CONTENTS
Standing
Committee on Public Accounts
THIRTIETH
LEGISLATURE
of
the
Legislative Assembly of
Saskatchewan
STANDING
COMMITTEE ON
Hansard
Verbatim Report
No.
11 — Friday, October 17, 2025
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay folks, good morning.
We’ll convene the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. I’m Trent
Wotherspoon, Chair of the Public Accounts. I’ll introduce the members of our
committee: Deputy Chair Wilson, MLA
[Member of the Legislative Assembly] Chan, MLA Crassweller, MLA Beaudry,
MLA Gordon, MLA Pratchler.
We have the following document to table:
PAC 58‑30, Ministry of Corrections, Policing and Public Safety: Responses
to questions raised at September 22nd, 2025 meeting.
I’d like to introduce and welcome our
Provincial Comptroller again here today: Brent Hebert, Provincial Comptroller;
and Jane Borland, assistant provincial comptroller. Of course I’d like to
welcome our Provincial Auditor, Tara
Clemett, and her officials that will be with us here today. She’ll be
introducing those officials as we go.
Education
Chair Wotherspoon: — Our first focus this morning, we’ll turn to the
chapters focused on the Ministry of Education. We’ve got DM [deputy minister]
Repski and a whole bunch of fine officials from the Ministry of Ed and from
school divisions across the province that have joined us. So thank you to all
of you that have joined us here today. Thanks for your work. And thanks to all
those others that are involved in the work that we’ll be considering here
today.
DM Repski,
I’ll kick it over to you to give just a brief introduction of all the officials
you have with us here today. You can refrain from getting into the chapters at
this point. We’ll come back to the auditor for presentation, then we’ll come
back your way for that.
Clint Repski: —
Before I introduce my colleagues, I’d like to take a moment to
acknowledge the work of the Provincial Auditor and thank you and your team for
your advice and recommendations. The ministry appreciates the work of the
auditor and accepts the recommendations in her reports.
To assist me in responding to
questions today, here with me from the ministry are Jason Pirlot, assistant
deputy minister; Sameema Haque, assistant
deputy minister; other officials from the ministry. We’re also going to be
having officials from school divisions joining us today. I will introduce them
once their chapters are discussed. Together we’ll provide information and updates
on the status of the recommendations, and we’ll be pleased to answer any
questions you may have.
Chair
Wotherspoon:
— Okay, thanks so much. And then as various officials come forward to provide a
response at the table here, just introduce yourself or identify, provide your
name before you enter in.
I’m going to turn it over to
the Provincial Auditor to make her presentation, then we’ll come back to DM
Repski.
Tara
Clemett:
— So thank you, Mr. Chair, Deputy Chair, committee members, and officials. With
me today is Mr. Victor Schwab, and he is the deputy provincial auditor that is
responsible for the portfolio of work that does include the Ministry of
Education and school divisions. Behind me is Ms. Michelle Lindenbach, and she
is our liaison with the committee and will be joining us the entire day.
We
are going to present our presentations on each of the chapters in the order
that they do appear on the agenda, and this will result in six presentations,
separate. The fourth and fifth presentations are new performance audits that
include new recommendations for the committee’s consideration. So there are
seven new recommendations in each of those chapters.
The
other presentations are status updates where we’ve conducted follow-up audits
and we’ve gone back to determine whether the recommendations are addressed
accordingly. And we’re basically providing the committee with independent
assurance as to whether or not the agency has fully addressed those
recommendations.
So
I do want to thank the deputy minister and all his staff at the ministry, as
well as those at the school divisions, for all their co-operation that was
extended to us during the course of our work. With that, I’ll turn it over to
Victor to start the presentations.
Victor Schwab: — Thank you. Chapter 18 of our
2023 report volume 2, on pages 167 to 172, reports the results of our first
follow-up on the Ministry of Education’s progress towards addressing the two
outstanding recommendations initially made in our 2021 audit of its processes
to evaluate the early learning intensive support program.
