Audit of Governance and Controls for Reliable Reporting of Civilian Personnel Data

 

September 2012

5000-8 (CRS)

Reviewed by CRS in accordance with the Access to Information Act (AIA). Information UNCLASSIFIED.

 

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADM(HR-Civ)

Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Civilian)

ADM(HR-Mil)

Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Military)

ADM(IM)

Assistant Deputy Minister (Information Management)

BPO

Business Process Owner

CF

Canadian Forces

CRS

Chief Review Services

DAOD

Defence Administrative Order and Directive

DCCP

Director Corporate Compensation Programmes

DCEP

Director Civilian Employment Policies

DCSHRP

Director Civilian Strategic Human Resources Planning

DHRIM

Director Human Resources Information Management

DIHRS

Defence Integrated Human Resource System

DND

Department of National Defence

DRMIS

Defence Resource Management Information System

DSPA

Director of Strategic Planning and Accountability

FTE

Full-time Equivalent

FY

Fiscal Year

HR

Human Resources

HRA

Human Resource Assistant

HRBM

Human Resource Business Manager

HRBTO

Human Resources Business Transformation Office

HRMS

Human Resource Management System

HRO

Human Resource Officer

HRP

Human Resource Planner

HRRS

Human Resources Reporting System

GC

Government of Canada

ID

Identification

IM/IT

Information Management/Information Technology

IT

Information Technology

L1

Level One

O&E

Organization and Establishment

OLA

Operational-level Agreement

RPP

Reports on Plans and Priorities

SSI

Shared Systems Initiative

TBS

Treasury Board Secretariat

UPK

User Productivity Kit

VCDS

Vice Chief of the Defence Staff

Results in Brief

Overall Assessment

The governance structure, HRMS 8.9 capabilities, standardized business processes and controls in place at the time of the audit were not adequate to ensure accurate, complete, and timely reporting of civilian population, FTE and position data.

There was, however, evidence that ADM(HR-Civ) is continuing to implement capabilities that were not delivered or activated within HRMS 8.9 and working to create an organizational structure that supports the achievement of the organization’s objectives.

Reliable civilian human resources (HR) information is essential for effective decision making within the Department of National Defence (DND). Following the implementation of an upgraded Human Resource Management System (HRMS) in 2010, the Assistant Deputy Minister (Human Resources – Civilian) (ADM(HR-Civ)) would have been required to redefine its business processes around the upgraded features and functions delivered in HRMS 8.9.

The objective of the audit was to assess whether governance and control processes are adequate to ensure accurate, complete, and timely reporting of civilian population, full-time equivalent (FTE), and position data.

The audit has found that although progress was being made, insufficient governance and controls were in place at the time of the audit to ensure the objective was met.

Governance. Accountabilities, authorities, roles and responsibilities within ADM(HR‑Civ) have not been adequately aligned to ensure that technological and process changes serve to maintain the integrity of population, FTE, and position data following HRMS implementation.

It is recommended that ADM(HR-Civ) align accountabilities with corporate objectives, policies and directives to ensure that initiatives to implement technological capability, business processes and controls produce reliable civilian HR data.

Current System Capability, Controls and Business Processes. ADM(HR-Civ) staff maintain civilian personnel data to support the Department's various requests despite insufficient HRMS 8.9 capability and business processes. Inadequate access controls for data input, in addition to the absence of standardized business processes, an adequate reporting module and formal training for key input and reporting activities, increase risk to the integrity of civilian personnel data.

It is recommended that ADM(HR-Civ) ensure that a single transformation authority substantiates process and/or capability implementation(s) with agreed-upon processes for the prioritization and categorization of change initiatives.

It is also recommended that ADM(HR-Civ) implement more detailed system role abilities, in line with positional duties and authority. In cases where detailed controls are not available at the system level, ADM(HR-Civ) should integrate business processes and monitoring in addition to system roles to ensure segregation of duties.

General Conclusion. Overall, the governance structure could be improved by streamlining and communicating accountabilities and authorities in order to implement change management objectives. In the absence of certain required capabilities within HRMS 8.9, standardized business processes, tools and controls, working-level staff within ADM(HR-Civ) were very adaptive in trying to manage and report population, FTE, and position data. The audit recommendations should assist management in working towards creating an organizational structure, performing horizontal business process reviews, and forming working relationships that would be more conducive to achieving their Information Management/Information Technology (IM/IT) objectives.

