HUMA Committee Report
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
APPENDIX A
ASSESSMENT GRID EXAMPLE
|
Integrity and Probity — Mandatory Section |
|||
|
Positive reputation among community of practitioners and with community at large |
YES/NO |
||
|
Positive feedback from other government departments |
YES/ NO |
||
|
Positive feedback from clients & community, irrespective of needs being met |
YES/NO |
||
|
Adequate bookkeeping and financial controls in place |
YES / NO |
||
|
There is no outstanding debt owed to the federal government |
YES I NO |
||
|
THERE ARE NO OUTSTANDING CRIMINAL CHARGES, NOR ANY CHARGES PENDING FOR THIS ORGANIZATION |
YES/NO |
||
|
Reference letters reflect a positive attitude toward the applicant |
YES/ NO |
||
|
THE DEPARTMENT IS NOT AWARE OF ANY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS OF INAPPROPRIATE BEHAVIOUR ON THE PART OF THIS ORGANIZATION |
YES/NO |
||
|
SUMMARY |
|
||
|
Organizational Profile |
Max Score |
% of Total |
|
|
Previous HRSDC experience |
10 |
2% |
|
|
Experience dealing with client group |
20 |
4% |
|
|
Background, mandate, areas of expertise |
20 |
4% |
|
|
Suitability of facilities to be used (fully accessible) |
5 |
3% |
|
|
Organizational chart |
5 |
1% |
|
|
Computer equipment suitable for Contact IV |
5 |
1% |
|
|
Completeness of tombstone data |
5 |
1% |
|
|
TOTAL |
80 |
16% |
|
|
Human Resource Plan |
Max Score |
% of Total |
|
|
Appropriate description of staff roles and responsibilities |
20 |
4% |
|
|
Appropriate staff coverage plan (breaks, illness, etc.) |
10 |
2% |
|
|
Ability to provide service in both official languages |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Appropriate number of staff based on scope of work |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Personnel policy |
5 |
1% |
|
|
TOTAL |
65 |
13% |
|
|
Max Score |
% of Total |
||
|
Suitability of counselling philosophy, approach |
25 |
5% |
|
|
Relevant employment counselling experience demonstrated |
25 |
5% |
|
|
Suitability of methods/tools used to assist with career exploration |
25 |
5% |
|
|
Needs assessment method(s), tools suitable for client group |
20 |
4% |
|
|
Employment counselling method(s), tools suitable for client group |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Description of processes/techniques used to facilitate attitude/belief changes with regard to barriers to employment |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Implementation plan satisfactory with detailed workflow |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Satisfactory tool for measuring client satisfaction |
10 |
2% |
|
|
TOTAL |
150 |
30% |
|
|
Community/Labour Market Knowledge |
Max Score |
% of Total |
|
|
Accurate knowledge of labour market presented |
20 |
4% |
|
|
Suitable technique for keeping abreast with labour market trends |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Suitable method of integrating LMI into the counselling process |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Demonstrated knowledge of local employment resources and programs |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Suitable plan to integrate service with existing resources and programs |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Demonstrated knowledge of socio-cultural diversity |
5 |
1% |
|
|
TOTAL |
85 |
17% |
|
|
Budget |
Max Score |
% of Total |
|
|
Wages supported LMI |
25 |
5% |
|
|
Overhead costs represent fair market value |
25 |
5% |
|
|
Items listed are reasonable and relate to project |
20 |
4% |
|
|
Capital items are necessary and relevant to project (if applicable) |
15 |
3% |
|
|
Forecast of cashflow complete |
10 |
2% |
|
|
Recipient/other partner contribution detailed (if applicable) |
10 |
2% |
|
|
TOTAL |
105 |
21% |
|
|
References |
Max Score |
% of total |
|
|
Specifications adhered to & forms are complete |
10 |
2% |
|
|
Three letters of reference provided |
5 |
1% |
|
|
TOTAL |
15 |
3% |
|
|
GRAND TOTAL |
500 |
100% |
|
| * | Responses to all criteria under the Integrity and Probity Section are to be provided by a “yes” or a “no.” A “no” response on one or more of the integrity and probity criteria is a concern to the department and represents grounds to exclude the submission/proposal from further funding consideration if additional evidence for a review cannot be found in support of the application. Please note that if a “yes” to either of the criteria identified in CAPITAL LETTERS is obtained, offices must consult with NHQ prior to proceeding with the assessment. Tools are presently being developed by NHQ to help staff in identifying quality standards for all criteria listed under the Integrity and Probity Section. |
| Source: | Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, Information presented to the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills Development, Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities on 8 March 2005. |