Evaluation of the Treasury Board Submission Process

Appendix A: Treasury Board Submission Process Logic Model - Text Version

This figure depicts the logic model of the Treasury Board submission process. Generally, a logic model illustrates the results chain of a policy, program or initiative. In this case, the logic model shows the results chain of a process. Specifically, it demonstrates how the activities associated with the Treasury Board submission process are expected to lead to the achievement of its final or ultimate outcome. The logic model depicted is not a comprehensive map of the submission process, as only the key activities, outputs and outcomes are identified.

The logic model has a pyramid structure. At its base are the activities associated with the Treasury Board submission process. Each activity has a corresponding output or deliverable. These outputs form the second tier of the pyramid, up from its base. The activities and outputs are expected to produce immediate outcomes, which in turn lead to intermediate outcomes, a long-term outcome and the ultimate outcome of the submission process. Each type of outcome represents a separate tier in the pyramid, with the ultimate outcome shown at its apex.

In ascending order, a detailed description of each tier of the logic model follows. At its base are the six activities associated with the Treasury Board submission process. These activities, which are undertaken by Secretariat analysts, are as follows:

1. Awareness and education that is internally focused on Secretariat analysts as well as externally focused on analysts in federal organizations;
2. Providing guidance and advice to federal organizations that are trying to determine if a Treasury Board submission is required;
3. Reviewing and providing advice and/or consulting on draft submissions put forward by federal organizations;
4. Drafting the précis document, briefing the appropriate individuals within the Secretariat so they are prepared for the Treasury Board meeting and providing advice to Treasury Board ministers;
5. Documenting and communicating Treasury Board's decision; and
6. Tracking the conditions that sometimes accompany Treasury Board decisions.

Each of these activities results in a corresponding output or deliverable. The six key outputs are as follows:

1. Guides, tools and outreach;
2. Recommendations to federal organizations about the appropriateness of putting forth a submission or confirmation of the proposed submission's policy or program vehicle;
3. Recommendations to federal organizations on their draft submissions or confirmation of the authorities, policies and directions of these submissions;
4. Treasury Board's meeting agenda and decisions;
5. Letter communicating Treasury Board's decision; and
6. Conditions placed on submissions.

In the more immediate term, the activities and corresponding outputs described should lead to the following outcomes:

• An increased understanding of the elements of Treasury Board submissions and policies among both Secretariat analysts and the analysts in federal organizations who are involved in writing Treasury Board submissions;
• Federal organizations seeking approvals and putting forth submissions that are appropriate and consistent with Government of Canada authorities, policies and directions;
• Treasury Board decisions that are well-informed and consistent with the advice, guidance and recommendations provided by Secretariat analysts; and
• Post-decision mechanisms being in place to enable Treasury Board decisions to be carried out (for example, communication to the Expenditure Management Sector, tracking of conditions, communication to departments, and so forth).

Eventually, the activities related to awareness and education and to consultation and advice should lead to the following intermediate outcome: only high-quality submissions being put forward for Treasury Board consideration. The briefings that precede Treasury Board meetings, the meetings themselves and the post-decision follow-up activities should help ensure that departmental management of programs and spending is aligned with government priorities, which is the second intermediate outcome shown in the logic model.

As a result, the expected longer-term outcome is that the management of programs and spending government-wide will be aligned with Government of Canada priorities.

The anticipated ultimate outcome of the Treasury Board submission process that is shown in the logic model echoes the strategic outcome found in the Secretariat's program activity architecture, which is that Canadians benefit from a government that is well managed and accountable and whose resources are allocated to achieve results.

Return to Evaluation of the Treasury Board Submission Process