Audit of the Canadian Space Agency

A Report from the Public Service Commission of Canada

Related Documents:

News Release Highlights Audit

May 2006

Public Service Commission of Canada
300 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0M7
Canada

Information: (613) 992-9562
Facsimile: (613) 992-9352

Cat. No. SC3-116/2006
ISBN 0-662-49196-3

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Public Service Commission of Canada, 2006

All of the audit work in this report was conducted in accordance with the legislative mandate and audit policies of the Public Service Commission of Canada.

PDF Format (355 Kb)

Table of Contents

• Summary
• Introduction
  • Background of the audit
• Objectives and scope of the audit
• Observations
  • There is a lack of leadership and accountability in human resources management  
  • Human resources planning is not integrated into business planning
  • The strategic human resources plan does not address key issues
  • Staffing activities were initiated on an ad hoc basis
  • There is no monitoring system
  • Many staffing transactions did not respect the merit principle and staffing values
  • Impartiality in staffing is compromised
  • Assessment methods and tools are inappropriate
  • Staffing roles and responsibilities are ambiguous
  • Staffing training is insufficient
• The PSC has imposed conditions on the delegation of staffing authorities
• Conclusion
• About the audit
  • Objective
  • Scope and method
  • Criteria
  • Audit team
• Glossary

Summary

1. The observations identified in this audit indicate a number of shortcomings in the management of staffing operations at the Canadian Space Agency (the Agency). We found that the staffing strategies and plans implemented by the Agency under the previous Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) were inadequate.

2. We noted a lack of leadership and accountability in the management of human resources. Human resources planning is not integrated into business planning. The strategic human resources plan approved by Agency management in 2004 was incomplete and superficial. Staffing transactions were initiated on an ad hoc basis. We found no system for tracking and monitoring staffing activities.

3. Our audit work also revealed a poor understanding of the framework governing staffing activities. The roles and responsibilities of managers and human resources advisors in regard to staffing were not defined. The advice and guidance provided to managers by human resources advisors during the audit period left much to be desired, and the training provided to managers and human resources advisors was insufficient.

4. The Agency did not effectively manage its staffing activities and as a result, 48% of staffing transactions reviewed in our audit did not respect the merit principle and staffing values. We are particularly concerned about impartiality in staffing, the quality of rating tools and assessment methods.

5. In December 2005, the Public Service Commission (PSC) and the President of the Agency signed a new agreement, entitled Appointment Delegation and Accountability Instrument, under the new PSEA, which came into force on December 31, 2005. The PSC has placed conditions on the Agency’s delegation of staffing authorities. Until the PSC is satisfied that an appropriate appointment system is in place, the Agency must respect these conditions, which are linked to the new delegation system.

Top of Page

Introduction

6. Established in March 1989, the Canadian Space Agency (the Agency) receives its authority from the Canadian Space Agency Act, in force since December 1990. The mandate of the Agency is “to promote the peaceful use and development of space, to advance the knowledge of space through science and to ensure that space science and technology provide social and economic benefits for Canadians.” The Agency operates in highly specialized fields, and has expertise at both the national and international level.

7. The President of the Agency reports to the Minister of Industry and is supported by the Senior Vice-President. The organization of the Agency comprises five core functions (Space Programs, Space Technologies, Space Science, Canadian Astronaut Office, and Space Operations), six executive functions (Audit, Evaluation and Review, Corporate Management, Communications, Strategic Development, and External Relations and Government Liaison) and three corporate functions (Legal Services, Administration, and Human Resources). The Agency has a status equivalent to that of a department and its personnel, apart from the astronauts, are appointed in accordance with the PSEA.

8. Prior to 1999, the Agency had a temporary funding arrangement and managed its resources almost exclusively on a short-term basis. Given the Agency’s funding arrangement, most staff members were employees appointed for a specified period and contractors were engaged in order to meet project-related needs.