Note: For a more detailed list of Chief Review Services (CRS) recommendations and management response, please refer to Annex A—Management Action Plan.

Introduction

Background

The CRS 2011/12 Risk-based Audit Plan identified the need for an audit to assess the quality, accuracy and validity of DND civilian personnel data, and determine if guidelines and IM/IT tools are adequate to enable managers to integrate HR and business planning in decision making.

Reliable civilian HR information is essential for effective decision making from the most senior levels to the operational levels within the Department. Internal DND policy1 and the ADM(HR-Civ) mandate2 describe accountability and authority for establishing an end-to-end process for managing civilian HR, making ADM(HR-Civ) responsible to ensure the reliability of HR data.

Many business processes and stakeholders support this mandate, the subsequent generation of this data and the integration of a HRMS. The HRMS, as the HR system of record in DND, was delivered through a Defence Integrated Human Resource System (DIHRS) Information Technology (IT) capital project which was initiated in November 1996 and concluded in September 2010. The overall objective of the DIHRS project was to replace various legacy HR systems by delivering a single HRMS that could be used by all civilian and military personnel to readily access HR information. Having a single HRMS was also in accordance with the Government of Canada (GC) Shared Systems Initiative (SSI).3 In 2010, HRMS 8.9, the version supported by the GC cluster group, was implemented in DND, enabling the Department to take advantage of the version support of the GC cluster group.

The 2010 DIHRS Completion Report notes that ADM(HR-Civ) would be required to redefine its business processes around the features and functions delivered in HRMS 8.9. Therefore, a re-alignment of HR business processes needed to take place to ensure the reliability of civilian personnel data in HRMS for organizational and departmental decisions involving civilian HR.

Objective

The objective of the audit was to assess whether governance and control processes are adequate to ensure accurate, complete, and timely reporting of civilian population, FTE and position data.

The criteria used to conduct the audit can be found in Annex B.

Scope

The audit scope included an assessment of the governance structure and systems in place that directly impact the input and reporting of population, FTE, and position data for FY 2010/11 and FY 2011/12, related to roles, responsibilities, processes and access controls. The audit also covered the National Capital Region and Ontario Region service centers.

Methodology

  • Reviewed relevant GC and DND policies, directives and initiatives related to HR management.
  • Conducted interviews and examined strategic and business process documents, flowcharts and applicable training manuals to assess governance and input and output control processes.
  • Tested user roles and permissions within HRMS 8.9 against delegated authorities for input controls, as well as report control procedures for the Human Resources Reporting System (HRRS4).

The audit team interviewed the following stakeholders:

  • working-level staff for the processes examined;
  • directors and managers, within ADM(HR-Civ), responsible for ensuring that adequate policies, directives, tools, and training exist and are in place;
  • HR business managers (HRBM) and HR planner clients from the Canadian Army, Royal Canadian Navy and the Royal Canadian Air Force environments; and
  • the HRMS system support organization – Director Human Resource Information Management (DHRIM).

Statement of Conformance

The audit findings and conclusions contained in this report are based on sufficient and appropriate audit evidence gathered in accordance with procedures that meet the Institute of Internal Auditors’ International Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing. The audit thus conforms with the Internal Auditing Standards for the Government of Canada, as supported by the results of the quality assurance and improvement program. The opinions expressed in this report are based on conditions as they existed at the time of the audit, and apply only to the entity examined.

Findings and Recommendations

Governance

Since DIHRS implementation, an appropriate governance structure has not been adequately aligned to accountabilities, authorities, roles and responsibilities, within ADM(HR-Civ), to ensure that technological and process changes maintained the integrity of population, FTE, and position data.

ADM(HR-Civ) Strategy and Stakeholder Communication

Organizational objectives were examined to determine the alignment of ADM(HR-Civ) HR information management priorities as well as their effective communication. This analysis considered DND Reports on Plans and Priorities (RPP), published mission/vision statements, and other available strategic documents.