By
August 2023 the ministry implemented one recommendation and partially
implemented the other one. We found the division fully implemented the first
recommendation by collecting sufficient information from school divisions
within the program on each child’s progress in their transition to
kindergarten. Also kindergarten teachers who responded to a ministry survey in
2021 indicated 58 per cent of children participating in the program effectively
transitioned to kindergarten. The information can assist the ministry in
determining whether the program adequately supports children with intensive
needs in their early learning and development, and in their transition to
kindergarten.
We
found the ministry made significant progress and partially implemented our
recommendation related to regularly collecting information about school
divisions’ actions to address the challenges identified in reviews of the early
learning intensive support program.
The
ministry drafted an action plan template to collect information about school
divisions’ actions. It planned to discuss the 2021‑2022 evaluation
results with each division during the ministry-division annual meeting in fall
of 2023 and required divisions to provide mid-year reports on action plans by
February 2024. Addressing challenges identified in program reviews helps to
reduce the risk of the program not meeting the learning and development needs
of children with intensive needs and also results in increasing children’s
success in school and life.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thank you very much
for the presentation. Of course for anyone following along, this is a follow-up
presentation here today — follow-up on these recommendations — and we have the
status update that’s been provided as well. And at this time, I’ll table that
status update. That’s PAC 59‑30, Ministry of Education: Status update,
dated October 17th, 2025.
This
committee has already considered these recommendations, concurred in them, and
we see the actions that have been taken to implement them. So I’ll kick it over
to DM Repski for a real brief remark, and then we’ll see if there’s any
questions.
Clint
Repski:
— The Provincial Auditor’s ’23 report volume 2, chapter 18 is, as was
mentioned, the follow-up audit on recommendations initially made in 2021
related to the evaluation of the early learning intensive support program.
The
program helps children requiring intensive supports requiring a good start on
early learning and development. The ministry is pleased that out of the two
recommendations initially made by the Provincial Auditor, one is considered
implemented and the second is considered partially implemented.
For
the second recommendation related to the Ministry of Education regularly
collecting information about school divisions’ actions to address the
challenges identified in its review of the early learning intensive support
program, the ministry considers this recommendation implemented.
The
ministry collects information from teachers, educational assistants, and
parents each year and shares this information back with school divisions.
School divisions provide reporting back to the ministry on how they’ve
addressed any challenges from this feedback. The ministry then works with the
school divisions to ensure any follow-up items are addressed.
And
I would be happy to take any questions you have at this time.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thanks so much. We’ll
open it up now for questions. Committee members? MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you, Chair.
Good
morning. Good to see you again. How many children are receiving supports
through the early learning intensive support program?
Sameema
Haque:
— Good morning. Sameema Haque, assistant deputy minister at the Ministry of
Education.
We
have an opportunity for up to 632 children requiring intensive supports to
attend this program. So our spots are 632. As of January reporting by the
school divisions, we have about 500 children enrolled. That is the last report
we have. We are right now in the middle of collecting all of that information.
Typically in October-November we have meetings with all the school divisions
and collect all that information. So the number hasn’t been solidified.
The
new spaces that were expanded were announced in January, and in
January-February the information was 500 of those were already filled. So we’ll
have more current information later on in the fall.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. Is there any
federal funding for these programs? If so, under which program?
Sameema
Haque:
— So the funding for the ’25‑26 fiscal year for this program is 7.9 million.
Joan Pratchler: — And is that federal funding?
7.9 million from the federal . . .
Sameema
Haque:
— Yes.
Joan Pratchler: — And what’s the name of that
program where you get that federal funding from?
Sameema
Haque:
— This is the bilateral agreement with the federal government that was
established in 2018.
Joan Pratchler: — So the child care one.
Sameema
Haque:
— No.
Joan Pratchler: — No? CWELCC [Canada-wide
early learning and child care]?
Sameema
Haque:
— This is a different agreement that was prior to the Canada-wide child care
agreement, if that’s the agreement you’re referring to.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. So this is a parallel
one to that.
Sameema
Haque:
— This is a separate agreement. I would not say it’s parallel in the sense that
it predates that child care agreement.
Joan Pratchler: —
Okay, great. Thank you. What processes had the ministry put in place to ensure
follow-through of the plans that you have here outlined today?