9. In 1999, parliamentary approval was given to the Agency for its first A-base budget. Responding to the stable funding arrangement, the Agency reorganized, reviewed its organizational structure and its staff changed considerably. The number, nature and distribution of the Agency’s workforce changed especially as a result of an exercise designed to convert term positions to indeterminate positions and to create new positions in order to reduce the number of contractors. The conversion exercise, undertaken in 2002, affected about 230 positions in more than 20 occupational groups. Recent years have been characterized by a large number of staffing transactions designed to stabilize the workforce. In March 2005, the Agency had 609 employees appointed for a specified period or on an indeterminate (permanent) basis, compared to 540 in March 2003 and 378 in March 2000. In March 2005, the Agency’s workforce also included 164 contractors, to meet needs associated with special projects.

10. The Agency’s headquarters is located in the greater Montreal area. Most employees work at the John H. Chapman Space Centre in Saint-Hubert, Québec. The rest work in Ottawa, at the David Florida Laboratory and two other locations, as well as in the Canadian Space Agency offices in Washington, Paris, Cape Canaveral, and Houston.

11. The headquarters of the Agency is located in an area designated as unilingual French under the Official Languages Act in respect of the language of work. This is a rather special situation, given that English is the main language of communication in the space industry. The Agency’s geographic location is a significant issue affecting staffing. The Agency must adopt carefully considered strategies in this area, to attract and retain pools of candidates who meet the language requirements of the positions to be filled.

Top of Page

Background of the audit

12. Under the previous PSEA, the PSC delegated its staffing authorities to the President of the Agency through a Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement. During the period covered by our audit, the agreement in force was the one made between the PSC and the Agency in January 2001 and amended in 2002, when delegated authorities were added for hiring staff in the engineering sub-group through open competitions.

13. In signing this agreement, the President of the Agency accepted the authorities, obligations and responsibilities associated with it and undertook to respect the values, expectations and legal obligations associated with accountability for staffing. The President of the Agency was required to report to the PSC, through the Departmental Staffing Accountability Report (DSAR), on all activities associated with his delegated staffing authorities, including the development and implementation of a framework for managing these activities.

14. In 2004, the PSC reviewed the Agency’s DSAR for the period 2002-2003. The review raised questions about competency, specifically concerning the strategies and decisions supporting the organizational objectives and the human resources plan. In its assessment report, the PSC noted that the Agency should have put a strategic approach to staffing and human resources management in place. The PSC concluded that the Agency’s DSAR presented information in a superficial manner and did not provide examples to indicate how performance had been achieved and what results had been obtained through the implementation of concrete measures.

Top of Page

Objectives and scope of the audit

15. The objective of the audit was to determine to what extent the management framework governing the Agency’s staffing activities and transactions complied with the previous PSEA, PSC policies, regulations and orders and with the Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement that the PSC and the Agency signed in 2001 and 2002.

16. We reviewed and analyzed relevant Agency documents on staffing, including documents prepared in 2005 in anticipation of the coming into force of the new PSEA in December 2005. We also conducted interviews with senior management, members of the Executive Committee, managers, representatives of the Human Resources Branch and union representatives. We also examined 122 staffing transactions conducted under the previous PSEA, between April 1, 2003 and October 31, 2004.

17. For more details, see About the audit at the end of this report.

Top of Page

Observations

There is a lack of leadership and accountability in human resources management

18. The Executive Committee, which is the Agency’s decision-making body, is responsible for the overall management, monitoring and control of activities. This Committee is supported by a sub-committee, the Internal Management Committee, whose mandate is essentially focussed on financial and administrative matters. In 2005, to discuss and deal with major human resources issues, the Human Resources Branch set up a Human Resources Orientation Committee. This Committee acts as an intermediary between the various sectors of the Agency. However, it is not accountable to the Executive Committee nor to the Internal Management Committee.

19. Given the key role of the Executive Committee and the growth of the Agency since 1999, we would have expected the Executive Committee to define the Agency’s vision, to be a catalyst for change and to take leadership on human resources matters by providing clear direction based on the organization’s present and future needs. Leadership in the area of human resources management should come from the Agency’s senior management, with organized participation by other key players, namely the Internal Management Committee, managers, the Human Resources Branch and its Orientation Committee, union representatives and employees.

20. We noted that the Executive Committee did not take leadership and lacked commitment regarding human resources matters. In fact, such matters are raised at meetings of the Executive Committee, through presentations made by the Human Resources Branch, with no strategic debate.

21. Many managers interviewed do not see themselves as being significant players in the development and implementation of an overall human resources management strategy. They perceive human resources management as a primary responsibility of the Human Resources Branch. The manner in which the Human Resources Orientation Committee functioned supports this perception.

