ARCHIVED - Evaluation of the Relevance and Operation of the CBSA Fleet

This page has been archived.

Final Report
Program Evaluation Division
Strategy and Coordination Branch
November  2009

Table of Contents

• Executive Summary
• Introduction and Context
  • Organizational Structure of Fleet Management
  • Regulatory Framework for Fleet Management
  • Purpose of the Evaluation
  • Evaluation Methodology
• Key Findings
  • Relevance
  • Program Design and Delivery
  • Results
  • Efficiency
• Conclusions, Recommendations and Management Response

Executive Summary

The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) is responsible for administering over 92 pieces of legislation with the ultimate aim of helping facilitate the movement of legitimate travellers and goods while intercepting those that pose a threat to national security and public safety. Some of the Agency's many responsibilities entail examination, interdiction, enforcement and protection activities.

The CBSA carries out these responsibilities with a workforce of approximately 13,800 employees, of which over 7,200 are uniformed CBSA officers who provide services at approximately 1,200 points across Canada including: 119 land-border crossings, 13 international airports, numerous ports and marinas, and 27 rail sites¹. In order to perform these activities the Agency has a fleet of more than 1,000 vehicles (including trucks, cars, minivans, snowmobiles) and boats.

Evaluation Purpose

The purpose of this evaluation was to examine the relevance of the Agency's operation of a fleet and the efficiency and successes of management and operation processes, including the collaboration of the CBSA with its service provider. The CBSA's Program Evaluation Division conducted the evaluation, and carried out the research between March and June 2009. The following research methods were used:

• A review and analysis of both internal and public CBSA documents, correspondence and data;
• A review of documents and data regarding other government departments' and agencies' fleet of vehicles;
• A review and analysis of documents relevant to the legal and regulatory framework for fleet management;
• Interviews with internal and external stakeholders; and
• Site visits to the CBSA Learning Centre at Rigaud, Quebec, as well as various CBSA offices in three regions.

This evaluation was identified as a priority for fiscal year 2008–2009 in the 2008–2011 CBSA Risk-Based Multi-year Evaluation Plan, approved by the Executive Evaluation Committee (EEC) in May 2008.

Key Findings and Recommendations

The evaluation found that there remains a need for the CBSA to operate a fleet of vehicles due to the many tasks the Agency is required to perform (e.g., detainee transport, transportation of detection equipment, surveillance). Further, it is imperative that the CBSA own its fleet vehicles due to Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) requirements and the fact that many activities require modifications to vehicles (e.g., detainee partitions, affixed lighting, specialized equipment and tools) that would not be feasible in leased vehicles.

In terms of governance, the evaluation found that the appropriate stakeholders are involved in fleet activities and roles and responsibilities are mostly clear at the district and regional level, though less so between the National Fleet Manager at the Contracting, Asset and Telecommunications Division (CATD) in National Headquarters (NHQ) and the regional fleet managers. Nevertheless, communication was found to also be good between the various stakeholders (both internal and external) involved in overall fleet management.

Information on the use and maintenance of fleet vehicles is being captured regularly at the district or division, the regional and national levels through the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log, Microsoft Excel spreadsheets developed in-house, and through the ARI^TM Insights system. However, for the most part, interviewees were unaware of the system functionalities and none of the regions reported using the ARI^TM system in their life-cycle management planning.

The CBSA's fleet management is aligned with Treasury Board Secretariat policies and directives with regards to planning, purchasing, maintaining and disposing of fleet vehicles. Furthermore, fleet vehicles were found to be sufficient in number. The evaluation team found added value to having regional fleet committees. These committees allow individual regions to more proactively identify vehicles for replacement and also facilitate decisions around relocation of vehicles to better meet operational needs. Regions with fleet committees were generally more satisfied with the replacement process than those that did not have them in place.

However, the evaluation found that the type of vehicle purchased does not always meet operational needs and that the Agency does not have criteria for choosing vehicle type by activity, function or mode. A vehicle matrix has been drafted that outlines the vehicle types best suited to the different activities though it has yet to be finalized and implemented across the Agency. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendations:

Recommendation 1 – The Comptrollership Branch, in consultation with Operations Branch and Enforcement Branch, should finalize a vehicle matrix that identifies approved vehicles based on use, equipment requirements, geographical and environmental considerations, and ensures that the matrix is disseminated to all regional fleet managers.

The evaluation found that the CBSA fleet of vehicles does not consistently meet the standards set out in the Federal Identity Program (FIP) which requires that all government vehicles bear the department or agency's signature and the “Canada” wordmark. Site visits revealed that there are a number of designs currently being used for marking of CBSA fleet vehicles.

The CBSA is currently developing a Branding Initiative which is intended to build a sense of identity and attachment between the Agency, its employees and stakeholders. The Branding Initiative may ultimately include a requirement for Agency-specific vehicle markings and appearance. Pending approval of the Initiative, CATD has directed regions to withhold marking any new vehicles. While this will reduce the need to re-mark vehicles once the policy is implemented, it means that many of the CBSA vehicles are not FIP compliant. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendation:

Recommendation 2 – The Comptrollership Branch should finalize and distribute a policy and guidelines concerning vehicle markings that is aligned with Federal Identity Program requirements and supports the Branding Initiative currently underway.

Overall, the evaluation found that considerable attention has been paid to the management of the Agency's fleet vehicles over the last few years. The Fleet Management Review conducted in fiscal years 2005–2006 and 2006–2007 included a complete review and analysis of the Agency's vehicle inventory, and helped to improve efficiency by eliminating or reallocating underused vehicles. The Review also resulted in the implemented key management practices such as a preventative maintenance program and the use of the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log to capture usage data.

The February 2008 internal audit of Fleet Management concluded that the Agency is compliant with Treasury Board Secretariat material policies but that improvements could be made in the area of life-cycle management. The evaluation found evidence to suggest that the CBSA may not have the necessary vehicle replacement resources allocated to support good life-cycle management of its fleet.

At current funding levels, CATD estimates that fleet vehicles would be replaced on a 12-year cycle. If the average age of the fleet is allowed to increase, both the cost and frequency of maintenance can be expected to increase. The use of older vehicles could also raise safety concerns. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendation:

Recommendation 3 – The Comptrollership Branch should consider developing a long-term replacement strategy to ensure that the average age of the CBSA fleet vehicles does not exceed seven years.

The use of boats is important to the operations of the Agency in certain regions. For example, in the marine mode, Flexible Response Teams require vehicles to transport equipment needed to conduct rummages and marine security visits. In some cases, the CBSA uses their own boats or those owned by other agencies, such as the RCMP, to meet commercial vessels on the water before they dock. Boats are also used for general transportation in order to reach designated marine reporting sites and to staff ports that are located on islands that would otherwise be inaccessible. Similarly, snowmobiles are needed to access remote areas during the winter months.

Regions develop business cases to justify the acquisition of new or replacement boats. However, there are no CBSA standards for the use of boats and regions report that the existence of such guidelines would help facilitate and expedite the development of their business cases. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendation:

Recommendation 4 – To provide a framework for acquisition decisions, the Operations Branch should consider developing guidelines outlining the rationale for, and acceptable use of, boats and other vehicles such as snowmobiles.

Introduction and Context

Background

The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) carries out its responsibilities with a workforce of approximately 13,800 employees, of which over 7,200 are uniformed CBSA officers who provide services at approximately 1,200 points across Canada including: 119 land border crossings, 13 international airports, numerous ports and marinas, and 27 rail sites².

To support the CBSA's examination, interdiction, enforcement and protection responsibilities, the Agency has a fleet of more than 1,000 motor vehicles (including trucks, cars, minivans and snowmobiles) and boats located across all regions in the various modes.

Figure 1: Number of CBSA conveyances by type

Type of conveyance3	Number of conveyances
Total	1004
Car	287
Sport Utility	299
Truck – Light-duty	67
Truck – Medium-duty4	31
Van	299
Boat	11
Snowmobile	10

Source: ARI^TM Insights system, June 2009.

Figure 2: Number of CBSA vehicles per region

Region	Number of Vehicles
Total	1004
Headquarters	59
Atlantic	94
Quebec	177
Greater Toronto Area	138
Niagara–Fort Erie	61
Windsor–St. Clair	65
Northern Ontario	107
Prairies	118
Pacific	185

Source: ARI^TM Insights system, June 2009.