[09:30]
Sameema Haque:
— School divisions typically give us their action plan somewhere in June of any
given year. At that point we review those action plans, provide them feedback.
There is a little bit of engagement and back-and-forth if there are any
concerns or updates needed on those action plans.
In October we have
discussions when they have started working on those action plans and
implementation has started. That’s where there is discussion about enrolment
and the actual action items. And after that discussion, they finalize their
action plans.
We meet again in February,
and at that point the school divisions and the ministry have discussions in
regards to the actions that have been implemented already and the outcomes, and
what they plan to implement next for the rest of the fiscal year. And we
continue those discussions and back-and-forth with the school divisions. And
then we send out the survey, collect the feedback. We report that feedback back
to them and then the new action planning cycle begins.
Joan
Pratchler: —
So there’s a lot of communication that goes back and forth to oversee it.
Sameema
Haque: — There is a lot of
communication. Absolutely.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Okay, thank you. Can I just circle back to that federal funding? How long is
that? What’s the length of that agreement? Or is that continual funding? Can
you shed some light on that? I’m not all that familiar with that program.
Sameema
Haque: —
In 2018 this was signed as a three-year agreement, three-year bilateral
agreement. We had another three-year agreement following that,
and then the Government of Canada offered a one-year extension with the
intention to align all of the federal-provincial agreements around early
learning and child care. So this agreement will expire in 2026.
So 2018, ’19, ’20, first
agreement. ’21, ’22, ’23, the other one. And ’24, ending in the next year, ’26,
the next one, the last one.
Joan
Pratchler: —
And does the ministry have to request beyond that to follow that program, or
does that program automatically renew every three years?
Sameema
Haque: —
Like when the agreements expire, as is typical for any bilateral agreement, we
engage in discussions to consider renewal and what are the options, and
negotiate an extension or a new agreement.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Gordon.
Hugh
Gordon: —
I just was wondering what kind of data or questions that were asked to help
provide insights into the success of the previous program.
Sameema Haque:
— Thank you for the question. So we do three surveys. We do a teacher survey to
collect information from the teachers from their perspective, we do a survey
with the educational assistants to gather information from their perspective,
and we also do a parent survey to get context around how they’re experiencing
the program.
So we have a whole slough of
questions in each of those surveys that we asked around, and I can kind of read
an example of a question from each survey if that is the committee’s
preference. So on a teacher survey, for example, we have a question, “The educational
assistant assigned to your class has been successful in their role of
supporting children with intensive needs, relationships, interact and play with
other children.” And then they have a gradient on which they respond.
We ask information about
professional development opportunities that are made available through the
Ministry of Education. We do quite a bit of professional development through
our ministry in the form of information that we provide on learning modules as
well as webinars and training opportunities, so we collect feedback on that.
Similarly from the EAs
[educational assistant] we ask a similar type of questions. How long have they
been working in the program? What’s their experience like? What are the
challenges they’re experiencing? And then from parents too, we collect that
information.
Once we collect that
information and the information comes to us, it’s often fairly lengthy
information. We go through it program by program. We do theme the information
around what they found in the survey results and have discussions with the
school divisions on opportunities that can be used for improvement of the
program. And what’s working well, of course. Successes as well.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Just a follow-up to that. What kind of EA training is provided or mandated for
this type of instruction at this age level?
Sameema Haque:
— There is no mandatory training that is enforced by the ministry. However
school divisions, as employers, determine what kind of training is needed by
the EAs. We do in our back-and-forth collaboration with the school divisions,
as we look at the survey results, if we find feedback in our survey results
that there are areas that the EAs are feeling that they need further support
on, we would have a conversation with the school divisions. We have a lot of
information across the province, so we can guide them to best practices and all
the opportunities that are available. And certainly we make some of those
opportunities available to the ministry.
We have some foundational
stuff that we do. We have PD [professional development] opportunities that are
around literacy, around inclusive practices in early years. We have videos,
webinars around that, some around mathematics, numeracy. So we make those
available as well as share best practices across the province to guide the
process of action plan development and implementation.
