Public Accounts Committee on April 20th, 2023

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I had asked some questions earlier about outputs versus outcomes. I want to bring the Auditor General in on it.

A few minutes have elapsed since my previous rounds, but I was referencing you a few times, Madam Auditor General. At a broad level, do you think the government has the evidence to support the claim they're making when they say that this is making a difference for women and girls around the world?

[Karen Hogan]

I think at a broad level that's exactly what we said in the report. It's that they couldn't show us at a broad level.

I do acknowledge that, at a project level, they can track. I do think we should acknowledge that. For the example I gave of building washrooms and putting washrooms and handwashing stations in schools, that is of value to the students in that school. However, when the goal is to increase attendance at school, that's what you should also measure. There is some value, but the ultimate goal is really the one that needs to be measured.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I think that's an important point. If you're spending large amounts of money and governments are saying something was done with that money, and it seems to, in particular circumstances, be making someone's life better, then that is important in a certain sense, but the larger point is this: Are we getting value for money and having the broadest, greatest impact we can? Are we tracking to make sure the measures are working to achieve the outcomes we've established we want to have?

Also, for the Auditor General, the government says that they have outcome-based data, but they're just not consistent in the indicators they're using. Did you see outcome-based data at the project level, or is your impression that they don't have that data at the project level?

[Karen Hogan]

I would say that at times we did see outcome-based data. My bathroom project is one for which we wouldn't have. Ultimately, when you're spending $3.5 billion, accounting for it in million-dollar tranches is difficult. You need to have a global picture to even decide whether or not you should reallocate funds to a certain area of the world.

That information's needed in order to have well-informed decision-making about investments.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

In terms of the existence of outcome-based data at the local level, you said there were cases in which it was there. It sounds as though the implication is that there were also cases in which there was not outcome-based data. Of the 50 projects you looked at, in how many was there identifiable outcome-based data at the local level?

I'm happy for others from your office to chime in.

[Karen Hogan]

I'm going to have to turn to someone else to see if they have that level of detail, or we will have to get back to you.

[Susan Robertson, Director, Office of the Auditor General]

We'd have to get back to you on that.

We can say that around half of the projects were reporting against the corporate indicators. As the department's been saying, all of the projects are required to do logic models and identify ultimate outcomes. As has also been pointed out, because we were fairly early on in the projects' implementation, many of them hadn't completed their work. It wasn't time to report on outcomes.

We didn't see serious problems with the way those tools that were being implemented at the project level were created. Where we were seeing the disconnect was that what the projects were trying to do wasn't translating into corporate indicators.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Right.

If there aren't local outcomes in about half of the cases, then I think the best the government can say is that some of the projects are doing some good, and for some of the projects we don't know. I would appreciate a written follow-up if there are things you haven't had a chance to say, certainly with a breakdown showing the projects for which outcome-based data was available in some form and the projects for which it was not.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Are you able to provide that?

[Karen Hogan]

We'll look into it. If we don't have anything further to add, then we'll let you know either way.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That would be appreciated. Thank you.

Ms. Yip, you have the floor for four minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Mr. MacLennan, in your opening statement you talked about strengthening your corporate tools and updating governance mechanisms. Could you elaborate more on that, especially on the governance?

[Christopher MacLennan]

Sure. Why don't I begin at the top? I should indicate to the committee that I've worked in this space and at the former CIDA for many years. I came back to the department—nominated as the deputy minister—in January 2021 with a deep knowledge. Following the amalgamation of the department, one of my immediate observations was that we really did require a senior table that looked at development operations—not policy but operations. That is first and foremost the biggest tool that we've put in place to manage governance. It's not quite a year old yet. We're still running it.

I can assure the committee that the findings of the Auditor General's report have caused quite a significant reflection on even how much more important this committee is than we thought previously. The question of results—I've heard the members around the table—clearly is something that all members hold close and expect the department to deliver on. I expect that from myself, and I expect that from the committee and from the department as well.

