Section A: British Columbia Region

In addition to the consolidated findings, conclusions and recommendations found in the main body of this report, this appendix provides an overview of results that are specific to the British Columbia region. This appendix must be read in context of the main report. This appendix provides observations specific to the Canada-British Columbia agreements.

Overview and Criteria Results

The audit found that the joint infrastructure programs were being well managed in British Columbia. The Management Committee and the Joint Secretariat have established sound control and risk mitigation mechanism for effective program delivery. Key project and administrative decisions, and interaction with provincial partners and program recipients were documented and communicated effectively. The region consistently utilized the Shared Information Management System for Infrastructure (SIMSI) tool to capture and organize most of the day-to-day project management information. This practice of utilizing SIMSI system could be used by other jurisdictions with the devoted assistance of INFC, to accomplish the intended results.

There were comprehensive and periodically updated procedure manuals, checklists, and guidelines to assist staff as needed. WD staff in conjunction with the Joint Secretariat, proactively track quarterly project progress reports to mitigate risks. Such information has been analyzed and utilized in forecasting cash flow, communicating milestones, potential scope changes and program extensions.

Results of selected audit criteria that were used to assess key risks and control elements, which impact achievement of program objectives, are summarized as follows:

Risk and Control Element	Assessed Criteria Results
Governance and Administration	Criteria met
Risk Management	Criteria mostly met
Financial Management	Criteria met
Stewardship and Project Management	Criteria met
Information and Performance Reporting	Criteria met
Communication	Criteria met
Compliance with Agreements and Policies	Criteria met

Observations

In the Canada-British Columbia agreement, there was a requirement that any material change to project outcomes as described in the contribution agreement needs to be reviewed by the Management Committee. However, some contribution agreements did not list the numerous intended benefits. The auditors felt it would be difficult to report on program performance in those cases.

In British Columbia, the auditors discovered one ICP project that was approved five years ago but had not started. The funds were being reserved for the project, but no funds had been expended yet. Some risks are associated with this approach: other ranked projects possibly had to forego funding and this project being in jeopardy due to rising costs and scarcity of tradesmen. Staff informed the auditors that once the projects are announced they cannot be pulled back or the funds reallocated. The issue of time delays is discussed more in section 4.2 of this report.

A formal Risk Based Audit Framework document to support the manner in which certain projects have been selected in ICP and MRIF for environmental audits has not started.