In fiscal years 2005–2006 and 2006–2007, the Comptrollership Branch conducted a Review of Fleet Management of the CBSA's fleet of vehicles. The objectives of Phase I were: to determine how to incorporate Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) vehicles⁵ into the fleet; to analyze the overall composition, general usage patterns, and average use in terms of kilometres and fuel; to identify and review low-usage vehicles in order to reallocate them; and finally to identify areas for cost savings including alternative modes of transportation and to create an “optimal base fleet size.”⁶ Phase I resulted in not only a reduction in the fleet size by 92 vehicles, but also in increased pooling, swapping and reallocation of vehicles in some areas.

Phase II of the Review consisted of a six-month follow-up where usage data from June to November 2006 was analyzed to further identify underused vehicles. In addition to further reallocating vehicles as well as disposing of 60 more fleet vehicles, the Fleet Management Review Phase II resulted in a preventative maintenance program and fleet management tools (e.g. the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log).

An internal audit of Fleet Management was also conducted in fiscal years 2005–2006 and 2006–2007, between the period of April 2005 and June 2007. The objectives of the audit were to “determine whether Agency practices for recording fleet assets were compliant with Treasury Board material management and financial administration policies and whether appropriate processes existed to ensure adequate governance and control over vehicle assets including fleet operating and maintenance expenses.”⁷ The audit found that the CBSA's fleet was managed and disposed of in accordance with Treasury Board Secretariat material policies but that room for improvement existed with regards to fleet planning, and records and accounting processes.

Organizational Structure of Fleet Management

Functional guidance on life-cycle management (planning, acquisition, use and disposal) for all CBSA capital assets is provided by the Assets and Fleet Management Section within the Contracting, Asset and Telecommunications Division (CATD) of the Comptrollership Branch at National Headquarters (NHQ). This Section coordinates and processes procurement and disposal of CBSA vehicles.

The Regions are the primary end user of CBSA fleet vehicles. The Operations Branch – the NHQ link to the regions – is responsible for regional reporting, horizontal and vertical integration of field operations, and ensuring consistency and effectiveness of delivery of Agency programs and services. It is also responsible for strategic management and coordination of planning and priorities between the field and NHQ. Regional fleet managers provide advice and support to regional personnel and coordinate the Agency's fleet activities. Once vehicles are assigned to the regions, the responsibility for day-to-day usage, maintenance and compliance with the relevant policies and procedures rests with the on-site manager and personnel.⁸

The Enforcement Branch plays a key role in the acquisition of CBSA fleet vehicles that are combined with detection technology as it provides the functional direction for most of the CBSA's activities related to commercial examination processes.

External stakeholders involved in the fleet management process include the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) which is responsible for providing departments and agencies with direction for the overall management of light-duty vehicles.⁹ In carrying out its mandate, the Real Property and Material Policy Directorate maintains the Policy on Management of Material, the Directive on Fleet Management: Light Duty Vehicles, and the Directive on Fleet Management: Executive Vehicles. The Department of Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) provides key services to federal departments and agencies including procurement and standing offers, in support of the management of light-duty vehicle fleets.

Finally, certain fleet management functions are provided under contract by the private sector. Automotive Resources International (ARI^TM) provides the CBSA with the essential fleet management services and tools including the issuing and administering of a Government of Canada fleet card,¹⁰ fleet management information system, and other services related to the management of the CBSA fleet of motor vehicles and equipment.

Regulatory Framework for Fleet Management

Fleet directives are issued pursuant to the Financial Administration Act, subsection 7(1)(a) and 9(2). The Treasury Board Policy on Management of Material provides direction for the management of departmental assets throughout their life cycle. More specifically, departmental vehicle acquisition, maintenance and disposal are governed by the Treasury Board Directive on Fleet Management: Light Duty Vehicles and the Directive on Fleet Management: Executive Vehicles, both of which became effective on November 1, 2006. The Directives' requirements include complying with the Alternative Fuels Act as well as acquiring vehicles and managing fleets in a manner that minimizes life-cycle costs and negative environmental impacts, all the while meeting operational requirements. They also require that departments and agencies use the PWGSC for all vehicle procurement. All government departments and agencies are obligated to comply with these Treasury Board Secretariat directives.

These directives also outline the mandatory requirements in the four stages of fleet life-cycle management. These are:

1. Planning: Departments must ensure that a mechanism is in place to determine whether ongoing and new transportation requirements can be met within the existing fleet. They must also select a vehicle class and type that best suits the operational requirements and must incorporate manufacturers' production times into procurement planning.
2. Acquisition:
   • Vehicle procurement: PWGSC has the exclusive authority for the purchase of vehicles for the federal government.
   • Vehicle leasing: Vehicle leases must be avoided except to meet temporary, short-term and seasonal requirements.
3. Fleet operation, use and maintenance:
   • Alternative fuels must be used when possible.
   • Departments must identify, assess and minimize risk associated with fleet management.
   • Vehicles utilization data must be collected and tracked for all vehicles.
   • Proper measures must be in place to ensure that government vehicles are used for authorized business only.
   • Essential information must be tracked for management and reporting purposes.
   • Departments are not required to obtain insurance with the exception of vehicles driven in the United States and vehicles allocated to executives.
4. Disposal: Vehicles must be disposed of as per TBS policies and directives.

Federal government vehicle markings are governed by the TBS' Federal Identity Program Policy (FIP) which makes each institution responsible for managing its corporate identity within the framework of the government-wide policy and standards. Guidelines and standards set out the requirements for the design, fabrication and placement of vehicle markings. The purpose of these markings is to identify government motor vehicles operated within Canada. The departmental signature and the “Canada”wordmark are the principal elements of vehicle markings under the FIP policy. These markings are to be applied to all government (owned or leased) on-road vehicles, with the exception of vehicles on short-term leases and those that have been exempted.

Purpose of the Evaluation

The evaluation of the CBSA's fleet management was identified as a priority for fiscal year 2008–2009 in the 2008–2011 CBSA Risk-Based Multi-year Evaluation Plan, approved by the Executive Evaluation Committee (EEC) in May 2008. The purpose of this evaluation was to examine the relevance of a fleet vis-à-vis the Agency's operational requirements, and the efficiency and successes of management and operation processes, including the collaboration of the CBSA with its service provider.

This evaluation considered the management and maintenance of all CBSA fleet vehicles including those that are combined with detection technology such as Mobile VACIS, COMET, X-ray van, and X-ray trailer, as well as other CBSA motorized vehicles such as snowmobiles and boats. The evaluation did not consider the effectiveness and management of the detection tools mounted/carried by fleet units.

Evaluation Issues and Questions

The evaluation was conducted in accordance with the TBS' Evaluation Policy. In preparation for this evaluation, the evaluators developed a logic model and evaluation framework for the CBSA's fleet management, which defined outcomes and evaluation issues. Figure 3 provides a summary of key issues and research questions for this evaluation.

Figure 3: Key evaluation issues and research questions

Evaluation Issue	Evaluation Question
Relevance	Is there an operational requirement for the CBSA to employ a fleet of vehicles and boats? Is the fleet managed in accordance with Canadian government regulations and policies?
Program Design and Delivery	How effective is the governance structure for the management and delivery of the fleet?
	How effective is the ongoing performance measurement system for the fleet?
	How effective is the design and delivery of fleet-related training?
Results	How well is the fleet managed?
	How well does the fleet support operational requirements?
	To what extent is the fleet equipped and operated in a manner to improve officer safety?
	Does fleet management contribute to the sustainable development / environmental objectives of the federal government?
Efficiency	To what extent does fleet management make the best use of resources?
	Are the most appropriate means being used to achieve objectives?

Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation used the following qualitative and quantitative lines of evidence to examine fleet-related activities:

Review and analysis of CBSA and Other Government Department (OGD) documents and data including:

• Planning documents, internal studies, strategies, management reports and relevant internal correspondence regarding the implementation and management of the CBSA's fleet;
• Documents and internal correspondence indicating CBSA priorities and needs in relation to vehicles;
• Legislation, regulations, and other materials related to the legal/regulatory framework of fleet management;
• Documented processes, procedures (such as Standard Operating Procedures) and forms;
• Data and reports on fleet management compliance verification;
• Budget and expenditure information related to fleet management;
• Related materials available on the CBSA Intranet and Internet sites;
• CBSA statistics and performance data related to the management of vehicles; and
• Fleet management processes, data and documents from other government departments.