22. We expected that the Agency would have established an effective accountability structure for human resources management, more specifically in regard to staffing. In order to make human resources management a priority, the President included, for the fiscal year 2003-2004, an annex in the management and performance evaluation agreements of all the Agency’s executives. This annex, which sets out various commitments, was called “Annex: Ongoing Commitment in Human Resources Management.”

23. However, our review showed that the agreements did not contain any performance indicator to allow concrete measurement of commitments and expected results in the area of human resources management. These annexes included, for example, commitments of the following kind: “manage human resources by maximizing the use of resources while not exceeding the established salary ceiling”, and “properly manage labour relations issues and cases as they arise, through a proactive partnership with the Human Resources Branch.” These commitments certainly reflect praiseworthy intentions, but do not indicate what action the executive should take to achieve the targeted objective. Because of the lack of indicators, the President was unable to assess the results of his executives’ ongoing commitments in the area of human resources management.

24. In spite of the efforts made by the Human Resources Branch to make members of the Executive group responsible for human resources issues, much remains to be done to attain this objective. It will be crucial that the Agency’s senior managers examine this issue under the new staffing regime.

Recommendation 1
The President of the Canadian Space Agency must take concrete actions to hold senior managers accountable and responsible for human resources management and related decisions.

The Canadian Space Agency’s Response. The Agency recognizes the importance of senior and middle managers’ accountability for human resources management. The Staffing Management Accountability Framework is being implemented to ensure all managers meet their responsibilities in human resources management. Accountability will be strengthened by aligning the level of accountability of senior managers with precise commitments and measures in performance agreements. Managers will assume leadership and responsibility for human resources management through the development and implementation of the upcoming strategic human resources management plan. Human resources management will be a permanent item on the Executive Committee meeting agenda, to encourage constructive debate and to ensure a corporate approach to decision-making. The designation of “champions” for human resources management initiatives will strengthen leadership and responsibility for human resources management.

Top of Page

Human resources planning is not integrated into business planning

25. Human resources planning is a process to help an organization identify its present and future needs. A connection should be made between human resources management and the organization’s overall strategic plan. Integrated planning of human resources and activities should be pursued at all levels of an organization and involve key players who have a role to play in making the process effective. To this end, managers should understand the organization’s global strategic and operational objectives and should clearly state their own operational needs.

26. In her December 2002 report, the Auditor General of Canada noted that the Agency had no overall plan for human resources management. During the period covered by our audit, the Agency moved towards a more strategic human resources management. Nonetheless, we noted that there is still much to be done to achieve this objective.

27. Many managers we interviewed still follow the principle of “silo” management and operate on a project-by-project basis. They are aware that the Human Resources Branch has developed a strategic human resources plan, but several of them could not describe to us its main features, its objectives or the way in which these objectives are integrated into the organization’s other objectives. Every service line has its own operational plan, which includes human resources elements, but according to some of the managers we interviewed, these elements are not connected to the overall strategic plan.

28. Representatives of the Human Resources Branch confirmed to us that a tremendous amount of work is still required to position human resources management on a more strategic level rather than an operational one. During the time of our audit, senior management and managers had not committed to address strategic planning and human resources management issues.

Top of Page

The strategic human resources plan does not address key issues

29. The strategic human resources plan approved by the Executive Committee in April 2004 is primarily the work of the Human Resources Branch. The plan describes trends, issues and possible actions and provides a list of considerations to improve human resources management.

30. Some of the managers interviewed maintained that there was a real need to draw up a succession plan. Although the strategic human resources plan outlines succession needs in certain key groups, such as executives and scientific researchers, it does not include any commitment or concrete action. A key component of strategic human resources planning is to have a thorough knowledge of the workforce in order to manage upcoming staff shortages or surpluses. The Agency operates in a high-risk sector and should maintain its leading-edge position while taking care to attract and retain highly qualified individuals.

31. In June 2003, the Agency’s Human Resources Branch developed its first demographic profile, providing an overview of its workforce. However, the picture is incomplete and provides no solution to the identified challenges. Employment equity targets and the Agency’s workforce distribution are the only demographic factors that are regularly tracked by the Agency.