Strategic priorities for system and process modernization did not effectively flow through to internal civilian HR strategic documents. FY 2010/11 and FY 2011/12 DND RPPs5 reported that key departmental objectives included simplifying HR business processes and investing in automated solutions for management efficiency. Although no such objectives are mentioned in the ADM(HR-Civ) mission and vision, a modernization strategy is referenced in a draft strategic document.6 It should be noted that during the audit, ADM(HR-Civ) underwent an organizational change in FY 2011/12.7 Although official organization change notification has been approved, responsibilities, accountabilities and authorities had not been published prior to the end of this audit.

Although roles and responsibilities for regional service centres and corporate managers are stated, authority for shared responsibilities is not always clear. Corporate organizations within ADM(HR-Civ) have responsibility for providing functional policies, tools and guidance to regional HR service providers. It would be expected that staffing business process owners (BPOs8) develop specific standards for staffing, in conjunction with service centres, to ensure a high level of standardization for quality assurance and compliance. Instead, documents tested during the audit identified that HR service providers in one regional service centre have created a staffing process flow for HRMS 8.9 and a document requirements checklist. While this is a good initiative, it stems from lack of central direction. Data integrity is at risk if all six regional service centres are permitted to design their individual business processes and quality assurance checklists.

This lack of cohesive communication between corporate and service sections impacts the ability to implement and monitor standard processes and training across the Department to ensure an efficient and effective workflow for decision making and input of data into HRMS.

Post-DIHRS Implementation Governance

From a governance perspective, the organizational and committee structure in place to achieve IM/IT objectives did not provide sufficient accountability and authority (change management) structure to complete business transformation objectives, post-DIHRS implementation. The main organizations and committees in place during FY2010/11 to complete transformation objectives were as follows:

  • the Human Resource Business Transformation Office (HRBTO), which was responsible for identifying and articulating civilian HR business requirements and ensuring appropriate business transformation occurs;
  • the IM/IT steering committee, co-chaired by the HRBTO9 and DIHRS project manager at the time, which was defined as “the vehicle through which all members can participate in the continued evolution of the IM/IT in ADM(HR‑Civ) through the identification and prioritization of activities related to the system…”10; and
  • the BPO Working Group, chaired by HRBTO, through which all members can participate in the continued evolution of HR services, information management and IT across the ADM(HR-Civ) organization, at a staff level.11

Although the apparent structure of the HRBTO, the IM/IT steering committee and BPO working groups seem complementary, the HRBTO did not have authority to make major decisions on process, people, and technological changes as committees instructed members to report to their respective chain of command to seek a resolution to an issue or approval and implementation of recommendations. Decisions to address committee recommendations which impacted multiple areas of responsibility were made by each responsible Director General, thus, diluting the accountability for implementation successes/failures.

Conclusion

Ineffective communication of strategic priorities for system and process modernization and unclear accountabilities and responsibilities within organization and committee structures led to inadequate processes and controls to maintain the integrity of the input and subsequent output of civilian personnel data.

Recommendation

1. ADM(HR-Civ) should align accountabilities with corporate objectives, policies and directives to ensure that initiatives to implement technological capability, business processes and controls produce reliable civilian HR data.

OPI: ADM(HR-Civ)

Current System Capability, Controls and Business Processes

ADM(HR-Civ) staff maintain civilian personnel data to support the Department's various requests despite insufficient HRMS 8.9 capability and business processes. Inadequate access controls for data input, in addition to the absence of standardized business processes, an adequate reporting module and formal training for key input and reporting activities, increase risk to the integrity of civilian personnel data.

Expectation for Change Initiatives

Not all components of HRMS 8.9 have been implemented. A CRS audit reported that “The system capability delivered in some modules of the GC cluster group12 version of the HRMS 8.9 did not fully satisfy DND’s business needs, without configuration, modification and/or customization.”13

The focus of the HRMS 8.9 upgrade was mostly on technological change and not necessarily on business process changes necessary to integrate with the technology. Changes and updates to HRMS and HRRS to perform ADM(HR-Civ) responsibilities occurred after DIHRS implementation. There was, however, no evidence of a methodology for prioritization of change initiatives. Without formal prioritization of change initiatives that considers areas such as processes, technology, training and organization of resources, all risks related to data integrity may not be considered or mitigated.

Currently, ADM(HR-Civ) is in the process of implementing HRMS capabilities that were not delivered or not activated within the system, but even with the responsibilities for civilian HR data conferred upon ADM(HR-Civ), the organization must still work within the governance frameworks established within the Department. Specifically ADM(HR‑Civ) must rely on Assistant Deputy Minister (Information Management) (ADM(IM)) as the steward of HRMS and who, due to resource constraints, prioritize their support of this system with multiple other information systems throughout the Department.

