Summary of the evaluation section of the combined audit and evaluation of the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP)

What we evaluated

• The Government of Canada (GoC) committed over $180 billion in public transit, green, social, trade and transportation, and rural and northern infrastructure through the Investing in Canada Plan.
• As part of the Investing in Canada Plan, Budget 2017 provided details of $33 billion in funding initiatives under the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program (ICIP) to be delivered by Infrastructure Canada (INFC).
• ICIP provides long-term predictable funding and support for provincial, territorial, municipal and Indigenous priorities while remaining focused on the GoC’s objectives of creating long term growth, improving the resilience of communities and transitioning to a clean growth economy, improving social inclusion, and improving economic outcomes of Canadians.
• ICIP is an allocation-based program that is being delivered through Integrated Bilateral Agreements (IBAs) with provinces and territories (P/Ts). 
• The program is divided into the following five funding streams:
• Public Transit,
• Green Infrastructure,
• Community, Culture and Recreation infrastructure,  
• Rural and Northen Communities Infrastructure, and
• The Covid-19 Resilience Infrastructure stream, which was not included in the scope of the evaluation.

Why it is important

• The objective of the audit component was to provide reasonable assurance that the ICIP has established effective oversight and ongoing monitoring processes.
• The objective of the evaluation component was to support future program design by reviewing program design and delivery options with particular attention to promising practices and lessons learned. It also reviewed the extent to which the program gathered data to support progress towards results and Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA Plus). The evaluation was conducted in accordance with the requirements of the Financial Administration Act (FAA), which requires that an evaluation of the relevance and effectiveness of all INFC contribution programs be conducted every five years.
• Both the audit and evaluation components looked at the four original streams (i.e., excluding the COVID-19 Resilience Infrastructure Stream) for the period between April 1, 2017, and March 31, 2022. 

How we proceeded

• The audit was based on the following criteria, which guided the work of the auditors:
• ICIP is supported by effective governance and oversight processes.
• Risk Management processes are in place and effective to manage program and project-level risks that might prevent the achievement of ICIP's expected outcomes.
• ICIP's internal controls, including monitoring and reporting processes, have been established and are operating as intended to effectively support the delivery of the program.
• The evaluation used multiple lines of evidence to gather information in support of the findings. This included a review of program documents, literature review, program data, external data, survey with ultimate recipients and key informant interviews. 

What we found

• The audit found that:
• While oversight and monitoring processes are in place and operating as intended, there is an opportunity to further improve their efficiency.
• Lessons learned from ICIP should inform and contribute to departmental program harmonization efforts. In addition, the system-based controls introduced in ICIP should be leveraged as part of future system enhancements.

• The evaluation revealed that:
• ICIP contributed to the overall core infrastructure needs of Canadians and remains relevant in addressing Government of Canada’s priorities and objectives. 
• ICIP's design resulted in targeted communities and diverse populations receiving program funding.
• ICIP made progress towards measuring performance achieved at the immediate outcome level, with the opportunity to enhance the current Performance Measurement Strategy (PMS) to report on long-term outcomes.

Our conclusions

• The audit concluded with reasonable assurance ICIP has established effective oversight and ongoing monitoring processes, with an opportunity to improve their efficiency.
• The evaluation concluded that, to report on progress towards long-term outcomes and fully assess the impact of ICIP on targeted communities and diverse populations, INFC will need to undertake the planned refinement of ICIP’s Performance Measurement Strategy.

Our recommendations

1. The oversight processes for ICIP should be updated to improve efficiency as:
1. The program's focus will increasingly shift to project implementation issues, there is an opportunity to review and recalibrate the membership of Oversight Committees to ensure the members are best positioned to discuss the matters expected to be brought to the committee going forward; and 
2. Monitoring processes continue to be revised to ensure reporting requirements are aligned to the associated risk level.
2. As the ICIP project intake is now closed in provinces, the performance measurement strategy should be updated to refine the objectives and requirements for intermediate and long-term results to ensure the availability of data and the feasibility of reporting progress toward expected relevant outcomes.