Government of Alberta 1999-2000 Annual Report Consolidated Financial
Statements
My staff completed an audit of the financial statements for the Government of Alberta as at and for the year ended
March 31, 2000. The results of this examination can be found in the Treasury section of this report on page 269.
Measuring Up We applied specified auditing procedures to the core measures and supplemental information for the year ended
March 31, 2000. Exceptions were noted in the auditor’s report.
Information on the results of this examination can be found in the Treasury section of this report on page 271.
Ministry Annual Reports Financial Statements of Ministries and Departments
My staff completed audits of the financial statements for Ministries and Departments as at and for the year ended March 31, 2000. The auditor’s reports contained reservations
of opinion due to certain corporate government accounting policies and reporting practices that, in my opinion, are not in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
Information on the reasons for the reservations can be found in the Treasury section of this report on page 264.
Specified Procedures on Performance Measures
We applied specified auditing procedures to the performance measures included in ministry annual reports for the year ended March 31, 2000. Information on the results of applying these procedures can be found in the section of this report for each ministry.
Integrated Results Analysis Recommendation No. 4
We recommend that ministries, with assistance from the Department of Treasury, enhance the results analysis included in ministry annual reports by providing an integrated analysis of financial and non-financial performance.
We have previously recommended that results analysis be improved
In 1998, we recommended that more emphasis be placed on discussing the reasons for variances between planned targets and actual performance, and that analysis of financial results be included in the results analysis section of ministry annual reports.
Results analysis does not integrate financial and non-financial performance
We reviewed the 1999 ministry annual reports and found some improvement in the analysis of financial results. However, we found that the results analysis of most ministries did not discuss the reasons for variances between planned and actual performance and did not present an integrated analysis of financial and non-financial performance for the year. An integrated analysis would include a discussion of performance results and the related costs.
Analysis of the achievement of performance targets provides useful information
An analysis of the degree to which performance targets were achieved and how strategies contributed to the achievement of goals helps the reader to evaluate how well the management of an organization has fulfilled its stewardship obligation. It also assists readers in understanding the likelihood of an
organization meeting future targets. Discussions of external influences that have had a significant impact on achievement of targets are also useful in explaining the reasons for
variances.
The Ministry Annual Report Standards indicate that a key element of annual reports is to provide a fair representation of the ministry’s work and results. Unbiased disclosure is
expected; good performance should be acknowledged and areas where performance did not meet expectations should be explained.
Costing core businesses will facilitate an integrated analysis of performance
Earlier in this Annual Report, we referred to strategies
underway for ministries to provide information on the costs of core businesses in business plans and annual reports (page 21) and noted the need to link goals to core businesses (page 19).
The availability of such information will allow ministries to include an integrated analysis of financial and non-financial performance in their results analysis in ministry annual reports. Such an analysis should include discussion of
significant variances in actual costs relative to the planned and historical costs of the core business.
A fundamental principle of accountability is that results are compared to planned performance in order to explain the cost-effectiveness of the organization.
Each ministry is responsible for the results analysis included in their annual report and should ensure that an integrated analysis is presented. In our view, Treasury should provide leadership and support to ministries in developing such analyses.
Guidance to accountable organizations on annual report presentation
Last year, we recommended that ministries, supported by the Treasury Department, provide guidance to accountable organizations on best practices for annual report presentation.
Government is making progress
Treasury indicated that they would provide advice to ministries on request. In addition, we understand that this issue may be addressed as part of the Government
Reorganization Secretariat’s review of ABCs.
Satisfactory progress is being made. We will continue to monitor developments in this area in the next year.
Summary financial information
Guidelines for the use and content of abbreviated financial statements was needed
In our last annual report, we recommended that the Treasury Department develop guidelines for ministries and accountable organizations regarding the use and content of summary financial information. Summary financial information is a condensed version of an entity’s full financial statements.
Guidance has been provided and is available on request
In the Ministry Annual Report Standards for the year ended March 31, 2000, Treasury has provided guidance relating to issuing extracts from ministry annual reports. In addition, Treasury will provide assistance on request.
We are satisfied that this recommendation has been addressed at a government-wide level.
Client Satisfaction Surveys
There has been an improvement in client satisfaction surveys
In 1997-98, we set out criteria for preparing client satisfaction surveys that produce meaningful results. Subsequently, both the Ministry of Treasury and the Personnel Administration Office (PAO) provided guidance to ministries on preparing client satisfaction surveys. We reviewed client satisfaction surveys used in preparing performance measures for the 1998-99 ministry annual reports. Overall, there has been an improvement in ministry client satisfaction surveys. In our view, this recommendation has been addressed at a
government-wide level.