Processes and Functions Related to Data Input

Nationally standardized processes related to staffing and position management requests at service centres were not evident. ADM(HR-Civ) did not provide consistent, DND‑specific data input tools or guidance to clients in order to assist them in staffing,14 compensation,15 and establishment16/position management17 requests.

Good Practices

The UPK was generally well received as a learning tool on input of information into the system.

HR service providers also had limited standardized processes, tools and training available to them to perform their operational duties, with the exception of the User Productivity Kit (UPK) and on-the-job training. Although not always updated to reflect system changes, the UPK reference tool shows users how to perform tasks within HRMS 8.9 modules and contained certain standardized operation process flows and checklists. If internal processes and tools are not standardized across service centres, inefficiencies and inconsistencies in decision making and data input may arise, resulting in varying levels of processing times and data fidelity.

Access Controls

Assigned system access permissions of individuals were tested against their respective delegated authorities and were identified as inadequate because there was no distinction between roles for an individual with delegated authority to perform position management functions, versus an individual that was not delegated this authority. HRAs and O&E personnel are not delegated classification officers, but do have access permissions for the creation, change or inactivation of a position in HRMS. HRAs assist classification HR officers, within ADM(HR-Civ), in achieving their delegated responsibilities. Although, one responsibility of O&E personnel18 is to assist organizations in managing the civilian establishment, without a direct reporting relationship, ADM(HR-Civ), has limited control and visibility over O&E personnel. ADM(HR-Civ) has not formally provided HRAs and O&E personnel with business processes or training related to these permissions for establishment changes. Under the current construct for example, HRAs and O&E personnel could change reporting relationships that would impact the classification of substantive positions within a given section. ADM(HR-Civ) does not have control over O&E personnel establishment transactions nor is there an adequate process to monitor these transactions.

A role-ability matrix19 was in developmental stages at the conclusion of this audit, which is intended to create more robust permission roles and otherwise fix permission deficiencies. Without formal establishment processes, more detailed access permissions and related formal training, the accuracy of position data is at risk.

Processes and Functions Related to Reporting Data

Without the delivery of a reporting module, limited automated reporting capability exists within HRMS 8.9. To mitigate this deficiency, a tool called HRRS was implemented. HRMS and HRRS are managed by DHRIM within ADM(IM). Some reporting is also performed outside of HRRS in other local databases or spreadsheets for operational needs.

HRRS offers the ability to output HRMS data in the form of extracts. These extracts provide a wide array of fields for individuals to access them through DHRIM. The risk with this process is that once the extracts are obtained by clients, controls do not exist to ensure that reporting is done correctly, or with a level of expertise to ensure accuracy and completeness of data. For example, clients have to create table relationships in a database application, and run queries on that information. Although some examples of how to perform such queries have been developed by DHRIM, this does not prevent users from generating inaccurate information.

Director Civilian Strategic Human Resources Planning20 (DCSHRP) has some employees with expertise in using relational databases such as MS Access. Although not part of their mandate, DCSHRP has created relational databases and reports to support the strategic civilian HR activities that HRBMs perform for organizations. DCSHRP is developing processes and procedures for creating these databases and reports, which are therefore, not yet formally documented. As the expertise for such report generation is held with just a few individuals, documented processes and procedures are important for business continuity.

As well, information provided at the conclusion of the audit showed evidence of DCSHRP sending HRBMs MS Access files with additional features that could potentially mitigate some of the risks involved in using data extracts, but this still exists outside of HRMS 8.9.

An inability to monitor data that is input into HRMS is one of the operational risks caused by insufficient reporting capabilities. Currently, service centres are generating monthly reports from HRMS, and spreadsheets that detect completeness and certain accuracy errors related to staffing process codes, employment classification, and duplicates (as well as other areas not related to population, FTE and position data). Though this is a good practice, the monitoring function does not include sign-offs for when errors were corrected, is not identifying trends in errors, and cannot solely identify all issues related to the accuracy and completeness of data. During FY 2012/13, the monitoring function began to identify trends in errors, though its effectiveness was not assessed.

