how the allocation relates to the Agency's objectives, goals and priorities.
Human Resources - Personnel needs now and in the future as well as training requirements.
Strategic Assessment - Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. The challenges and opportunities that exist, strategic issues that management faces, alternative plans and strategies that were considered, the choices that were made, what management was forced to eliminate due to constraints.
Delivery Issues and Operations - Alternative means of delivery (pros and cons), space, equipment, inventory and production processes.
Objectives and Performance Targets
Specific, one-year, measurable goals and objectives. They should also relate to (and be consistent with) the more general longer-term objectives, the strategic plan and management priorities.
Service and Financial Commitments - both qualitative and quantitative.
Five year, longer-term objectives that have been set.
Strategy
Key Assumptions - Economy, market, resources, demand analyses and forecasts.
Realistic range of options.
New markets and strategies for penetration.
Proposed rate and fee structure and subcontracting strategy.
New products/services - New initiatives proposed and how these relate to longer-term objectives, to the strategic plan and to management priorities.
Specific Plans
For each product and service line; the marketing, operations, management, capital and financial plans. Also the assumptions made in developing the plans, the risks and contingency plans.
Summary financial and other statements - Income statement, balance sheet, cash flow, head count.
Requirements
Capacity to meet plans - The specific approvals being sought and any issues that may require future ministerial approval.
Mandate changes, financial and other authorities.
Proposed linkage with the parent department - Use of infrastructure, shared resources.

Annex D	Existing SOAs, Links, and Contacts 
Individuals wishing general information on SOAs, including current plans and future activities may contact:
Alternative Service Delivery Team
Governance Unit
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
400 Cooper St., 8th Floor
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0R5
Phone: 613-957-0149 Fax: 613-957-0160
E-mail: asd-dmps@tbs.sct.gc.ca
Internet: www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/asd-dmps
As of March 2004, there are 17 SOAs at the federal level:
Public Works and Government Services
•	Consulting and Audit Canada http://www.cac.gc.ca/
•	Translation Bureau http://www.translationbureau.gc.ca/
Foreign Affairs and International Trade
•	Passport Office http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/passport/pass.htm
•	Physical Resources Bureau
Industry
•	Canadian Intellectual Property Office http://opic.gc.ca/
•	Technology Partnerships Canada http://tpc-ptc.ic.gc.ca/  
•	Superintendent of Bankruptcy http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/bankrupt/engdoc/superint.html
•	Measurement Canada http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrksv/meascan/engdoc/homepage.html
Agriculture
•	Pari-Mutuel Agency
Heritage
•	Canadian Heritage Information Network http://www.chin.gc.ca/
•	Canadian Conservation Institute http://www.pch.gc.ca/cci-icc/english/english.htm
Public Service Commission
•	Training and Development Canada http://www.myschool-monecole.gc.ca/
Corrections
•	CORCAN
Indian and Northern Affairs
•	Indian Oil and Gas Canada
Finance
•	Canada Investment and Savings Agency http://www.cis-pec.gc.ca/
Defence
•	Canadian Forces Housing Agency