Key Interviews and Discussions

Both formal interviews and informal discussions were conducted with key stakeholders to learn about the management and operation of different aspects of the fleet, and to solicit views and explanations of data and results obtained during the research. Interviewees included:

• CBSA headquarters staff, including senior management and program management in the Operations, Enforcement and Comptrollership Branches;
• CBSA regional staff involved in fleet management (e.g., regional directors general (RDGs), directors, chiefs, superintendents, BSOs, regional and/or local fleet managers);
• A representative of the fleet service provider Automotive Resources International (ARI^TM);
• Management from other government departments and agencies including the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC), the RCMP, Environment Canada; and
• Representatives from B.C. Ministry of Transport and Infrastructure, Ontario Provincial Police, Ontario Ministry of Transport, Société d'assurance automobile du Québec and Sûreté du Québec.

Figure 4: Individual and Group Evaluation Interviews

Interview Category	Number of Interviewees
Total	79
CBSA NHQ Staff	18
CBSA Regional Staff	55
OGD Representatives	5
Private Sector Service Provider	1

Site Visits

The evaluation team conducted site visits in three regions over the course of this evaluation: Windsor – St. Clair, Pacific and Quebec. The visits involved meeting with various stakeholders including end users, as well as observation of the different types of vehicles within the fleet. The site visits served to inform the evaluation team of fleet management processes and procedures including strengths and limitations and allowed for a better understanding of how the fleet is managed and how it contributes to the achievement of CBSA strategic outcomes.

Study Limitations

To a large extent, fleet management practices are dictated by PWGSC and Treasury Board Secretariat policies and directives. As a result, the evaluation did not include an in-depth analysis of alternate fleet management models. As well, the evaluation of life-cycle management of CBSA boats and snowmobiles was not possible due to a lack of related policies and guidelines.

Key Findings

Relevance

Is there an operational requirement for the CBSA to employ a fleet of vehicles and boats? Is the fleet managed in accordance with Canadian government regulations and policies?

The CBSA conducts a multitude of activities and tasks associated with its mandate and legislative obligations. Further, the Agency is required to perform these duties across a large geographical area and sometimes within a short amount of time. As such, the use of vehicles and boats is essential to the Agency's ability to conduct many of these activities. Some of these tasks include: surveillance, providing Detector Dog Services (DDS), using specialty equipment and detection tools (COMET, VACIS, and X-ray), detainee transportation, and general transportation.

Interviewees were unanimous in recognizing the need for a fleet and stated that, for operational requirements, particularly in certain modes, they would not be able to conduct their day-to-day activities without the use of boats and vehicles. For example, in the marine mode, Flexible Response Teams require vehicles to transport equipment needed to conduct rummages and marine security visits. In some cases, the CBSA uses boats that are either CBSA-owned or owned by other agencies, such as the RCMP, to meet commercial vessels on the water before they dock. Boats are also used for general transportation to reach reporting stations and to staff ports that are located on islands that would otherwise be inaccessible. Similarly, snowmobiles are used to access remote port areas during the winter months.

Investigations and Regional Intelligence units would not be able to conduct surveillance activities without the use of vehicles. Vehicles are also necessary to ensure the health and safety of officers during certain activities. For example, while conducting commercial export “blitzes” at land border crossings, officers sometimes have to close lanes or redirect traffic. In these situations, vehicles are used to provide additional protection to the officers. Finally, operations that include activities such as removals of persons inadmissible to Canada,¹¹ arrests and seizures require the use of vehicles.

As per the Treasury Board Secretariat Directive on Fleet Management: Light Duty Vehicles, departments and agencies requiring the use of a fleet should explore whether the requirement can be met using alternative transportation modes such as: vehicle rentals (short-term or seasonal only), taxis, use of employee-provided vehicles, public transportation, or outsourcing. Vehicle ownership should only occur when operational needs are such that the alternative transport modes are not viable options. Furthermore, long-term leasing of vehicles has been determined by PWGSC to be a non cost-effective approach to life-cycle management.

Vehicle ownership is the only option available to the CBSA due to the types of ongoing duties performed. Certain duties require specialized equipment to be installed in the vehicle such as cages for Detector Dog Services, detainee partitions, radio equipment and in some cases detection equipment. Vehicles must be modified in such a way that would not be possible on a short-term leased vehicle.

All other government departments interviewed have a very similar, if not identical, fleet management structure to that of the CBSA. For example, vehicle acquisition is part of a national envelope and regions are responsible for the day-to-day operation and overall maintenance of vehicles. Like the CBSA, other federal government departments and agencies are also bound by the policies and directives set out by TBS and PWGSC, leaving little room for alternatives.

Some intelligence officers have expressed interest in the ability to rent vehicles for covert operations allowing them to use a vehicle appropriate for the local environment and exchange it for a new one if the identity of the vehicle has been compromised. The need to modify vehicles to add special equipment such as gun boxes limits the viability of this option.

According to the TBS FIP policy, all government vehicles must bear the department's or agency's signature and the “Canada ” wordmark. However, departments and agencies may apply for exemptions by seeking TBS approval.¹² The evaluation found that many CBSA vehicles are not marked in accordance with the FIP policy.¹³ For example, there are vehicles that have been marked with decals and logos that are not TBS approved. Further, many vehicles remain unmarked though they have not been approved for exemption from the FIP policy.

All interviewees who were asked the question agreed that there is a need for vehicle markings in most situations. Moreover, most felt that clear marking of vehicles to make them more easily and readily identifiable was crucial for health and safety reasons, particularly for those working at the Ports of Entry (POEs). In some cases, vehicle markings are also deemed mandatory due to the environment in which the vehicles operate. For example, one region reported that the airport authority requires that all vehicles with restricted access be identified by the company logo or company name on both sides of the vehicle prior to travelling airside.

The CBSA is currently developing a Branding Initiative which is intended to build a sense of identity and attachment between the Agency, its employees and stakeholders. The Branding Initiative may ultimately include a requirement for Agency-specific vehicle markings and appearance. Pending approval of the Initiative, Contracting, Asset and Telecommunications Division (CATD) has directed regions to withhold marking any new vehicles. While this will reduce the need to re-mark vehicles once the policy is implemented, it means that many of the vehicles currently deployed are not FIP compliant.

Program Design and Delivery

How effective is the governance structure for the management and delivery of the fleet?

Interviewees reported that all the necessary stakeholders are involved in maintaining and managing the CBSA's fleet, including garages, the ARI^TM service provider, districts, divisions, regional representatives and NHQ. However, representatives from Comptrollership reported that greater involvement and better communication with Operations Branch to more efficiently match vehicles specifications to operational needs would be beneficial.

In terms of roles and responsibilities, interview respondents reported these were generally clear among the different stakeholders. Where roles and responsibilities were reported to be the least clear was between CATD at NHQ and the regional fleet managers. Many regional fleet managers reported that a major challenge was in defining where their role began and ended in relation to the role of NHQ. For example, at times NHQ deals directly with the district or divisional level with regards to the fleet. As a result, the regional fleet managers often reported feeling removed from the decision-making process. This lack of clarity is exacerbated by the fact that some regional fleet managers are fairly new in their position (i.e. less than one year) and that there is no specific training for regional fleet managers.

Despite the lack of clarity of roles and responsibilities between the regional fleet managers and NHQ, communication between the two groups was generally reported to be good. Many regional fleet managers reported that NHQ was both accessible in terms of answering questions and was very accommodating to their needs. When respondents reported poor communication with NHQ, it was with regard to a lack of direction on marking of fleet vehicles. This may be a result of the lack of a formal CBSA policy on marking.

The evaluation team also found that CATD is disseminating pertinent information to the regions through the INSight bulletin which is released monthly.¹⁴ Unfortunately, this publication may not be widely read at the working level in the regions. For example, interviewees in one region reported having no knowledge with regards to the timeline for the transition from the previous service provider to ARI^TM despite this information appearing in several INSight bulletins leading up to the transfer date.

Within the regions, those with fleet committees reported mostly good communications through the use of regular conference calls. However, respondents in two regions reported they would prefer even more networking and information sharing opportunities, especially with other regions. To date, there has only been one national fleet conference which took place in October 2008. While a draft Roles and Responsibilities document between CATD and regional fleet managers was produced during the meeting, it was never finalized.

Overall, communications with external stakeholders such as garages and the service provider ARI^TM were generally reported to be good. NHQ respondents also reported good communication with external stakeholders including PWGSC, TBS, and the auctioneer company for disposal of vehicles.

How effective is the ongoing performance measurement system for the fleet?