Conclusion

Incomplete business transformation delivered insufficient data input and report production capabilities. Capabilities and processes were being implemented to address these deficiencies without prioritization of change initiatives, making it difficult to assess whether sufficient consideration was given to mitigating risks to data integrity.

Non-standardized processes, functions, tools and training related to data input across the service centres examined, access permissions within HRMS exceeding individuals’ roles and responsibilities, and the absence of a reporting module in HRMS, led to deficiencies in the ability to monitor and detect issues from data input, and to produce reliable reports related to population, FTE and position data from information available in the system.

Recommendations

2. ADM(HR-Civ) ensures that a single transformation authority substantiates process and/or capability implementation(s) with agreed upon processes for the prioritization and categorization of change initiatives.

OPI: ADM(HR-Civ)

3. ADM(HR-Civ) implements more detailed system role abilities, in line with positional duties and authority. In cases where detailed controls are not available at the system level, ADM(HR-Civ) should integrate business processes and monitoring in addition to system roles to ensure segregation of duties.

OPI: ADM(HR-Civ)

General Conclusion

Working-level staff within ADM(HR-Civ) were very adaptive in trying to perform their day-to-day activities in the absence of some required capabilities within HRMS and standardized business processes and tools. Management was also working towards reshaping an organizational structure, performing horizontal business process reviews, and forming working relationships that would be more conducive to achieving their IM/IT objectives.

Thus, while much work was being done to adapt to a relatively new system, the governance structure and mechanisms could be further improved by communicating and streamlining accountabilities and authorities in order to implement change management objectives. As well, process and system controls to manage and report population, FTE, and position data were not always consistent or sufficient. The audit recommendations should contribute to improved governance and control processes that increase the reliability of DND civilian personnel data.

Annex A—Management Action Plan

Governance

CRS Recommendation (High Significance)

1.   ADM(HR-Civ) should align accountabilities with corporate objectives, policies and directives to ensure that initiatives to implement technological capability, business processes and controls produce reliable civilian HR data.

Management Action

In the immediate term, ADM(HR-Civ) has launched a data clean-up initiative to respond to the needs of several L1 organizations for specific data. All L1 organizations have been provided with the information and tools necessary to identify specific data errors, which ADM(HR-Civ) staff will correct. This initiative is co-governed by the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff (VCDS) and L1 organizations.

In the short term, we have initiated a project to align business processes with the required data/information architecture. The project will confirm departmental and HR civilian data requirements, coordinate data clean up initiatives, and establish an in-service team to monitor and sustain data integrity on an ongoing basis. The project must also identify and address business process, training or system issues that contribute to data integrity problems.

In the longer term, data/information architecture and data integrity will be addressed within the ADM(HR-Civ) Civilian HR Business Transformation Program. This program will establish a methodical, consistent approach to modernizing HR program and service delivery models, roles and responsibilities, business processes, data/information architectures and enabling technology. The program will identify existing and anticipated business deficiencies. Requirements will be documented in detail, with clear identification of business impacts, interdependencies, stakeholders and recommended technical solutions.

Governance for the transformation program will formalize ongoing accountabilities and responsibilities and roles of all stakeholders, governance structures, and document consistent business processes and data/information architectures.

The program will have defined expected outcomes, performance indicators and a measurement strategy to ensure that business deficiencies are satisfied and investments are sound. The program will be governed at a senior level to ensure that business impacts and mitigation strategies are elevated to an appropriate governance level.

As part of the program, operational-level agreements (OLA) for all stakeholders will establish clear “ground rules” governing, among other elements, roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities for ensuring that business processes, monitoring activities and controls protect the reliability of civilian HR data.

OPI: ADM(HR-Civ)

Target Date:

  • Data Clean Up Phase 1 (DRMIS) – November 2012
  • Data Clean up Phase 2 – March 2013
  • Business Modernization Program Charter – October 2012
  • Business Modernization Program Master Implementation Plan – December 2012

Current System Capability, Controls and Business Processes

CRS Recommendation (High Significance)

2.   ADM(HR-Civ) ensures that a single transformation authority substantiates process and/or capability implementation(s) with agreed upon processes for the prioritization and categorization of change initiatives.