The team is up to the challenge of doing this. I do believe, actually, that the teams themselves are the ones that hold most closely the importance of delivering actual results. The teams that are in place are fully capable of doing the job. They want to see results more than anybody else does, to be perfectly frank. They're the ones on the ground working directly with partners to do this.

Maybe I can turn to Patricia, who's going to be leading the....

[Patricia Peña]

As an example, the deputy mentioned that I'll be following up on the action items for the recommendations in this report. I'll be leading a team that looks at those, and we'll be tracking progress. When we reach particular milestones, we will bring that to this international assistance operations committee so that the committee is apprised, so that we can get feedback and so that we can seek direction and then be able to do everything we've committed to do.

Thank you.

[Jean Yip, Liberal, Scarborough—Agincourt, ON]

Did the pandemic hinder your programs and impact outputs and outcomes?

[Christopher MacLennan]

Yes, obviously the pandemic had a significant impact, and quite a varied impact, depending on what part of the world you're talking about. In some parts of the world, it required us to slow down projects, as teams on the ground were forced to go off-line. They went through the exact same experience that we went through. It was figuring out how to do this online. How do you monitor and evaluate the work you're supporting and funding? It did lead to a slowdown.

In some cases, we needed to extend the projects for time lost during COVID to allow them to catch up on the results they were trying to accomplish. In other circumstances, within a project that was, for example, largely health or education—two really good examples—we worked with the partners to adjust what they were doing to respond more clearly to the challenges that COVID was causing. That's a really good example. In some of our education programs, we allowed and worked with partners to figure out ways to support online learning for students in various developing countries where we were doing those types of projects.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

That is the time.

Thank you.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have only two minutes, I'm sorry.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. MacLennan, I have three requests. First, I would like to know how funds are allocated among the various countries. Can that information be submitted to the committee?

[Christopher MacLennan]

Absolutely.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Great.

Second, when all the projects have been provided to the Auditor General, can we be informed, so we can note in our report that all the information requested was found, compiled and sent?

Third, you have one minute to tell us about the concrete action plan and the measures to be taken to make sure that all efforts are made, starting now, and that things are back on track when it comes to gender equality. When we meet again, things will have to have been resolved.

[Christopher MacLennan]

I can assure you that this is central to everything we are going to do to give specific responses to the recommendations, which is only a start. We are going to continue our momentum in this matter and completely overhaul the way we show Canadians everything we are doing in relation to development.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Even though we may invite you back to the committee, I suggest that you let us know what you have done, because we need to be reassured. I said at the outset that I was very concerned, but I know there will soon be results.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Williamson]

Thank you.

Mr. Desjarlais, you have the floor for two minutes now as well.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to turn directly to some comments that were made earlier in the last round of questions in regard to the deadline of 2016. Mr. McCauley was able to have you admit to a deadline in terms of some of the major commitments for change. You mentioned, as well, that AI and some other aspects of technology would also be implemented. I believe you provided evidence to suggest why it would be so long.

In terms of some of that work that will be undertaken for the robustness of this new system, can you provide details as to what this system is in terms of its difference from the existing one?

[Patricia Peña]

Certainly. To clarify, on the database we've committed to implementing, we're working on that immediately to make sure that we can find all the documents and they can be tracked. That's our interim solution.

In terms of our longer-term approach, immediately, we've already started working on essentially taking all of these disparate legacy systems that don't talk to one another, and we're going to be building a new way of managing grants and contributions. On one hand, it's an IM/IT solution, so it's a technological solution, but it's really looking at how we operate.

It's going to look at how we manage data—so that's data collection—but then also the analytics around that. It's going to link to our finances. Currently, we don't have a way to get the systems to speak to one another. It's then going to track our results. It's taking bits of information and bits of ways to work that we're doing in a variety of different ways and that we can now cobble together. However, as the report has shown, it takes us time and it's not straightforward.

Very importantly, we are working very closely with our partners, including our Canadian partners. They are involved with us in this process to make sure that it's a system that works not just for us, as Global Affairs Canada and as the Government of Canada, but also for them, because they are the front line in delivering these projects on our behalf.