Information that is collected with regards to the fleet is used mostly for life-cycle management (i.e. monitoring of maintenance and usage to ensure vehicles are used effectively and efficiently, and for the purpose of replacement). This information is either collected through tools developed in-house such as MS Excel spreadsheets or through the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log.¹⁵

Each motor vehicle has a designated Monthly Vehicle Trip Log that is to be completed by the driver each time a vehicle is used. The information captured on the log includes: date of usage, purpose, driver name, detailed explanation of use of vehicle, kilometres for the start of each trip and end of each trip, total kilometres of trip, date of oil change, and whether there were any issues noted with the vehicles. The odometer readings are input into the ARI^TM system once a month either by a designated officer or administrative clerk within the work unit or are sent to the regional fleet clerk for input. While the trip log captures crucial information with regard to the overall condition of the vehicle and helps ensure that vehicles are used appropriately, it is used primarily at a national level for replacement purposes.

Interviews show there are some issues with the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log. For example, regional fleet managers reported that the logs are not always diligently completed and sent in on time. ARI^TM and regional management have reported that the situation has improved in the recent months due to reminders from management.

Fleet vehicle users also reported issues with completing the logs. Primarily, the logs can be inconvenient and impractical for some units who use vehicles for short durations and frequently (e.g. officers working at the airports who do short but frequent trips, surveillance vehicles used in investigations which may be parked for long periods of time, and vehicles used for escorting which are constantly on the road). Others stated they feel the logs are problematic since they only serve to report on kilometre usage, which alone is not sufficient for effective decision making with regard to vehicle replacement.

Treasury Board Secretariat requires that departments ensure that essential information about their fleet is tracked for management and reporting purposes by using a fleet management information system and a companion credit card, or an equivalent system, to monitor the cost of operating, maintaining and repairing vehicles as part of a life-cycle management approach to fleet management.

In the transition of service providers, all vehicles were transferred into the new ARI^TM Insights system. Further, all newly purchased vehicles appear in the system automatically with the creation of an account / fuel card request. The ARI^TM fleet management service provider developed and operates the ARI^TM Insights system that allows the CBSA to generate a department-wide view of all maintenance, operating and repair costs related to the fleet. The system also contains an inventory of the boats and vehicles including their make and model, as well as the fuel and maintenance cards dedicated¹⁶ to these vehicles.

Information from the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log is also input into the ARI^TM Insights system such as vehicle odometer readings submitted on a monthly basis by the regions. While the system not only tracks data, it can also generate reports on the vehicle inventory, the yearly carbon footprint, average kilometres per litre, maintenance, accident reports and more. With regard to boats, only fuel and maintenance costs are recorded in the ARI^TM system.

For the most part, interviewees were unaware of the system functionalities and none of the regions reporting using the ARI^TM system in their life-cycle management planning. Instead, fleet managers and clerks reported relying on internally developed spreadsheets that track the same information as that which is captured in the system leading to a duplication of work.

The evaluation also found that data is not input into the system in a consistent manner. For example, regions and districts are required to fill out a credit card action request form upon receipt of a new vehicle. The information on the form is in turn inputted by ARI^TM in the ARI^TM Insights system and will serve for vehicle identification, management and planning purposes. However, there are no guidelines or standard operating procedures on how to fill out the forms leading to inconsistent data entry. As a result, certain fields including type of fuel required, physical location of vehicle and purpose of vehicle are often left blank which hinders the ability to conduct in-depth analyses of the fleet life-cycle management.

How effective is the design and delivery of fleet-related training?

The evaluation found that training offered in relation to fleet vehicles can be categorized as training for specialty equipment, techniques for specialized types of work or use of the ARI^TM Insights system. For the use of detection technology equipment, interviewees reported receiving training on driving with the Scan Trailer, operating the VACIS and in some regions where necessary, receiving a specialized license for operation of the COMET trucks. In regions with fleet boats, interviewees also reported receiving an on-the-water boat operator course that covered topics such as navigation, night navigation, trailering and boat safety.

Specialized techniques and skills training reported during interviews includes a five-day surveillance course, a two-day pursuit and dangerous driving techniques course, transport control tactics for transporting detainees, and driving with finesse. With regards to the ARI^TM system, regional fleet clerks and regional staff responsible for inputting fleet information reported receiving an online overview of the system shortly after the transfer of service providers. Though most found the training to be useful, interviewees reported that it was very high level and did not discuss the system's multiple functionalities. Many of those who reported receiving ARI training were also under the impression that further training was to be offered at a later date. Users can benefit from additional system training through a virtual trainer and webcast available on ARI^TM Insights but unlike the introductory training, this training is voluntary and users have to register on their own initiative and time which could explain the lack of participation. It was not possible to determine through the system the number of CBSA users that have taken advantage of the ARI^TM Insights virtual training.

Some interviewees reported receiving standard vehicle usage courses that cover basic techniques to safely and responsibly operate a motor vehicle. For example, fleet users working at the airports reported having received an airside driving course to ensure safety and compliance while on the tarmac. The most commonly reported course on general usage was a Green Defensive Driving course offered by PWGSC. However, a frequent criticism is that this course is too theoretical and of limited use.

Figure 5: Number of Green Defensive Driving course participants per fiscal year

Fiscal Year	2003-2004	2004-2005	2005-2006	2006-2007	2007-2008	2008-2009
Number of Participants	490	305	250	175	85	0

Source: CATD, Comptrollership Branch.

There are a variety of partners involved in the delivery of training. While some courses are delivered internally through the CBSA (e.g. surveillance course, transport control tactics), others are provided by other government departments and external groups.¹⁷

Results

How well is the fleet managed?

The Fleet Management Review conducted in fiscal years 2005–2006 and 2006–2007 allowed the Agency to identify vehicles that were being underused. As a result, those vehicles were either reallocated or disposed of in order to establish an optimal base fleet size for the Agency.

The Agency has also incorporated manufacturers' production timelines into the planning phase as per the service standards outlined on the CATD intranet Web site.¹⁸ Replacement vehicles are ordered approximately three months prior to anticipated requirements (e.g., vehicles purchased in the new fiscal year are in fact ordered in late January / early February). Nevertheless, some interviewees expressed concerns about the length of time it takes in getting a vehicle and did not understand why the wait is required if an identical vehicle to the one purchased is available in a dealership lot. However, no significant negative operational impacts were reported as a result of the delivery wait time.

For each category of vehicle (e.g., compact sedans, small utility trucks, seven passenger vans), PWGSC will determine which is the most cost-effective based on price, fuel consumption and green house gas emissions (GHG) in order to create the Government Motor Vehicle Ordering Guide. The CBSA orders vehicles in accordance with this guide and does not have any guidelines above or beyond those set out by PWGSC. However, to meet operational requirements, the CBSA may order vehicles that are not listed as the top-rated vehicle in a particular category as long as proper justification is provided.¹⁹

A matrix outlining vehicle type per function or activity was drafted in 2005 however it has not been finalized or implemented across the Agency. There would be a number of advantages to developing such a matrix. As a reference document, it would assist regions in selecting vehicles during the replacement cycle and facilitate greater consistency and transparency in decision making. The matrix could also be used to support the Agency's branding initiatives by specifying types and the colours of vehicles for certain purposes.

The planning phase of life-cycle management of the CBSA's fleet comprises of two replacement periods — once in the fall when the new PWGSC Departmental Individual Standing Offers (DISO)²⁰ come into effect and again at the beginning of the calendar year (during the 3^rd and 4^th quarters) — during which the CATD at NHQ orders vehicles for the eight different regions.²¹ CATD uses key indicators such as age, repair costs and odometer readings collected by the Monthly Vehicle Trip Logs and captured in the ARI^TM Insights system to determine which vehicles are due for replacement. Not all vehicles that meet the criteria for replacement are replaced at once and therefore vehicle replacement is prioritized. A number of regions have developed fleet committees comprised of representatives from each district and division that employ vehicles to determine where the most pressing needs are for the region for vehicle replacement. While one region has just begun this practice, others reported meeting on a quarterly basis.

According to regional interview respondents, it is not always clear who determines which vehicles are to be replaced during these replacement periods. A few districts and divisions reported proactively developing lists of vehicles due for replacement, while regions with fleet committees proactively develop a region-wide list of vehicles to be replaced. Conversely, other regions reported having little input in the process and believe that NHQ pre-selects which vehicles will be changed. Still other regions use a combined approach for planning replacements whereby the individual districts and divisions will compile a list identifying which vehicles they would like to see replaced with which type of new vehicle, including a justification as to why. This information is then compared to the NHQ list of vehicles to be replaced and any discrepancies between the two are negotiated between NHQ and the region.