Management Action

In the immediate term, DGHRSD has been appointed as the single transformation authority to prioritize and substantiate civilian HR people/process/technology change, i.e., the Civilian HR Business Process Owner. Through the HR-Civ Business Modernization Program Steering Committee, and supported by a Program Director and Program Management Office, we will monitor and direct people/process/technology review, resolve issues and ensure appropriate change control.

In the short term, we will improve data integrity governance with ADM(IM) to

  • assess the potential impact of change requests on data integrity, data/information architectures and reporting capability; and
  • oversee requests for data access to ensure consistency in the use and reporting of civilian HR data.

In the longer term, as part of the Civilian HR Business Transformation Program, ADM(HR-Civ) will formalize ongoing accountabilities, responsibilities and roles of all stakeholders, governance structures, initiation and prioritization of modernization initiatives (including change control processes). Going forward, OLAs for all stakeholders will clearly establish the “ground rules” and processes governing the ongoing initiation, prioritization and change control of people, business process and technology change.

ADM(HR-Civ) will also seek to change how the enabling technology components of transformation initiatives are governed.

  • As business need should be the driver for enabling technology, governance should not be IM driven. Governance should include VCDS, ADM(HR-Civ) and ADM(IM), with a balanced view of both business and technology costs and imperatives.
  • Civilian HR enabling technology includes a variety of systems and tools, with GC HRMS as the nucleus. Other critical technology includes the necessary infrastructure, collaboration, document and records management, and work management tools to support the full spectrum of civilian HR processes. As such, ongoing governance must address prioritization and issue resolution on all elements of the civilian HR tool set (ERP, non-ERP, and infrastructure).

Projects should not be defined as business or technology; each should be considered a component of an initiative as a whole and managed accordingly. Thus, common prioritization criteria should be applied. At present, business organizations prioritize initiatives in one way and ADM(IM) prioritizes the technical component of these initiatives in a different way, with subsequent disconnects in resourcing and scheduling for final outcomes. Through governance, both ADM(HR-Civ) and ADM(IM) must manage the resources assigned to projects, once prioritized and launched, in a coordinated way.

OPI: ADM(HR-Civ)

Target Date:

  • Business Modernization Program Charter – October 2012
  • Business Modernization Program Master Implementation Plan – December 2012

CRS Recommendation (Moderate Significance)

3.   ADM(HR-Civ) implements more detailed system role abilities, in line with positional duties and authority. In cases where detailed controls are not available at the system level, ADM(HR-Civ) should integrate business processes and monitoring in addition to system roles to ensure segregation of duties.

Management Action

In the short term, ADM(HR-Civ) has taken the following steps to improve role abilities:

  • Although business processes changed upon upgrade to GC HRMS 8.9, role validation was not included in the scope of the DIHRS project. Review and update of role abilities was initiated subsequent to the upgrade. Classification and Official Languages role abilities have been updated, with the review and update of Compensation role abilities under way. This has surfaced an issue, in that some of the compensation functionalities are hard-coded and therefore not possible for DND to change. As a result, we must constrain the role adjustment and further analysis is required. The role validation initiative will continue as availability of ADM(HR-Civ) and ADM(IM) permits until all process areas are completed.
  • In collaboration with ADM(IM), a quarterly cyclical review report on role/account access is provided to Business Owners (DGs/Directors and their BPOs responsible for functional civilian HR programs and services) for validation and correction.
  • In the review of position and classification roles and business processes, a recommendation was made to remove Org & Establish Comptrollers from the business process given that insufficient controls are available at the system level to restrict their access to the appropriate data fields. This recommendation has been brought forward to the Validation and Implementation phase of business process review.

In the longer term, the Civilian HR Business Transformation Program will ensure that the issue of appropriate roles, authority, access and monitoring is addressed in people/process/technology transformation in all civilian HR process areas.

OPI: ADM(HR-Civ)

Target Date:

  • Business Modernization Program Charter – October 2012
  • Business Modernization Program Master Implementation Plan – December 2012

Annex B—Audit Criteria

Objective

The objective of the audit was to assess whether governance and controls are adequate to ensure accurate, complete, and timely reporting of civilian population, FTE and position data.

