1. 1 SUP-1: Mechanisms are in place to evaluate manager satisfaction with staffing services OAR-1: Staffing performance deficiencies identified in feedback from the PSC are corrected in a timely fashion DEL-1: Mechanisms in place to ensure that sub-delegated managers comply with their sub- delegated authorities Delegation of Staffing to Deputy Heads Planning for Staffing and Monitoring of Results Organizational HR Support Organizational Accountability for Results Results: Flexibility and Efficiency Results: Effectiveness and Adherence to Staffing Values FLX/EFF-1: Managers’ satisfaction with flexibility to carry out staffing processes in an efficient manner FLX/EFF-2: Length of time for hiring process FLX/EFF-3: Candidates’ satisfaction regarding duration of appointment process Merit Non-partisanship Representativeness Access Fairness Transparency Intended Effects: Improved Outcomes Intended Effects: Progress with Key Success Factors Indicators of Success Key ChangeA reas Micro Organizations 2011-2012 Cycle Staffing Management Accountability Framework Indicators DEL-3: Appointment policies are current DEL-2: Staffing Management Framework ensures monitoring of key staffing areas NOT ASSESSED THIS YEAR SUP-2: PE capacity: (a) PEs by population base; and (b) PEs by volume of staffing SUP-3: Participation in continuous learning by staffing advisors Self-report if organization received acceptable rating in 2010-2011 PLN-1: Staffing strategies support organizational staffing priorities and align with current and future needs PLN-2: Extent to which expected results for staffing are assessed ; Adjustments made as required

2. 2 SMAF Indicators (cont.) AccessFairness FAIR-1: Candidates’ perceptions of the fairness of the assessment process FAIR-2: Percentage of acting appointments with subsequent indeterminate appointment at the same occupational group and level within the same organization FAIR-3: Percentage of new indeterminate hires coming from (a) casual and (b) term positions within the same organization FAIR-4: Candidates’ perceptions on whether staffing processes to select employees for the work unit are done fairly Transparency TRANS-1: Organizational staffing priorities and strategies are communicated on organizations’ websites; and contents are clearly communicated to managers, employees and employees’ representatives where applicable TRANS-2: Candidates’ perceptions of openness and transparency in internal staffing Merit MER-1: Managers’ satisfaction with quality of hires MER-2: Official Language qualifications in staffing (non-imperative appointments where the person does not meet the official language profile within the time periods prescribed by regulations) MER-3: Candidates’ perceptions on whether they were assessed for actual job requirements of the position MER-4: Candidates’ perceptions on whether the posted qualifications and criteria for positions are bias-free and barrier-free MER-5: Investigations into staffing: a) PSC; b) In-house MER-6: Candidates’ perceptions on whether the people hired in the work unit can do the job NP-1: Candidates' perceptions on whether they are aware of their rights and responsibilities as public servants, under the Public Service Employment Act, with respect to participation in political activities Representativeness REP-1: Staffing- related provisions or initiatives to increase representativeness Effectiveness/Values ACC-1: Percentage of external appointments that are non- advertised: a) non-EX group; b) EX group ACC-2: Percentage of internal appointments that are non- advertised: a) non-EX group; b) EX group NOT ASSESSED THIS YEAR Non-Partisanship FAIR-5: Priority entitlements in staffing are respected [Note: PSC data (i.e. From PIMS) would be used to assess organizations] New indicator for 2011-2012