Other issues reported with the planning for replacement of vehicles include the length of time for replacements to arrive, and the amount of justification required for ordering a different type of vehicle as a replacement (e.g., ordering an SUV to replace a minivan). The most commonly cited issue was the use of odometer readings by NHQ to determine which vehicles were to be replaced. Many if not all regions reported that this was an ineffective measure by which to determine when to replace a vehicle when used alone. As such, many interviewees including regional fleet managers reported they would like the replacement process employed by CATD at NHQ to be more transparent including an overview of the formula and process used by NHQ to determine which vehicles were due for replacement.

Some regions did state however, that it was not always clear how to set about acquiring additional vehicles, while others found it required a lengthy justification process that included drafting a business case, often on short notice. Regions may purchase additional vehicles when they have enough funding to do so, however, they must make a permanent budget transfer to CATD in Comptrollership Branch to cover the cost of replacing that vehicle at the end of its life-cycle (approximately seven years).²²

One exception to the standard acquisition process is for specialized vehicles used with detection equipment. The Detection Technology Section (DTS) of the Borders Enforcement Division does not coordinate purchases of detection equipment vehicles through the CATD at NHQ, and does not need to purchase the chassis for its detection equipment through the PWGSC Government Motor Vehicle Ordering Guide. In fact, when detection technology and tool vehicles (e.g., VACIS and COMET) are purchased, DTS will post a Statement of Work (SOW) through PWGSC on the MERX system, and will award a contract for the technology and not necessarily for the vehicle itself. Minimum requirements for the type of vehicle are listed in the SOW and the initial acquisition of the vehicle is done by the contracted firm. However, once the vehicles are delivered to the CBSA they are governed by the same directives as other vehicles (i.e. with regards to operation, maintenance and disposal). They are also managed by ARI^TM fleet services and assigned a fleet fuel card.

Another exception is the acquisition of boats. PWGSC does not produce an ordering guide for purchase of boats. Instead, Standing Offers are in place for certain components of boats (e.g., the motor). The acquisition of boats and snowmobiles has been a regional decision based on regionally developed business cases. However, there are no CBSA standards for the use of boats or snowmobiles and regions report that the existence of such guidelines would help facilitate the development of their business cases.

There were very few issues reported with the disposal of motor vehicles. There is a system in place in which either the region or NHQ will contact the contracted service provider to remove the vehicle for sale at auction. Regions are responsible for ensuring that all equipment and markings are removed from the vehicle prior to disposal. All funds from the sale of vehicles are put into the Assets and Fleet Management Trust Account for Vehicles to be put toward future fleet purchases and replacements.

While the level of sophistication varies across the Agency, all regions reported using some kind of system for monitoring and managing the usage of vehicles. Depending on the size of the fleet in question, monitoring is conducted either within the individual office, or at the district or divisional level. One region has developed a central reservation system for all fleet vehicles used for general purposes (e.g., vehicles used for administrative purposes such as meetings, transporting Agency employees to different locations, etc.). Other regions either designate vehicles and boats to work teams or officers, or employ a wipe-board or sign-out sheet.

In terms of monitoring the maintenance of vehicles and boats, the evaluation team found no major issues. All regions are aware of their responsibilities for maintenance, and the monitoring of maintenance is conducted at the division, district or regional level. Usually one or two people (either officers or clerks) are designated the task of monitoring and coordinating maintenance of vehicles. In one region, the regional fleet manager has begun a process by which a monthly inspection of randomly chosen vehicles is conducted to ensure that the districts and divisions are maintaining their fleet on a regular basis.

The evaluation found that processes and procedures for the identification of vehicles needing replacement and disposal have not been disseminated to regions. Many respondents in the regions stated that they would benefit from receiving clear guidelines that would allow them to use the same methodology as NHQ to determine replacement needs. Similarly, there is an absence of policy guidance on the acquisition of vehicles to address short-term pressures such as in the case of accidents or unplanned maintenance.

Regional interviewees reported that they have not received formalized policies or procedures from NHQ regarding their obligations as vehicle users. As a result, some groups have drafted their own vehicle usage information packages and, in one region, a user checklist was developed based on Treasury Board Secretariat directives concerning operation of government vehicles. While these tools are working well, regions report that they would like to see information consolidated into an overall package of policies and procedures for fleet users that would be developed and maintained by NHQ.

The evaluation team found that there are no formal CBSA policies or guidelines for vehicle marking or the use of specialized equipment such as lighting. While regions look to CATD for functional guidance on these issues, regional interviewees reported that NHQ is sometimes unable to answer specific questions about marking of vehicles because of the lack of formal CBSA policy. While draft policies for both marking and use of sirens and light bars ²³ are being developed, they have yet to be finalized and disseminated.

How well does the fleet support operational requirements?

The Fleet Management Review conducted in fiscal years 2005–2006 and 2006–2007 allowed the Agency to create a full inventory of all CBSA vehicles, including those acquired through Citizenship and Immigration (CIC) and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), and to determine which were being underused. As a result, the fleet was decreased by 150 vehicles. Interviews show that some regions were dissatisfied with the process and felt that operations had been affected by the decrease in fleet size. Since that review, many regions have submitted business cases to acquire additional vehicles which have for the most part been approved.

Interview respondents in the regions reported that they had sufficient vehicles to meet their operational requirements with only one exception.²⁴ However, it was regularly reported that temporary shortages such as vehicles out for repair affects operations. None of those interviewed reported a surplus of vehicles.

While most interview respondents were satisfied with the quality of vehicles, some felt the servicing costs were too high due to aging fleet vehicles. With regard to meeting regional and operational requirements, the majority of interview respondents reported that the fleet was, for the most part, meeting their needs.

However, a number of respondents raised issues with respect to the size of the vehicles available for some purposes. Issues raised included vehicles being too small to accommodate fully equipped border services officers (BSOs), to transport equipment (such as tools and firearm lock boxes), or for caging (e.g., not enough room for either the driver or passenger area in the back seat once the cage was installed). An additional issue raised was the lack of four-wheel drive vehicles for work areas with rough terrain, country roads or frequent bad weather. Other issues cited were the limited variety of vehicles for those working in Intelligence and Investigation units and the need for a vehicle outfitted for transportation of detainees with a handicap.

While the CBSA does not have any policies and guidelines on the use of boats, they are used in three regions. One regional interview respondent reported that the size of their boat limits the marine unit's vessel search capabilities. For example, the boat is too small to transport the Remote Operating Vehicle (ROV) to vessels anchored offshore, therefore restricting the search of the exterior hull of a ship to those that have been docked. The officers do have the option of contacting a partner agency such as the RCMP to transport the ROV to anchored vessels, however partner agencies are required to respond to their own priorities first, meaning that the CBSA cannot always rely on them for transportation. Furthermore, the boat can transport a maximum of six officers, limiting the number of vessel searches that can take place at any given time. This is problematic in a major marine Port of Entry (POE) with a high volume of ships arriving each day.

The Agency responds to an increased need for vehicles in a number of ways. In terms of the 2010 Olympics, the CBSA will both rent additional vehicles as well as redeploy vehicles from other operational areas for the two-week period. With the creation of both the Canadian Experience Class program and the Arming Initiative, the Agency was able to purchase additional vehicles through program funding to meet operational needs. For example, when the Arming Initiative was implemented the Agency procured vehicles required for the transportation of trainees and trainers to and from the various training facilities.

To what extent is the fleet equipped and operated in a manner to improve officer safety?

There are a variety of vehicle tools and equipment required by officers to perform their many operational duties. A few examples include lights (wigwags or covert lighting, strobe lights, light bars, and cherries), PA systems, radios, cages, detainee partitions (back and front), shelving, gun lock boxes, portable Global Positioning System (GPS) and navigational systems, first aid kits, and fire extinguishers. Much of this equipment is essential to ensure the health and safety of officers. For example, specialized lighting allows officers to be easily identifiable during certain activities such as blocking traffic while conducting lane closures at land borders.

Two areas were found to present some challenges for equipping vehicles. First, while most vehicles have been outfitted with gun boxes where required, it proved to be difficult in certain types of SUVs since the boxes are required to be bolted to the frame of the vehicle. Second, while most vehicles that require lighting have had lights installed, there are no standards or directives for colour, type, supplemental support equipment or use in any of the modes. While a draft policy with regards to lighting and marking is being developed, it has not been finalized nor have any directives pertaining to standard equipment on the Agency's vehicles been implemented.

