Good afternoon, Madam Chair.
Thank you for inviting us to appear before your committee to discuss the Treasury Board Secretariat’s role in providing guidance and oversight to institutions on the management of large IT projects.
Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Corinne Charette. I’m the Chief Information Officer of the Government of Canada. As you know, I am responsible for setting direction and policies and standards for Information Technology and Information Management as well as Security, Privacy and Access to Information in the government. I’ve been on the job since last May. I bring to the table over 30 years of experience in the private and public sectors.
My role includes supporting the government in its commitment to continue improving public service management and to ensure value for money for taxpayers.
With me today is Val Wutti, the executive director of the IT project review and oversight division at the Treasury Board Secretariat.
In November 2006, the Auditor General examined the management of large IT projects and issued her recommendations on the overall management of these projects. Since then, I'm pleased to say that we have acted on those recommendations. We have implemented a series of measures that strengthen our challenge and oversight functions to ensure that departments' IT projects succeed.
Before going into detail, let's discuss what constitutes an IT project. It's an important point. There are essentially two types. First, there is the kind that deals with basic infrastructure such as data centres or telecommunications networks that computer systems rely upon. Infrastructure projects usually involve the purchasing of the equipment, computers, software, other devices, and telecommunications facilities and services.
The second type of IT project is at least as complex as the first. In this type, IT is used to create a system that is going to be actively in use by any department or agency in support of their program. These projects typically change business processes or implement new legislative requirements in order to improve delivery of government programs. They support programs such as processing tax returns, issuing employment insurance cheques, protecting our borders, etc. These are application systems in support of government programs.
The Auditor General focused on this latter type of project in the 2006 report.
The Secretariat has similarly focussed on strengthening the management of these large IT projects. We are talking mainly about this type of project.
We have published a new Policy on the Management of Projects in 2007 and are progressively implementing it. We have also developed tools and guidance documents which the community is already using. These tools will help departments improve the management of their projects. The government is a very large organization with accountability for program delivery resting with deputy ministers.
The Treasury Board Policy on the Management of Projects reinforces deputy ministers’ responsibility for monitoring adherence to this policy within their organization and taking action when compliance issues arise. In the case of IT projects, each department has a delegated project authority and is only required to go to Treasury Board to seek approval for projects that are higher than that authority.
When the rollout of the new policy on the management of projects is complete in April 2011, we expect that Treasury Board ministers will see fewer projects requiring their approval. There are two reasons for this. Currently, most delegated project authorities are based on the dollar value of the project. We are moving to an approach that considers the department’s capacity to manage projects and the risk and complexity of a proposed project. Only projects that are riskier and more complex than the department’s capacity to manage them or projects that require amendments to what had previously been approved will require Treasury Board approval.
We are also challenging departments to reduce the size of their projects to help reduce the risk. Instead of having one large project that takes many years to complete, we are encouraging departments to break them up into fewer, smaller projects that deliver value for the investment faster. This will result in smaller, lower-risk projects that are more likely to be successful. This approach would also help departments make better informed decisions on the implementation of the overall project based on outcomes to date. They would also allow deputies to stop investing further if the outcomes are not satisfactory. Clearly, we are steering departments away from an all-or-nothing approach to IT projects.
Once a department has received Treasury Board approval, the secretariat expects that departments will apply the appropriate project management and oversight processes, as prescribed by the policy and related instruments. This is not to suggest that TBS takes a hands-off approach. In fact, the secretariat continues to monitor higher-risk, more complex IT projects. We have taken additional steps to guide organizations and to ensure, or contribute to, the success of their IT projects.
In particular, we have improved templates and guidance and expectations for preparing business cases and for preparing project charters and management plans. We have created an executive dashboard that highlights the five key performance indicators of a project: cost, schedule, risk, scope, and issues.
Last, we have established an independent review program to help project executives gain useful insights at key points or gates in their projects. This will allow them to make appropriate course corrections, including terminating projects if they no longer meet the expected outcomes.
The use of these products is not mandatory, but they guide deputy heads in managing the implementation and risks of their projects, within the spirit of Public Service renewal, by reducing the “web of rules”, by providing appropriate guidance and tools and by establishing clear accountabilities on management practices.
Deputy heads are accountable for ensuring that IT projects contribute to program outcomes and support the government’s objectives.
The Treasury Board continues to work closely with departments by providing the advice they need to make sound management decisions. Departments are aware of available IT project management guidance and tools. This is reinforced regularly through our meetings with the community of CIOs. Their adoption remains a departmental responsibility and decision. However, we are very pleased to see that even though the policy will be fully deployed in April 2011, many departments have anticipated it and have already taken up a lot of these practices.
In closing, in cases of higher-risk, more complex IT projects, the secretariat closely monitors progress and performance and continues to work with departments in optimizing ultimate project outcomes.
Madam Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. I would be very pleased to answer any questions.