32. We expected that the Agency’s strategic human resources plan would take into account, among other things, the items presented in Exhibit 1.

Source:  Text based on Developing a Staffing Strategy – Section 1: “Developing a Human Resources Plan”, Public Service Commission of Canada, 2002.

33. We noted that the Agency’s strategic human resources plan only provided a partial analysis of the environment and some possible measures, without specifying priorities. Moreover, our review of key documents and our interviews led us to the conclusion that the Agency had not produced any report dealing expressly with progress achieved or results attained in regard to its plan.

34. An action plan to implement the strategic human resources plan was developed in April 2004. This action plan is a business plan for the Human Resources Branch, which sets out the major commitments that the Branch has made in a number of areas, including official languages, employment equity, recruitment and retention. We noted the efforts that the Human Resources Branch had made to implement parts of its action plan. In 2005, the Branch developed a competency profile and a template to develop a staffing plan, by branch, for 2005-2006. This template, which will henceforth include data on eligibility for retirement, has been submitted to the Agency’s managers. These new initiatives will offer positive support for staffing activities within the Agency.

Top of Page

Staffing activities were initiated on an ad hoc basis

35. As we have already mentioned, since the start of its conversion exercise in 2002, the Agency has been reorganized and its workforce has grown considerably. The period covered by our audit was characterized by a large number of staffing transactions. We noted that the Agency had gone ahead with its conversion exercise without strategically planning its staffing needs, in spite of the recommendation made by the Auditor General of Canada in her December 2002 report.

36. The staffing transactions initiated during the period covered by our audit were primarily designed to meet immediate needs. Our analysis of staffing files revealed the absence of dialogue between human resources advisors and managers on how to plan the staffing process and on the various options available for filling positions. Most of the human resources advisors we interviewed confirmed that they did not use the strategic human resources plan as a strategic tool in their discussions with managers.

37. Our review showed that the Agency staffs its positions as needs arise. For example, the Agency has shown itself to be inefficient in drawing up eligibility lists. We noted that the number of candidates on eligibility lists established following closed or open competitions was generally equivalent to the number of positions to be filled immediately. The Agency should have drawn up lists containing a larger number of candidates, in order to meet future needs.

38. We also noted that a number of competitions had been initiated in the same sector in order to fill similar positions. If managers had made a concerted effort to plan their staffing transactions, they would not have repeatedly conducted similar competitions. For example, generic competitions would have been appropriate for assessing common qualifications, particularly in the case of administrative support positions. If the Agency had proceeded along these lines, its staffing activities could have been managed more efficiently.

39. We observed that some of the Agency’s managers preferred trying out candidates on an acting basis or for a specified period before appointing them for an indeterminate period. According to the data we obtained from the Agency on staffing transactions during the period covered by our audit, more than 40 appointments were made for a specified period to positions clearly designated as indeterminate. In our review of 122 staffing transactions, we identified 17 appointments made for a specified period to positions clearly designated as indeterminate. In addition, among the 39 closed competitions we audited, we found six cases where incumbents appointed indeterminately were already performing the duties of the position on an acting basis, and six other cases where the incumbents were already holding the position for a specified period. This method of staffing does not offer the best possible value in terms of cost and time invested and increases the risk of perceived lack of impartiality. The Agency knew it was permitted to fill these positions on an indeterminate basis, as a result of having received permanent funding.

40. In 2004, the Agency implemented three learning and professional development programs to attract and develop communications officers, compensation officers and technologists. However, we noted that these programs did not meet predetermined strategic needs, and the documents that we reviewed did not mention any objective directly associated with the particular needs of the groups targeted by these programs.

41. In our opinion, the adoption of practices reflecting a more strategic perspective, such as the use of generic competitions and anticipatory staffing, would ensure a better match between the present and future needs of the Agency. We are concerned by the fact that the Agency’s managers do not plan staffing activities, since under the new PSC Appointment Policy, appointment decisions must be based on human resources planning and linked to organizational and business planning.

Recommendation 2
The President of the Canadian Space Agency must develop and implement a strategic human resources management plan, integrating its operational plans and strategic objectives, and ensure that the plan is taken into account in staffing processes.