Furthermore, the number of total losses due to either accidents or incidents represents a significant cost to the Agency. For Example, the total cost in 2008–2009 amounted to more than $155,000. As previously noted, the CBSA does not have any mandatory training with regards to general safe driving.

Figure 6: Accident/Incident Annual CBSA Vehicle Statistics for All Regions

Type of Occurrence	2006-2007 (915 vehicles)	2007-2008 (975 vehicles)	2008-2009 (1003 vehicles)
Total Accidents	58	57	58
Total Incidents	33	46	54
Total Accidents + Incidents	91	103	112
Number of Total Losses Due to Accident + Incident	0	6	6
Vehicle Replacement Costs for Total Losses	$0.00	$144,990.00	$155,293.00
Accident + Incident Repair Costs	$91,032.00	$120,530.01	$115,507.16
Total of Replacement and Repair Costs to CBSA	$91,032.00	$265,520.01	$270,800.16

Source: CATD, Comptrollership Branch.

Does fleet management contribute to the sustainable development / environmental objectives of the federal government?

In 2006, the Government of Canada introduced the Federal Sustainable Development Act (FSDA) in response to a number of international commitments made over the past two decades. As part of the FSDA, the Government of Canada is responsible for implementing a Sustainable Development Strategy, which will be led by Environment Canada and tabled in Parliament no later than summer 2010.²⁷

The CBSA's Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS) 2007–2009 establishes the link between sustainable development and existing policies, programs and operations with the aim of integrating sustainable development in management and decision-making processes. The ultimate goal is to meet the Agency's mandate while contributing to a prosperous economy, the quality of the environment and social equity.²⁸

As part of the SDS, the CBSA supports the Federal House in Order initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to use green procurement to advance the government-wide sustainable development objectives. Under this first objective, the CBSA aims to annually reduce greenhouse gas emissions per vehicle kilometre by 15% from the 2002–2003 levels. This goal was partially met in 2004–2005 and again in 2007–2008 as greenhouse gas emissions were reduced by 10%.²⁹ The CBSA also purchases ethanol-blended fuel for the fleet vehicles, when available.³⁰ In 2007–2008, the CBSA purchased 38,800 litres of ethanol or ethanol-blended gasoline which amounts to 2% of all vehicle fuel purchased by the Agency.³¹

PWGSC assigns a high priority to fuel efficiency and emissions when determining which vehicles will be selected for the Government Motor Vehicle Ordering Guide. As such, the CBSA purchases fuel-efficient, low-emission vehicles where it is cost effective and operationally feasible. As well, within the fleet, the Agency has a total of 21 hybrid vehicles which represents 2% of the total fleet.³²

Figure 7: Distribution by region of CBSA's hybrid vehicles

Region	Number of hybrid vehicles
Total	21
Headquarters	2
Atlantic	3
Quebec	6
Northern Ontario	3
Windsor – St. Clair	3
Niagara Falls – Fort Erie	1
Greater Toronto Area	1
Prairies	0
Pacific	2

Source: ARI^TM Insights system, June 2009.

Most of those interviewed supported the use of hybrid vehicles. However, the number of models is limited and in some cases they may not meet operational requirements due to vehicle size and limited capacity to transport fully equipped BSOs and equipment. Concern was also raised as to the cost of hybrids which can be significantly greater than non-hybrid alternatives. For example, in the Department Individual Standing Offers, the Ford Escape Hybrid is approximately $10,000 more expensive than a non-hybrid model.

Efficiency

To what extent does Fleet Management make the best use of resources?

Within the Agency, the cost of fleet management is divided between NHQ and the regions. NHQ is financially responsible for the cost related to the acquisition of the vehicles while the regions are responsible for maintenance and disposal.

Figure 8: Fleet Management cost estimate for 2008–2009³³

Types of costs	Amount($)
Human Resources34	$690,877
Fuel	$1,561,779
Maintenance	$1,144,465
Service provider	$63,725
Replacement vehicles	$1,866,868
New vehicles	$721,061
Sub-total	$6,048,775
Disposal income	($128,767)
Total	$5,920,008

Source: Collective Agreements, Rates of Pay, CATD Comptrollership Branch, ARI^TM Insights system - June 2009 and interviews.

Figure 9: Cost of Service Charges³⁵ over the Last Three Fiscal Years

Fiscal Year	2006-2007	2007-2008	2008-2009
Service charges	$52,125	$58,770	$63,725

Source: CATD, Comptrollership Branch.

Since fiscal 2006–2007, service charges have increased by 22.3% due mainly to a 9.6% increase in the number of fleet vehicles. Over the same period, fuel costs increased by about 6% and average maintenance costs per vehicle remained stable.

Figure 10: Fuel Consumption in Litres

Regions	2006-2007 Fuel Litres	2007-2008 Fuel Litres	2008-2009 Fuel Litres
Headquarters	34,388	29,145	43,631
Rigaud	37,254	31,574	46,770
Atlantic	176,034	186,495	264,457
Quebec	343,880	357,810	273,267
Northern Ontario	159,659	169,146	159,958
Greater Toronto Area	245,629	275,405	314,413
Windsor–St. Clair	127,388	138,787	137,264
Niagara–Fort Erie	122,334	136,618	131,817
Prairies	241,535	255,888	228,480
Pacific	317,270	305,765	319,912
Grand Total	1,805,369	1,886,633	1,919,970
Average per vehicle	1973.1	1935.0	1914.2

Source: CATD, Comptrollership Branch.

There are 317 vehicles where the life maintenance costs have exceeded $5,000. This represents 31.6% of the CBSA fleet. Out of the 317 vehicles, 296 are light-duty vehicles such as pick-up trucks, vans or cars. Furthermore, 83.4% of these light-duty vehicles that have exceeded $5,000 in maintenance over their life-cycle are six years of age or older.

Figure 11: Vehicle maintenance costs

Regions	2006-2007 Total Cost	2007-2008 Total Cost	2008-2009 Total Cost
Headquarters	$19,993	$25,125	$18,588
Rigaud	$53,331	$37,507	$28,615
Atlantic	$146,280	$147,438	$114,913
Quebec	$175,407	$214,271	$219,775
Northern Ontario	$69,777	$105,077	$109,040
Greater Toronto Area	$207,034	$249,550	$204,911
Windsor–St. Clair	$82,025	$71,712	$83,987
Niagara–Fort Erie	$75,801	$100,682	$79,206
Prairies	$123,687	$115,525	$103,245
Pacific	$139,046	$219,970	$182,185
Grand Total	$1,092,381	$1,286,857	$1,144,465
Average per vehicle	$1193.9	$1319.9	$1141.0

Source: CATD, Comptrollership Branch.

The 2008 CBSA Internal Audit Report of Fleet Management found that the use of a fleet management services provider allows for major cost avoidance in the procurement of low-risk, high-volume purchases under $500. Fleet acquisition cards are used to reduce and simplify the procurement and payment process for the purchase of fuel, repairs and maintenance of the vehicle fleet. This also allows the CBSA to benefit from fuel vendor, automotive tire and mechanical services parts, repairs and preventative maintenance discounts. The service provider will also identify repairs deemed unnecessary and will either inform the regional fleet manager or deny the repair. Figure 12 gives examples of such cost savings and denials.

Figure 12: Negotiated savings in the last 12 months as per ARI^TM.

Description	Number of claims	Amount saved	Percentage
Fleet manager denied	3	$4,910.68	43.3%
Price negotiations	18	$1,349.51	11.9%
Repair denial	9	$2,869.96	25.3%
Unnecessary repair	7	$1,635.67	14.4%
Warranty adjustment	3	$566.38	5.0%
Total	40	$11,332.20	100.00%

Source: ARI^TM Insights system, June 2009.

Interviewees reported that the current budget does not reflect additional replacement needs stemming from the large number of vehicle purchases that occurred following the Public Security and Anti-Terrorism (PSAT) funded initiatives in 2002–2003.

Figure 13: National replacement budget for last three fiscals

Fiscal Years	Number of replacement vehicles	Cost ($)	Number of new vehicles36	Cost ($)
2006–2007	29	$784,225	11	$297,422
2007–2008	87	$2,319,837	33	$878,113
2008–2009	80	$1,866,868	27	$721,061

Source: CATD, Comptrollership Branch.

The CBSA Vehicle Replacement Plan is based on a five to seven-year vehicle life-cycle, or between 100,000 to 140,000 kilometres depending on vehicle use and environment. Based on these criteria, in February of 2008 CATD estimated that 100 vehicles in fiscal year 2008–2009, and 150 vehicles in fiscal year 2009–2010 would require replacement. An increase of $2.1M in the vehicle replacement budget for fiscal year 2009–2010 would be required to meet these targets. As of August 2009, there are 316 vehicles that are seven years or older and thus, due for replacement. At the current replacement rate, CATD estimates that fleet vehicles would be replaced on a 12-year cycle. If the average age of the fleet is allowed to increase, both the cost and frequency of maintenance can be expected to increase. The use of older vehicles could also raise safety concerns.

One region has developed a centralized booking system for corporate service vehicles. This allows them not only to keep track of vehicles, but also to ensure that each vehicle is used regularly and that use is maximized. Interviews reveal that some of the larger offices conduct occasional rotations of vehicles in their different work units to ensure equal use and maximized mileage. While this occurs mostly within divisions, it may also be done among the different districts particularly in regions where fleet committees are in place. One group reported assigning vehicles with the highest mileage first thus eliminating favouritism toward the newest vehicles. Some regions also reported that clerks monitor whether vehicles are being used efficiently and equally by reviewing Monthly Vehicle Trip Logs and other tools that capture usage. Finally, one division reported conducting yearly reviews of the placement of their vehicles in order to reassign to different areas as needed.

Reassigning older vehicles to the National Learning Centre in Rigaud has resulted in efficient vehicle usage. Rather than completely disposing of older vehicles that may no longer be suitable for use at their present location but that still function, they may be sent to Rigaud where they are used for short trips within the training campus or for use in training exercises. For example, some vehicles are used when teaching control and defence tactics, such as vehicle extractions or in simulation exercises on how to interact with the public in the Primary Inspection Lines (PIL) at the land borders. This practice extends the life-cycle of vehicles and avoids the high costs of purchasing brand new vehicles for Rigaud.

Are the most appropriate means being used to achieve objectives?

These committees allow individual regions to more proactively identify vehicles for replacement and also facilitate decisions around relocation of vehicles to better meet operational needs. For example, in the replacement planning stages, if one unit within the region requires a 4x4 vehicle, it could opt for a used vehicle from another district rather than a new vehicle, thus reducing costs. This relocation of vehicles was less frequent in regions that do not have a fleet committee or similar structure.

The CBSA does not have a national level fleet committee that meets on a regular basis to deal with fleet management related issues. Regions deal individually with NHQ and key information shared with one region may not always be distributed to the rest of the Agency. The lack of policies, standards and agreements also leads to implementation variations from region to region. Furthermore, the Operations Branch is not involved in the fleet management process though it is best suited to understand regional and operational needs. The RCMP is an example of an OGD that has a national vehicle equipment committee that is responsible for:

• Approving the installation of all equipment and vehicle modifications;
• Directing on the installation location, procedures, fixed points, electrical connections, power configurations, and safety requirements;
• Advising management, i.e. national, regional and divisional levels, on vehicle equipment management throughout the life-cycle process;
• Developing and monitoring a quality control framework for vehicle equipment management;
• Reviewing, developing and maintaining installation standard practices and procedures for marked police cruisers;
• Inputting into the establishment of performance benchmarks for all aspects of the installation and sustainment of vehicle equipment management; and
• Providing a forum for the exchange and dissemination of best practices, technical information and information on vehicle equipment.

Some CBSA vehicles are equipped with GPS tracking and fleet management systems. This technology not only allows the CBSA to locate a vehicle's position, but it can also be used to generate data reports on hours in operation, distance, speed and slow-downs therefore potentially eliminating the use for logs. There is a wide variety of service providers that offer a system that can be consulted online and that can generate personalized reports based on selected criteria and interests.

Conclusions, Recommendations and Management Response

The evaluation found that there remains a need for the CBSA to operate a fleet of vehicles due to the many tasks the Agency is required to perform (e.g., detainee transport, transportation of detection equipment, surveillance). Further, it is imperative that the CBSA own its fleet vehicles given PWGSC requirements and that many activities require modifications (e.g., detainee partitions, affixed lighting, specialized equipment and tools) that would not be feasible in leased vehicles.

In terms of governance, the evaluation found that the appropriate stakeholders are involved in fleet activities, and roles and responsibilities are mostly clear at the district and regional levels, though less so between the national fleet manager at Contracting, Asset and Telecommunications Division (CATD) in NHQ and the regional fleet managers. Nevertheless, communication was found to also be good between the various stakeholders (both internal and external) involved in overall fleet management.

Information on the use and maintenance of fleet vehicles is being captured regularly at the district or division, the regional and the national levels through the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log, in-house developed MS Excel spreadsheets and through the ARI^TM Insights system. However, for the most part, interviewees were unaware of the system functionalities and none of the regions reported using the ARI^TM system in their life-cycle management planning.

The CBSA's fleet management is aligned with Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) policies and directives with regards to planning, purchasing, maintaining and disposing of fleet vehicles. Furthermore, fleet vehicles were found to be sufficient in number. The evaluation team found added value to having regional fleet committees. These committees allow individual regions to more proactively identify vehicles for replacement and also facilitate decisions around relocation of vehicles to better meet operational needs. Regions with fleet committees were generally more satisfied with the replacement process than those that did not have them in place.

However, the evaluation found that the type of vehicle purchased does not always meet operational needs and that the Agency does not have criteria for choosing vehicle type by activity, function or mode. A vehicle matrix has been drafted that outlines the vehicle types best suited to the different activities though it has yet to be finalized and implemented across the Agency. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendation:

Recommendation 1 – The Comptrollership Branch, in consultation with Operations Branch and Enforcement Branch, should finalize a vehicle matrix that identifies approved vehicles based on use, equipment requirements, geographical and environmental considerations, and ensures that the matrix is disseminated to all regional fleet managers.

Management Response:

The Comptrollership Branch concurs with the recommendation and, in consultation with Operations in the Regions and in HQ and with the Enforcement Branch, will develop a vehicle matrix (including boats and snowmobiles) based on vehicle use, equipment requirements, geographical location and environmental consideration by January 2010. Once completed, the Comptrollership Branch will update the Fleet Management Policy accordingly. The vehicle matrix will be disseminated to all regional fleet managers and posted on the CATD Web site in February 2010 and subsequently revised periodically.

---

The evaluation found that the CBSA fleet of vehicles does not consistently meet the standards set out in the Federal Identity Program (FIP) which requires that all government vehicles bear the department or agency's signature and the “Canada” wordmark. Site visits revealed that a number of designs are currently being used for marking of CBSA fleet vehicles.

The CBSA is currently developing a Branding Initiative which is intended to build a sense of identity and attachment between the Agency, its employees and stakeholders. The Branding Initiative may ultimately include a requirement for Agency-specific vehicle markings and appearance. Pending approval of the Initiative, CATD has directed regions to withhold marking any new vehicles. While this will reduce the need to re-mark vehicles once the policy is implemented, it means that many of the CBSA vehicles are not FIP compliant. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendation:

Recommendation 2 – The Comptrollership Branch should finalize and distribute a policy and guidelines concerning vehicle markings that is aligned with Federal Identity Program requirements and supports the Branding Initiative currently underway.

Management Response:

The Comptrollership Branch concurs with the recommendation and will finalize the vehicle marking policy and guidelines based on vehicle function by November 2009. The policy will be aligned with the Federal Identity Program requirements and will support the Branding Initiative. The marking policy and guidelines will be incorporated into the Fleet Management Policy in January 2010 and disseminated to all regional fleet managers and posted on the CATD Web site in February 2010. The policy will subsequently be revised periodically as required.

---

Overall, the evaluation found that considerable attention has been paid to the management of the Agency's fleet vehicles over the last few years. The Fleet Management Review conducted in fiscal years 2005–2006 and 2006–2007 included a complete review and analysis of the Agency's vehicle inventory and helped to improve efficiency by eliminating or reallocating underused vehicles. The Review also resulted in the implemented key management practices such as a preventative maintenance program and the use of the Monthly Vehicle Trip Log to capture usage data.

The February 2008 internal audit of Fleet Management concluded that the Agency is compliant with Treasury Board Secretariat material policies but that improvements could be made in the area of life-cycle management. The evaluation found evidence to suggest that the CBSA may not have the necessary vehicle replacement resources allocated to support good life-cycle management of its fleet.

At current funding levels, CATD estimates that fleet vehicles would be replaced on a 12-year cycle. If the average age of the fleet is allowed to increase, both the cost and frequency of maintenance can be expected to increase. The use of older vehicles could also raise safety concerns. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendation:

Recommendation 3 – The Comptrollership Branch should consider developing a long-term replacement strategy to ensure that the average age of the CBSA fleet vehicles does not exceed seven years.

Management Response:

The Comptrollership Branch concurs with the recommendation and, in consultation with Operations Branch, will conduct research in November 2009 on developing a long-term replacement strategy to ensure that the average age of fleet vehicles does not exceed seven years. A proposed strategy will be presented to the Vice-President of the Comptrollership Branch for consideration and approval in January 2010.

---

The use of boats is important to the operations of the Agency in certain regions. For example, in the marine mode, Flexible Response Teams require vehicles to transport equipment needed to conduct rummages and marine security visits and in some cases, the CBSA uses its own boats or those owned by other agencies, such as the RCMP, to meet commercial vessels on the water before they dock. Boats are also used for general transportation to reach designated marine reporting sites and to staff ports that are located on islands that would otherwise be inaccessible. Similarly, snowmobiles are used to access remote areas during the winter months.

Regions develop business cases to justify the acquisition of new or replacement boats. However, there are no CBSA standards for the use of boats and regions report that the existence of such guidelines would help facilitate and expedite the development of their business cases. In light of these findings, the evaluation makes the following recommendation:

Recommendation 4 – To provide a framework for acquisition decisions, the Operations Branch should consider developing guidelines outlining the rationale for, and acceptable use of, boats and other vehicles such as snowmobiles.

Management Response:

The Operations Branch concurs with the recommendation. In consultation with other program areas, Operations Branch will develop guidelines that outline the rationale for the use of boats and other vehicles such as snowmobiles by March 2011. In addition to guidelines, a needs analysis and a policy must be developed in support of these vehicles.

---

• 1. 2009-2010 Report on Plans and Priorities, Canada Border Services Agency. [Return to text]
• 2. 2009-2010 Report on Plans and Priorities, Canada Border Services Agency. [Return to text]
• 3. Light-duty vehicles are defined as passenger cars, vans and light trucks consistent with Parts II and III of the Government Motor Vehicle Ordering Guide published by PWGSC. http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=12065&section=text#appA. Medium-duty vehicles are those consistent with Part IV of the Government Motor Vehicle Ordering Guide published by PWGSC, and are based on the Nominal Payload (defined as the approximate allowable weight of the driver, passengers, cargo, tongue weight of the trailer and optional equipment). [Return to text]
• 4. Medium-duty trucks include the VACIS and COMET trucks. [Return to text]
• 5. The CBSA was established on December 12, 2003 bringing together the enforcement activities of the Customs, Immigration and Food Inspection portfolios. [Return to text]
• 6. CBSA Fleet Management Review presentation, January 18, 2006. [Return to text]
• 7. Audit of Fleet Management: Internal Audit Report, February 2008. [Return to text]
• 8. Audit of Fleet Management: Internal Audit Report, February 2008. [Return to text]
• 9. Medium-duty vehicles are not governed by Treasury Board Secretariat directives but must be procured through the PWGSC National Master Standing Offer. [Return to text]
• 10. A fleet card is a card provided by a fleet management service provider, to be used for the purchase of fuel and other operating and maintenance expenses related to government vehicles. Normally a fleet card should be assigned to one vehicle. In some departments, fleet cards are unassigned and available to be used for several vehicles. http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?evttoo=X&id=12065&section=text#appA. [Return to text]
• 11. As part of the enforcement of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) may remove from Canada any person who has been issued a removal order for breaching the Act. [Return to text]
• 12. There are three acceptable reasons for exemption: for national security purposes, for health and safety reasons or where marking of a government vehicle may affect operational effectiveness (e.g., vehicles used for surveillance purposes). [Return to text]
• 13. Site visits, interviews and the February 2008 Audit of Fleet Management Internal Audit Report. [Return to text]
• 14. Some of the information provided through the bulletins over the course of the 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 fiscal years includes: how to relocate or remove two-way radio equipment from CBSA vehicles; the announcement of the new standing offer for Fleet Management Support Services with details of the transition including the new services provided by ARITM; discussion of the CBSA vehicle markings in terms of the TBS FIP Policy; discussion of the replacement of PASS Radio Microphones; the legal requirement for winter tires in Quebec; a link to the ARITM Web site which includes access to virtual training; the new requirement to input odometer readings in ARITM and; PWGSC's announcement that ARITM cards can no longer be used to pay at the pump in order to avoid White Card Fraud. [Return to text]
• 15. Boats are not assigned Monthly Vehicle Trip Logs and odometer readings are not recorded in the ARITM system. Rather, working units that operate boats keep a local record of the hours of use. This information is used in the life-cycle management of the boats (e.g., to determine when maintenance or replacement is due). [Return to text]
• 16. Some vehicles are designated more than one card. For example, vehicles driven in the United States will also have a Government of Canada credit card. [Return to text]
• 17. Some of the delivery partners mentioned during interviews include the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP), Toronto Police, Sûreté du Québec, the Justice Institute of British Columbia, the Canadian Coast Guard as well as private trainers. [Return to text]
• 18. In general, PWGSC standing offers allow for a turnaround of 90 to 120 days for production and delivery of light-duty vehicles. The turnaround time allowed for alternative fuel vehicles is estimated to be between 120 and 150 days. [Return to text]
• 19. For example, specific vehicles may be required for surveillance purposes in order to blend into a particular environment. [Return to text]
• 20. The Departmental Individual Standing Offers method of procurement offers departments and agencies a choice of vehicles with a variety of options at pre-agreed prices for a specific period of time. [Return to text]
• 21. It should be noted that not every year has two replacement cycles. For example, if there were a high number of accidents that called for unexpected replacements throughout the fiscal year, there may not be enough funding left in the national budget for the second replacement ordering period. CATD, Comptrollership Branch. [Return to text]
• 22. The permanent budget transfer is based on the cost of replacing a $30,000 vehicle. The region who acquires the new vehicle must pay the initial purchasing cost in addition to transferring 20% of the replacement cost to CATD each year over the course of five years (which is the approximate life-cycle of a fleet vehicle). This amounts to approximately $6,000 per year transferred to CATD from the region. [Return to text]
• 23. Lighting requirements and restrictions are dictated by provincial legislation and therefore vary from region to region. [Return to text]
• 24. One region had a shortage of vehicles within one particular division, requiring long-term leasing of two cars. At the time of this evaluation, the division was in the process of submitting a business case to purchase the two vehicles that were lacking. [Return to text]
• 25. Accidents are defined as any vehicle-on-vehicle collision. [Return to text]
• 26. Incidents are defined as damage that does not involve another vehicle (i.e. animal; force of nature (ex. wind); sandblasting near vehicle; compound gate malfunction; vehicle failure damage; hitting walls, pillars, barriers, etc.). [Return to text]
• 27. From the Government of Canada Web site: http://www.sdinfo.gc.ca/s16_e.cfm. [Return to text]
• 28. From the Government of Canada Web site: http://www.sdinfo.gc.ca/s14_e.cfm#2. [Return to text]
• 29. CBSA 2007–2008 Departmental Performance Report: Sustainable Development Strategy (Supplementary Tables). [Return to text]
• 30. The target does not outline what percentage of fuel purchased should be ethanol-blended. [Return to text]
• 31. CBSA 2007–2008 Departmental Performance Report: Sustainable Development Strategy (Supplementary Tables). [Return to text]
• 32. Though the CBSA also has a number of flex-fuel or alternative-fuel vehicles, it was not possible using the ARITM system to distinguish them from regular gasoline vehicles. [Return to text]
• 33. This is an estimate of the annual cost of fleet management in the Agency. It considers direct costs of fleet acquisition, operation, and disposal such as, salaries of major stakeholders, operation and management. It does not include indirect costs such as time spent by administration consolidating bills, time spent by officers bringing vehicles to the garage, training, cost of acquiring specialized equipment and/or vehicles, etc. [Return to text]
• 34. The Human Resources estimate is based on the mid-level salary for one FTE (PG-05 – national fleet manager) and 0.5 FTE (AS-04 – senior program officer) at NHQ and 0.33 FTE (FB-06 – regional fleet managers) and one FTE (CR-04 – regional fleet clerks) per region. [Return to text]
• 35. ARITM charges the CBSA a fixed monthly management fee of $4.46 per vehicle. [Return to text]
• 36. New vehicles are vehicles added to the existent fleet and where acquired through new program funding. [Return to text]