Joan Pratchler: — And does the funding for
that training come under that federal agreement, or is that provincially
supported funding?
Sameema
Haque:
— The ministry funding is provided as funding for the program. We don’t
allocate it out for sub-envelopes as to what is spent on what. So school
divisions make those decisions.
Most
of the training that I’ve talked about over here is free online training.
Certainly the training that we’ve made available to the school divisions is all
free, because these are mostly online webinars and videos. So they are of no
cost to the school divisions and the EAs to take. There are other opportunities
as well that are available for free. But the program is funded as a whole, as a
program, and the school divisions make the determinations, if they so choose,
to take on training that has some cost around it.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. So I’m just trying to
parse out the support that the federal government gives to this program. It’s
not separate. It’s given to the ministry to use as it needs to for the early
learning program, you know, or there are specifications — it must be for
training; it must be for resources; it must be for salaries. Or how does that
work? I’m not 100 per cent sure.
[09:45]
Sameema
Haque:
— The funding that the school divisions get for the ELIS [early learning
intensive support] program is effectively unconditional in the sense that the
school divisions get $25,000 for every two ELIS spaces, 20,000 to fund a
half-time EA, as well as 5,000 for specialized services such as speech-language
or occupational therapy services.
In
addition, whenever a new space is added to the ELIS program, school divisions
receive a one-time start-up grant funding of $5,000 for renovations or any
materials that they need for accessibility, such as, you know, fencing for a
play area or purchasing materials to create a sensory or calming space or a
change table, depending upon the children that are enrolling in there.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. That’s all my
questions, Chair.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Any further questions,
members? Not seeing any, I’d welcome a motion to conclude consideration of
chapter 18. Moved by MLA Chan. All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, that’s carried.
We’ll move right along, and I’ll turn it back over to the Provincial Auditor to
focus on chapter 10 of the 2024 report volume 1.
Victor
Schwab:
— Thank you. Chapter 10 of our 2024 report volume 1, on pages 153 to 156,
reports the results of our sixth follow-up of the Ministry of Education’s
processes towards addressing the remaining two outstanding recommendations
initially made in our 2009 audit of its processes to achieve compliance by
school divisions in delivering student instruction time as required by the
minister. By February 2024 the ministry fully implemented the two outstanding
recommendations. We found that the ministry actively monitored the overall
instruction hours required for school divisions; that is, 950 hours per school
year for grades 1 to 12.
The
ministry also actively monitored the school divisions’ compliance with the
required instruction hours for core curriculum areas of study, like math and
science. We also found the ministry followed up and addressed school divisions
not complying with instruction hour requirements for core subjects. For
example, the ministry expects a school division to provide 95 to 100 hours of
math instruction in the year. Monitoring instructional hours, including in core
study areas, increases the likelihood that students receive the necessary
instruction to be successful in key curriculum areas.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thanks so much.
This is again a follow-up chapter here. I’ll kick it over to DM Repski and then
open it up for questions.
Clint
Repski:
— The Provincial Auditor’s 2024 report volume 1, chapter 10 is a follow-up
audit on recommendations made to the ministry’s processes to achieve compliance
by school divisions in delivering student instruction time.
School
divisions are expected to offer 950 hours of instruction time annually to
students in grades 1 to 12. The ministry is pleased to report that all school
divisions are compliant with the required hours of instruction. The ministry
agrees with and thanks the Provincial Auditor for the assessment that these
recommendations are implemented, and we would welcome any questions at this
time.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thank you. Members,
any questions? Of course we’ve considered this concurred and this is follow-up.
MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. So I see the
first time it came to light was 2009 and 2025 now, so that’s 16 years for this
implementation on instructional hours. What were some of the learnings that
were gathered along the way from 2009 to present day so that school divisions
might be better able to meet their instructional hours compliance?
Clint
Repski:
— Between 2009 and 2025, really the biggest learnings and changes that resulted
from that were a review of the school calendar handbook. And one of the biggest
things that we did was more clearly define what instructional time is. So that
has been updated in the handbook. The other thing I would mention at this point
— and I believe it was in the auditor’s recommendations — was each school
division now has to sign off on a declaration that they are in fact complying
with the requirements.