The Canadian Space Agency’s Response. The Agency acknowledges that more must be done and recognizes the importance of the strategic human resources management plan. Steps have been taken for the development and implementation of a strategic plan in accordance with the Treasury Board Integrated Human Resources planning toolkit, issued to Deputy Ministers on February 2, 2005. From this toolkit, the Human Resources Branch also developed planning tools to help managers in the development of the strategic plan, including an internal and external demographic analysis. The Plan will include resourcing and development strategies. For the 2006-2007 planning exercise, the Agency has aligned its staffing plans with the Agency work plans. In order to evaluate and identify current and future human resources needs, the Agency has also linked human resources planning to the Agency’s business strategy—the Canadian Space Strategy—and the ten-year plan.

Top of Page

There is no monitoring system

42. Monitoring activities involve the ongoing review of activities in relation to plans, procedures and performance standards, to determine whether or not these activities are carried out or function as planned and whether they are producing the desired results. Monitoring aims to examine areas at risk, including staffing trends, at regular intervals in order to detect possible weaknesses in the processes. As needed, the Agency would then take corrective action to improve its existing policies and processes.

43. To ensure that staffing is efficiently monitored, the Agency must be able to count on reliable and accessible staffing information. The Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement requires that the President monitor the Agency’s staffing activities.

44. We noted that during the period covered by our audit, the Agency did not monitor its staffing activities. While we found that the Agency did not have systems to assess its staffing activities and outcomes, we noted the existence of operational control systems relating to budget control and the documentation of staffing files.

45. During the period covered by our audit, the Agency required that every staffing transaction be authorized by the President, using the human resources action request form, in order to ensure a balance between resources and the operating budget. On a monthly basis, the Human Resources Branch produced an updated table on staffing transactions. This table update was sent to hiring managers. However, there was no discussion between representatives of the Human Resources Branch and managers regarding strategic direction and priorities.

46. We found that most files contained a checklist signed by a human resources advisor, to show that the documents required for the decision had indeed been placed in the file and that the steps in the staffing process had been followed. We encourage the Human Resources Branch to continue with this practice and to put a system in place to assess the quality of documents used in the staffing process.

47. In our opinion, sound human resources management must be based on effective staffing strategies, a systematic tracking of their implementation and outcomes and the communication of the results obtained. The Agency recognizes this need and mentioned it in its workplan, noting that such a monitoring framework for staffing activities will need to be developed in accordance with the PSC’s Staffing Management Accountability Framework.

Recommendation 3
The President of the Canadian Space Agency must implement a staffing monitoring system that will serve to assess progress achieved on the basis of planned results and to actively monitor areas at risk.

The Canadian Space Agency’s Response. The Agency is developing a staffing monitoring system in compliance with the new PSEA. Monitoring points and controls have already been implemented and are found in the form of various support tools such as:

• specific articles added to our policies and sub-delegation instrument;
• checklist in staffing files; and
• computerized system to facilitate reporting.

The Agency is also examining the implementation of other mechanisms:

• internal audits by the Audit, Evaluation and Review Branch; and
• peer-review audits of a sample of files among the human resources advisors.

A Monitoring Committee will be created to examine staffing issues, particularly those in areas considered at risk and will report to the Executive Committee on its findings to elicit strategic debate. The Committee will also make recommendations to the President.

Top of Page

Many staffing transactions did not respect the merit principle and staffing values

48. We expected that every staffing decision made at the Agency would be in accordance with the Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement signed by the Agency and the PSC in 2001 and 2002. In accordance with this agreement, the President of the Agency must ensure that staffing decisions are based on the merit principle, in conformity with the previous PSEA, and on the staffing values and principles set out in Exhibit 2,while ensuring sound planning of processes.

Source: Public Service Commission of Canada, Staffing Delegation and Accountability Agreement.

49. Our review of 122 of the Agency’s staffing files revealed that 59 staffing transactions (48%) did not respect the merit principle and staffing values. Exhibit 3 gives a breakdown of our review of the files, by type of staffing transaction

Exhibit 3:  Summary of the file review

Source: Audit Branch of the Public Service Commission of Canada.

50. We expected that human resources advisors would fulfil their staffing responsibilities by providing informed advice and guidance and by guiding managers in their decision-making activities. This advice must be provided at various steps in a staffing process, namely when needs and strategies are defined, at the screening stage, at the time of assessment and when candidates are ranked. This challenge function that human resources advisors assume is particularly important where managers lack experience in staffing in the public service, as is the case at the Agency.