Criteria

  • ADM(HR-Civ) governance objectives form the basis for internal coherence; corporate discipline and alignment to outcomes and are in place to ensure that DND HR civilian population, FTE and position data are accurate, complete, and timely.
  • Access controls, authorization, processing and entry of exceptions and management of change ensure DND HR civilian population, FTE and position data are accurate, complete, and timely.
  • DND HR data generated, managed and reported for DND HR civilian population, FTE and position data—for operational and strategic decision making—are accurate, complete, and timely.

Sources of Criteria

  • Audit Criteria Related to the Management Accountability Framework: A Tool for Internal Auditors, TBS.
  • Global Technology Audit Guide—Identity and Access Management
  • Global Technology Audit Guide—Auditing Application Controls

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Footnote 1 DAOD 5005-0, Civilian Human Resources Management (2003-02-28), “ADM(HR-Civ) has the authority to oversee a consistent, cohesive, coherent and integrated approach to civilian human resources management in the DND and the CF”. As well, “ADM(HR-Civ) in conjunction with ADM(HR-Mil) have the authority to oversee the Human Resources Management System (PeopleSoft)”.

Footnote 2 Fiscal Year (FY) 2009/10 ADM(HR-Civ) Level One (L1) Strategic Assessment and Business Plan.

Footnote 3 The SSI was established to reduce the number of departmental financial, personnel and material systems in use across the government and to achieve significant cost savings by using common processes. http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/webarchives/20071120221736/www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/ssi-isp/index_e.asp.Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) “Shared System Initiative.”

Footnote 4 HRRS, formally known as output products, offers the ability to output HRMS data in the form of extracts. These extracts provide a wide array of information fields for individuals who request access to them.

Footnote 5 National Defence 2010-2011 RPP, http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rpp/2010-2011/inst/dnd/dndpr-eng.asp?format=print.National Defence 2011-2012 RPP, http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rpp/2011-2012/inst/dnd/dndpr-eng.asp?format=print.

Footnote 6 Civilian HR IM/IT Modernization—Strategy and Plan FY 2011/12 – FY 2013/14 whereby it states that “Civilian HR technology must support the plans, priorities and accountability frameworks of the public service and the Department of National Defence” (2012).

Footnote 7 NDHQ Organization Change—ADM(HR-Civ), August 2011.

Footnote 8 BPOs are owners of a particular HR business process.

Footnote 9 Director Corporate Service Modernization after July 2011 reorganization.

Footnote 10 IM/IT Steering Committee Terms of Reference, 2008.

Footnote 11 BPO Working Group Terms of Reference, January 2011.

Footnote 12 The GC HRMS is a government Shared Human Resources Information and Management System endorsed by TBS under the SSI.

Footnote 13 CRS Audit of Human Resource Management System Capabilities and Functionalities, draft report, 2012.

Footnote 14 Staffing HR service providers provide advice and guidance to DND clients, as well as input information related to staffing requests into HRMS. DCEP is the functional authority and business process owner (BPO) of civilian staffing. Staffing actions are carried out by staffing HR officers (HRO) and HR assistants (HRA) within service centres.

Footnote 15 Compensation enters/checks information regarding employees’ standard working hours in HRMS, which impacts the calculation of the FTEs. DCCP is the functional authority and BPO of civilian compensation. Compensation transactions are carried out by compensation advisors within service centres.

Footnote 16 The function of “establishment” is to create the position structure (hierarchy, roles and responsibilities) of an approved organization. DCCO is the functional authority and BPO of civilian classification. Position creation, change and inactivation within HRMS is performed by various levels of HR service providers such as classification HR officers (HRO-C) and HRAs. Organization and Establishment (O&E) personnel who work for L1 organizations are authorized to make specific establishment changes to positions.

Footnote 17 Each position created is assigned a unique position identification (ID) from HRMS. Employee ID is linked to position ID as part of DND establishment and position management. Position management affects the attributes of a position such as reporting relationships, language profiles and security.

Footnote 18 Civilian O&E personnel who work for L1 organizations maintain a functional relationship with the Vice Chief of the Defence Staff for organization responsibilities and ADM(HR-Civ) for establishment responsibilities. These O&E personnel are authorized to make specific establishment changes to positions.

Footnote 19 A document developed by ADM(HR-Civ) assigning security profiles by position.

Footnote 20 DSPA after July 2011 reorganization, the organization which contributes to achieving ADM(HR-Civ) and departmental strategic objectives by providing direction, advice and policy development on report interpretation.

Date modified: