Government Operations Committee on Oct. 20th, 2009

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Do you want to respond to that, briefly?

[Corinne Charette]

We are aware of the size of the investments, but a distinction also has to be made between the start-up costs and regular operating costs. At present we have this service and we are constantly working to reduce costs and find better solutions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

For the betterment of our understanding--and I was with public accounts as well--if we could have a flow chart that shows what happens when a department suggests...because these are large IT projects, and we're going to be speaking with Public Works. Say GENS is coming on. What is the process they follow? We as MPs have to look after the public purse, and so do you. How do we have the satisfaction of knowing that due diligence has taken place? It would help if you just give us that “how the bouncing ball goes”.

Okay? Thank you.

With that, we move over to Monsieur Gourde for huit minutes, s'il vous plaît.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for your testimony, ladies. It will be very helpful to us.

I have one little question for Ms. Charette. What measures has Treasury Board Secretariat taken to improve the management of large information technology projects and ensure better returns?

[Corinne Charette]

Madam Chair, the question is what measures have been taken by Treasury Board to ensure sound management of projects and ensure better returns...

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

And improve the management.

[Corinne Charette]

As I said, our strategy consists mainly of this: we have improved or updated our project management policy so that it better reflects what are called best management practices for project management. This is based on various strategies, including preliminary studies, but mainly on techniques like project charters, where results are very clearly described, the scope of the project is clearly defined, the role of the sponsor and business representatives from various parts of the country are clearly depicted, and the ultimate objectives are described and measured. So there is that, for one thing. Another is that there is also the entire independent project review program, which is very much encouraged.

So in any project there is the project team that works closely with its business sector. Best practices refer to the fact that independent reviews, which are sometimes done every six months, sometimes yearly, by experienced outside consultants who may come from the outside and take an independent look and offer the project team objective feedback, both for the sponsor and for the team members, are extremely beneficial. We have used that technique successfully several times recently, and we have also put in place a whole program with the community to encourage and facilitate the adoption of this technique.

One thing we have is a training program for people who want to be independent project reviewers. We have a manual that has helped reviewers and teams to prepare better. We also have a procurement tool that is used to establish a list of experienced, accredited reviewers who have met the criteria.

So there is a whole set of tools and monitoring methods. As well, we also work closely with the community and we are often invited to sit on project review advisory committees where we regularly take part in determining status and make recommendations as necessary. We are also in frequent contact with the departments, and we encourage them in various ways to share their experience, and so on.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

I would like you to tell me about the tools that have been created. Do you have evidence that these tools produce good results?

[Corinne Charette]

Absolutely. For the independent review program, there was an important project in the waste water management program.

I am going to let Ms. Wutti explain that case, because she is very familiar with it.

[Valerie Wutti, Executive Director, Information Technology (IT) Project Review and Oversight, Chief Information Officer Branch, Treasury Board Secretariat]

We have a project in Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the national land and water information system, and they were using tools like the executive dashboard, independent reviews. These tools helped them have the types of insights they needed at the executive level so they were able to make course corrections and successfully conclude that project last spring.

We see more adoption of those tools. I've been working with Natural Resources Canada, and they're starting to adopt these tools. We're seeing it going into Citizenship and Immigration. Departments are seeing the benefit of these tools. They are very receptive to using them and appreciative of the benefit they bring to the projects.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

How do you decide what projects will get follow-up?

[Corinne Charette]

For example, when a department presents a submission to Treasury Board, in particular to get approval for a project that exceeds the limit allocated to its authorities, we can review the submission, and if we think the project involves somewhat higher-risk elements, we can decide to put it on our follow-up dashboard and get more involved. In other cases, the departments come to us and ask us for help. In our experience, the agencies and departments are all very motivated when it comes to making sure their programs are successful. They seek help when they can get it, and we are very happy to work with them. We monitor the biggest projects in the community, which is not a huge one, closely. We are aware of developments and we are able to identify the risk level.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

How do you monitor these projects?

[Corinne Charette]

Mainly by attending meetings of what is called, in English, a steering committee or advisory committee, to which we are periodically invited, as managers. The project managers do regular follow-up. If necessary, we request documents or additional support. If we think there is a risk of getting off course, we ourselves strongly recommend an independent review so that the agency or department, working with a reviewer or independent team of reviewers, can really focus on the problems identified and then take action.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

We now go to Mr. Thibeault for eight minutes.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you both for being here today. It's a very complex issue to try to wrap your head around, and you're helping me understand, as well as I'm sure many of my colleagues around the table.

I want to go back to what Madame Bourgeois was asking. Before we get to the bouncing ball, as the chair mentioned earlier, my questions relate to this. How do you make your decisions before we get to that stage? Are there discussions with the industry on IT before you even get to that bouncing ball stage?

[Corinne Charette]

Madam Chair, that's a very good question. Absolutely, we do discuss with industry through a number of forums, and independent of a specific project or any procurement activity, we are in touch with the industry on our general orientations, on their opinions on new technologies, and so on and so forth.

When it comes to specific initiatives, there is quite a prescribed process on which my colleagues from Public Works will go into greater detail later on, but there are formal consultation steps with industry and so on.

Yes, industry is consulted, as are our colleagues in government departments and so on.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Okay. So are there studies or research, then, that the Treasury Board has done to justify a trend to a more bundled contract in various sectors, specifically in IT, for example?

[Corinne Charette]

I'm sorry, just to be clear, are you saying towards a more bundled...?

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Yes, there's a trend to see that we're going toward more bundled contracts. Are there studies or research that would indicate why Treasury Board would want to go one way or the other?

[Corinne Charette]

Well, certainly the Auditor General's recommendations in 2006 were that we should move towards smaller projects, and therefore smaller contracts by association. Other industry research from the Standish Group and many other project management advisory boards certainly stresses that smaller projects have a much higher likelihood of success than big, monolithic projects. So yes, I would say that, and my experience in the private sector, as well as, I'd say, quite a bit of experience, indicates that smaller is better. It's problem decomposition: try to achieve smaller, more regular, and more repeatable results.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Then help me understand. We have the Auditor General's report saying that smaller is better, and then we're looking at going into things like GENS, which is a large IT project. Are those two conflicting, or should we be looking at something else? Maybe you can help me understand the whole process.

[Corinne Charette]

I won't pre-empt my colleagues from Public Works and Government Services Canada, but GENS, as I understand it, is not yet a project. It is currently being discussed as a supply arrangement for the provision of services and facilities to a number of government departments in the area of telecommunications.

Once procurement is finished, the next logical step is a series of projects. Government departments rely on telecommunication services of many types. A lot of government departments are using telecommunication facilities and services, some of which are right at the end of their technology life. They've been around for a long time, so there is a high likelihood that there are newer, more efficient, and probably more cost-effective solutions. Once a procurement arrangement is in place, departments have to step forward and initiate projects that will move them from what they are using today to the next generation.

GENS procurement may lead to much more than one contract. In fact, it might lead to a number of projects, depending on how many government departments and agencies participate. Right now, there are 124 separate networks across government. Many will move toward replacement, because their business cases indicate that it's more cost-effective to move and incur the migration cost. This way they benefit from improved technology and reduced operating costs going forward. Any IM/IT decision for investment is going to look at these factors.

[Glenn Thibeault, NDP, Sudbury, ON]

Great.

The Auditor General's report talks about how we need a clear and concise business plan relating to these initiatives. Has that been done for GENS on a project basis? Do we have business plans in place for GENS?