Joan
Pratchler:
— And just a quick follow-up: what would be the typical steps that you might
have in your tool box to help ensure compliance going forward?
Clint
Repski:
— To address the issues that school divisions have on their calendaring, it’s
based on an approval submission process. Once they submit their calendars,
there’s a series of things that they need to comply with. Nine-fifty is clearly
the biggest one that we’re looking for. Within our system of review, we look to
make sure that the math adds up. We are looking at the spreadsheets; we are
looking at what has been submitted. If we find a school division is not in
compliance with it, it effectively becomes a conversation, back and forth, with
the school division until we’re satisfied that they’re meeting the
requirements.
Joan
Pratchler:
— Thank you. Those are all my questions, Chair.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Beaudry? Chan? Any other
questions here? No further questions? Not seeing any, I’d welcome a motion to
conclude consideration of chapter 10. Moved by MLA Chan. All agreed? That’s
carried.
Moving
right along, I’ll turn it back to the Provincial Auditor to focus on chapter 8
from the 2025 report volume 1.
Victor Schwab: — Thank you. Chapter 8 of our
2025 report volume 1 from pages 115 to 123 reports the results of our first
follow-up on the Ministry of Education’s processes towards adjusting the five
outstanding recommendations we initially made in our 2023 audit of its processes
for implementing its Inspiring Success, First Nations and Métis pre-K to 12
[pre-kindergarten to grade 12] education policy framework. That program was to
improve education outcomes for Indigenous students.
By
2025 the ministry fully implemented three recommendations and partially
implemented the other two. The ministry started tracking the performance of its
key initiatives under its Inspiring Success framework and working with
partnerships in school divisions to address underperformance at the individual
school or partnership level.
We
found the ministry developed methods for schools or partnerships to annually
report back on the two main initiatives of the Inspiring Success framework,
which are Following Their Voices and invitational shared services initiative.
Following
Their Voices is an initiative seeking to improve Indigenous student outcomes by
engaging and supporting students through changes in student-teacher
relationships and interactions, teacher instructional practices, and the
learning environment.
The
invitational shared services initiative develops partnerships with the
provincial education system and First Nations education organizations to
support Indigenous students who live on-reserve but attend provincial schools
to provide supports and services to these students.
Enhancing
reporting and monitoring helps the ministry to determine actions to address
root causes of underperforming activities and get initiatives back on track for
Indigenous student success.
The
ministry appropriately followed its established processes for reviews during
ISSI [invitational shared services initiative] year-end reports about
Indigenous student partnerships. During our audit, we found the ministry staff
appropriately reviewed each of the submitted ISSI partnerships’ ’23‑24
year-end reports we tested.
Storing
received reports in a central database decreases the risk relevant information
can be lost or missed. Additionally having ministry staff review ISSI
partnership year-end reporting allows the ministry to identify any challenges
or underperformance by the partnerships.
The
ministry started preparing a summarized report on the actions and impacts of
ISSI partnerships and submitted it to the executive director of the priority
action team for review. Once finalized, the priority action team appropriately
shared the report with all partners, for example school divisions and First
Nations, at an annual gathering in the fall. Having summarized reports of ISSI
partnership performance provides the ministry with a better picture of the
partnership’s impact on Indigenous student success.
We
found the ministry expanded its measures related to the aspiring success
framework beyond graduation rates. They started measuring student success by
looking at attendance, connectedness and safety concerns, readiness to learn
upon exiting kindergarten, and literacy outcomes, including separate Indigenous
student data.
However
the ministry has not developed quantifiable associated targets. For example,
the ministry targets that Indigenous students’ attendance will improve
annually, but it is not clear by how much. Establishing quantifiable targets
will help the minister to better analyze and understand the trends and barriers
affecting Indigenous student outcomes. It will also clarify whether key
strategies and initiatives successfully increase Indigenous student success,
and if not, allow the ministry to determine actions or supports needed.