51. Some of the managers we interviewed emphasized that human resources advisors were unable to meet their needs in a satisfactory manner. They pointed out weaknesses regarding the relevance and quality of the advice and guidance offered. Exhibit 4 presents two cases which, after review, revealed that the quality of advice and guidance offered to managers was unsatisfactory.

52. In our review of staffing processes, we found a number of cases where human resources advisors provided advice that was either inadequate or simply administrative in nature. For example, we did not find any convincing evidence in the staffing files to show that the human resources advisors had challenged the applicability of the assessment tools and methods. Since there was no effective challenge function, we noted significant irregularities in the application of the PSEA, PSC policies and staffing values.

53. Most of the files that we rated unsatisfactory (59) consisted of competitions within the public service (31) and open competitions (21), representing 88% of the files that did not respect the merit principle and staffing values. Exhibit 5 describes two competitions conducted within the public service where the merit principle and staffing values were not adhered to.

Top of Page

Impartiality in staffing is compromised  

54. One important aim of values-based staffing is to develop a relationship of trust between the organization’s managers and its employees. We expected that Agency staff would be appointed and promoted impartially. Impartiality in staffing means that staffing decisions are free from any political patronage or personal favouritism.

55. In the case of open competitions, the very restrictive screening of candidates, a reference in the statement of qualifications to experience or knowledge specific to the Agency, and the fact that the appointed candidate was already performing the duties of the position are indications that impartiality in staffing is compromised. In our opinion, staffing decisions made in this context may be challenged where staffing files do not contain convincing evidence to prove that the processes were impartial and free from any personal favouritism.

56. In 10 open competition files that we reviewed, we found the screening process for candidates to be very restrictive and the evidence placed in the staffing files did not allow a determination as to why some applications had been eliminated at the screening stage. This approach hinders equal access to employment opportunities for the Canadian public.

57. Many staffing transactions we reviewed were manipulated in order to hire individuals chosen in advance. Our review showed that over 30 staffing transactions were “targeted” and that the individuals appointed following these competitions already held the position in question on a term, acting or contractual basis. Exhibit 6 describes the competitions in more detail.

Exhibit 6: Details of the “targeted” transactions

Source: Audit Branch of the Public Service Commission of Canada.

58. We observed that the Agency’s Engineers Inventory, which is used for both closed and open competitions, is an important staffing tool. Nonetheless, our review revealed that eight of the nine competitions by inventory that we reviewed were “targeted”; in other words, in these eight cases, the individuals appointed following the competitions had been chosen in advance. This practice does not respect the merit principle and staffing values.

59. When selection processes are used to appoint individuals chosen in advance, the staffing values of non-partisanship, fairness and equity are compromised.

60. The Agency does not systematically apply the principle of impartiality in staffing; individuals working in the Agency told us about some hires that did not respect this value. Lack of impartiality can take a number of forms, including tactics to dissuade certain individuals from participating in the staffing process. Exhibit 7 presents two cases where the value of non-partisanship in staffing was compromised.

61. Before staffing a position, the Agency determines the criteria that candidates must meet to be eligible for an appointment. These criteria must be in line with the work description and comply with the PSC Selection and Assessment Standards.

62. Most of the selection processes we reviewed included statements of qualifications that had a direct relationship with the positions to be staffed, they reflected the type of work to be done in accordance with the work description, and they were developed in accordance with PSC Selection and Assessment Standards. However, we were concerned by the fact that for 10 open competitions, the Agency used statements of qualifications that were too restrictive. For these competitions, the statements of qualifications seem to have been developed to ensure the appointment of candidates chosen in advance.

63. The statement of qualifications is the basic tool provided to potential candidates to help them make an informed decision regarding their intent to apply for a particular position. Under the new PSEA, this statement is replaced by the statement of merit criteria. Although the new staffing regime is moving away from the “best qualified” concept, the person who is appointed must still meet the qualifications required of the position. Staffing decisions will still have to be documented to clearly establish merit and to demonstrate that the staffing values have been respected.

Top of Page

Assessment methods and tools are inappropriate

64. In hiring or staffing processes, candidates must be assessed in a fair, equitable and transparent manner, to ensure the impartiality and competency of the public service. Under the previous PSEA, the rating tool and the assessment methods used had to highlight the candidates’ competencies and the results of the examinations they had taken, so that they could be ranked by order of merit.

65. There are various ways of assessing candidates in a staffing process. In particular, interviews, samples of previous work, simulation or situational judgement exercises, written tests, assessment centres and a review of achievements and experience can be used. The combination of assessment methods must produce results that relate to all the qualifications assessed.

66. We noted that the Agency’s managers, to determine the merit of candidates, primarily used interviews and assessment tools consisting of rating scales or point-scored questions, except for a few cases where they used narrative assessments. In our opinion, the use of a rating guide is not itself sufficient to ensure respect for the merit principle. Exhibit 8 presents, for the 59 files that we rated as unsatisfactory, our observations on the assessment methods and rating tools used by managers in their assessment of candidates.

Exhibit 8: Observations on rating tools and assessment methods

Source: Audit Branch of the Public Service Commission of Canada.

67. We are therefore concerned about the quality of the assessment methods and rating tools employed by the Agency. There must be enough clear evidence in the staffing file so that the rationale that led to the final decision can be understood and is in line with what has been advertised. Exhibit 9 presents two cases where the Agency had announced an assessment method but did not follow this method in assessing candidates.

68. During the period covered by our audit, staffing within the public service was based on Selection and Assessment Standards established by the PSC using general and specific criteria that made it possible to establish a minimum standard to be attained in the staffing process. The general criteria supported the merit principle, while the specific criteria applied to particular groups. Since these criteria reflected minimum selection standards, a department may have raised this minimum to attain its hiring objectives, if the entire process was in accordance with the staffing values.

69. We reviewed staffing transactions for more than 15 occupational groups, and concluded that the Agency had met the PSC’s Selection and Assessment Standards in the staffing of positions. Except for three cases where the statements of qualifications included an education requirement that was not in line with the PSC’s Selection and Assessment Standard, the appointments made as a result of these processes confirmed that the individuals appointed met the standard.

70. When a position is advertised and an assessment method is announced for establishing merit, this method must be followed. The Agency must review how it develops rating tools and assesses applications, so that the merit of candidates can be properly determined. Staffing decisions must always be documented to show clearly how candidates were assessed and ultimately selected.

71. Under the new PSEA, the candidate assessment process must continue to be merit-based and respect the staffing values. Decisions resulting from the staffing process must be planned and carefully considered. In order to meet the requirements of the new legislation, managers will have to be able to clearly explain and justify their appointment decisions.

Recommendation 4
The President of the Canadian Space Agency must take action to ensure that every staffing decision respects the merit principle and staffing values. The President must review the Agency’s staffing practices to ensure that they are based on proper assessment methods and rating tools.

The Canadian Space Agency’s Response. In 2006, all Agency managers attended a two-day training course “Staffing for Managers Under 2003: A Values-Based Approach.” It will be supplemented with human resources management training in the near future. Training in values and ethics will continue through the Agency-wide Values and Ethics Program. Moreover, the human resources advisors have successfully completed the validation exam established by the PSC for the new PSEA and will enhance their skills and capacities through continuous training. For 2006-2007, the Agency is working with PSC experts in their review of rating tools and evaluation methods for each process. The discussions on a case-by-case basis will fortify the skill levels of managers and human resources advisors in the development of assessment tools and evaluation methods. From this, the Human Resources Branch will build an index of best practices in scoring and evaluation for distribution to all managers. The monitoring system for staffing activities will ensure that the merit principle and the staffing values are respected.

Top of Page

Staffing roles and responsibilities are ambiguous

72. We expected that staffing roles and responsibilities in the Agency would be clearly defined by means of official subdelegation instruments. We also expected that all the individuals affected by these roles and responsibilities would be officially informed of them. We observed that only human resources advisors and certain professionals in the Human Resources Branch received subdelegated staffing authorities. These authorities were subdelegated on November 23, 2000 in a letter signed by the then President of the Agency. According to the letter, authority to make appointments to the Executive group was not subdelegated. However, we found that, in three cases, the letters of offer concerning acting appointments in the Executive group had been mistakenly signed by non-delegated human resources advisors.

