This page has been archived.
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
The objective of the audit was to determine whether contracting for professional, technical and temporary help services in small departments and agencies (SDAs) is managed in a fair, transparent and competitive way and whether the overall management and administration of contracting is accomplished in accordance with the intent of the policies in place.
Objectives |
Criteria |
---|---|
To assess the extent of compliance with Treasury Board and Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) contracting regulations and related policies. |
|
To assess the extent to which management of contracting activities and processes are sound and conducted with due regard to efficiency, thereby ensuring that the government is receiving good value for money spent. |
|
To identify and promote best practices and innovative approaches in the procurement of professional and technical services within the SDA community. |
|
The following table presents the recommendations and a description of the actions being taken to address them. Each recommendation is assigned a risk ranking of high, medium or low, based on the relative priorities of the recommendations and the extent to which the recommendations indicate non-compliance with Treasury Board policies.
Recommendations |
Overall Risk Ranking |
Management Action Plan |
---|---|---|
1. Those providing the oversight and challenge function for contracting activity should be at an appropriate level of management to ensure their challenge is respected and adhered to. Additionally, those responsible for this oversight should be aware of the importance of their challenge function and should document their agreement with the contracting decisions made. This may be best accomplished by creating a checklist of key oversight elements. |
Medium |
SDAs are or will be implementing a formal challenge function as oversight for contracting activity. SDAs will ensure that this challenge function includes formalized procedures outlining key oversight elements for the contract approval process Implementation is expected by January 31, 2010. |
2. SDAs should ensure that there is appropriate documentation on file to justify sole source contracting. |
High |
SDAs will ensure that sole source contracting is justified with appropriate supporting documentation. |
3. SDAs should ensure that individuals involved in the contracting process understand contracting policy requirements and have access to the tools they need to do their work. |
High |
SDAs are or will be establishing internal contracting policies, including appropriate tools and training. SDAs will ensure that individuals are aware of these policies and make these accessible on their intranet sites. Implementation is expected by March 31, 2010. |
4. Training and guidance for contracting staff should be provided so that standing offers are used appropriately and effectively. |
Medium |
SDAs are beginning to ensure that contracting staff receive the required training and that ongoing training renewal work plans are in place. |
5. SDAs should consider a formal process for ensuring contracting files contain all the appropriate documentation to support the contracting activities undertaken. This could be accomplished by the use of a checklist reminding contracting officers what key requirements must be considered for inclusion in each file. |
High |
SDAs will improve current checklists or will establish quality assurance checklists to ensure that contracting files contain all appropriate documentation. Implementation is expected by March 31, 2010. |
Acts, Regulations and Policies
(Links current as of September 3, 2009)
[1] This audit was conducted in accordance with the International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. However, the Office of the Comptroller General has not undergone an external assessment at least once in the past five years or been subject to ongoing monitoring or to periodic internal assessments of its horizontal internal audit activity that would confirm its compliance with the standards.