73. We did not find, for the period covered by our audit, any staffing subdelegation instrument giving an overview of the functions, obligations, roles and responsibilities of the Agency’s human resources advisors and managers.

74. In 2005, in order to comply with the new PSEA and the new Staffing Management Accountability Framework, the Agency’s Human Resources Branch prepared a delegation of authorities instrument and an agreement on the sharing of responsibilities in the human resources area. Under the new framework, the subdelegation of authorities instrument must clearly define roles and responsibilities in regard to appointment.

Top of Page

Staffing training is insufficient

75. We expected that the Agency would develop systems and practices to ensure continuous learning in the area of staffing, for both human resources advisors and managers. We also expected that these employees would be well trained to carry out their staffing responsibilities.

76. During the period covered by our audit, managers and human resources advisors had received little training to assist them in their staffing activities. In 2003 and 2004, the Agency held a two-day mandatory training session on staffing in the public service, entitled “Staffing for Managers, Values in Staffing.” According to the documents we reviewed, over 140 individuals, including a number of managers, took part in this training. In April 2003, an info-lunch on recruitment and staffing was offered in order to familiarize participants with staffing terminology and processes.

77. A number of managers we interviewed told us that they had not received enough training on recruitment and staffing, and had little experience with staffing practices in the federal public service. Some of them told us that they relied entirely on the advice they received from human resources advisors. Others told us that they did not feel fully equipped to handle human resources activities. In our opinion, the Agency’s managers involved in staffing activities should have had more in-depth knowledge of the legislation and policies and of the staffing values and principles. This would enable them to develop informed staffing plans and strategies and to make staffing decisions based on the merit principle and on the related staffing values and principles.

78. Some of the individuals we met interviewed described a lack of stability within the human resources advisors group. According to them, this prevents human resources advisors from becoming thoroughly familiar with the needs of the various service lines for which they are responsible. The Agency should be attentive to the service lines’ needs for stability. This aspect is particularly important where managers lack experience in staffing in the public service, as is the case at the Agency.

79. The shortcomings that we noted in regard to the challenge function, the adherence of staffing transactions to staffing values, and the assessment tools and methods used by the Agency led us to the conclusion that the training provided to human resources advisors was inadequate. Representatives of the Human Resources Branch confirmed to us that there was no formal training plan for human resources advisors during the period covered by our audit.

80. In June 2005, the Agency developed a continuous learning program to help its managers and human resources advisors perform their human resources management duties effectively. Furthermore, in anticipation of the coming into force of the new PSEA, the Agency was planning to provide training to its human resources advisors. We support these learning initiatives taken by the Agency. Before subdelegating appointment authorities, the Agency must make sure that these individuals have and maintain the competencies required by the new legislation and have a thorough knowledge of the staffing values.

Recommendation 5
The President of the Canadian Space Agency must clearly define the roles and responsibilities of human resources managers and advisors, and must implement a continuous learning program for them.

The Canadian Space Agency’s Response. A document on the sharing of roles and responsibilities between managers and human resource advisors is presently being prepared. The President recently defined the roles and responsibilities of the Agency sub-delegated managers in the Sub-delegation Instrument for authority in human resources staffing. In addition, a mandatory program of continuous learning for all Agency managers has been put in place, which comprises many human resources management courses. The human resource advisors have successfully completed the validation exam established by the PSC for the new PSEA and will enhance their skills and capacities through continuous training so that they may provide the best advice possible on staffing options, risks and methods. A development and continuous learning program for human resource advisors is being developed which will help them be more strategic and comprehensive in their approach. The program includes courses and coaching, as well as training offered by the Canada School of Public Service. A senior human resource advisor has also been hired to provide coaching to the existing team to help in this regard. This program will be submitted to the PSC for approval.

Top of Page

The PSC has imposed conditions on the delegation of staffing authorities

81. In December 2005, under the new PSEA, the PSC established a new Appointment Delegation and Accountability Instrument with the President of the Agency. Under this new agreement, the PSC imposed specific conditions on the Agency in regard to appointments.

82. Until the PSC is satisfied that an appropriate appointment system is in place, the Agency must respect these specific conditions, which are linked with the new delegation system. These conditions will be reviewe