We
found the ministry provides guidelines and templates for school divisions to
assist in preparing their annual reports. But as we mentioned earlier, they
still need to establish appropriate targets for Indigenous students to include
in their reporting. Without Indigenous-specific targets it is difficult for the
ministry, school divisions, and the public to determine whether reports show
success for Indigenous students and whether Indigenous student outcomes are
improving.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thanks so much for
the follow-up on this front, as well to all those that are involved in the work
reflected in the status update. I’ll kick it over to DM Repski for brief
remarks and then open it up.
Clint
Repski:
— The Provincial Auditor’s 2025 report volume 1, chapter 8 is a follow-up on
the ministry’s processes to implement the Inspiring Success First Nations and
Métis pre-K to 12 education policy framework. This framework was developed to
improve educational outcomes for Indigenous students by working collaboratively
with the ministry’s educational partners to strengthen relationships and
achieve an equitable and inclusive system that benefits all learners.
[10:00]
The
ministry is pleased to report that out of the five recommendations initially
made by the Provincial Auditor, three are implemented and two are partially
implemented. I’ll briefly provide an update on the two partially implemented
recommendations.
Related
to the recommendation that Education expand its measures and targets related to
its Inspiring Success framework, this recommendation is considered partially
implemented. In partnership with the education sector, the ministry has
incorporated the Inspiring Success framework into the provincial education
plan.
One
of the priorities of the provincial education plan is to focus on Indigenous
student outcomes. Targets, measures, and expectations for the provincial
education plan were communicated in the fall of ’23. And in the ’24‑25
school year, the ministry, along with the provincial education plan
implementation team, worked with school divisions with establishing and
reporting targets.
Related
to the recommendation that Education work with school divisions to obtain
enhanced annual reporting on Indigenous student success once measures and
targets are expanded in relation to the Inspiring Success framework, this
recommendation is considered partially implemented. This recommendation aligns
with the work being completed through the provincial education plan and will be
implemented as part of that work.
And
I would be happy to take any questions you have at this time.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay. Thank you. I’ll
open it up to members that may have questions. MLA Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — How many school divisions
have yet to set targets, and what are they doing to encourage that school
divisions do?
Clint
Repski:
— I don’t have the information with me regarding how many school divisions have
existing targets and measures in the annual reports to be accurate on it, but
what I can say is, when we met as a provincial education team just a couple of
weeks ago, we’ve been communicating that we’re going to be requiring targets
and measures moving forward.
And
so on a go-forward basis, the expectation is that every school division will
have targets and measures along with reporting in their annual reports on their
Indigenous outcomes and successes that have driven those results.
Hugh Gordon: — Can you tell me if any area
of the Inspiring Success framework’s implementation relies on funding for
Jordan’s principle?
Clint
Repski:
— Inspiring Success is a framework that was developed provincially. Like other
areas of funding, we provide funding to school divisions. They are going to
make plans based on that funding. The ability to access Jordan’s principle,
while that could be seen as a benefit to the school divisions through the
federal funding stream, it’s not relied upon in our planning with them.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — So you’re not
. . . That program is not going to see a shortfall in funding because
of the loss of that Jordan’s principle positions, etc.
Clint
Repski:
— We don’t have a specific plan in place for Inspiring Success as we work
through the goals and actions that I just described for what’s moving forward.
School divisions are going to be taking their existing budgets and they’re
going to be making decisions to properly fund. They’re going to be making
decisions about programming, staffing, other expenditures that they incur.
The
impact of Jordan’s principle does need to be taken into account at that local
level, the same as every other revenue stream that they have coming in. For us
moving forward, it is going to be part of that overall provincial funding that
they need to make decisions on.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — Have you at this time
defined how many schools you expect to participate in Following Their Voices,
and have you addressed the underperformance noted in ’22‑23?
Tim
Caleval:
— Good morning. I’m Tim Caleval with the priority action team in the Ministry
of Education and I work on Following Their Voices. So just to answer your
questions, first of all we’ve increased the number of schools that are
participating in FTV [Following Their Voices] this year to 45. So we’ve gone
from 35 to 45 year over year.
In
terms of addressing the other question you asked regarding the performance of
FTV schools, the trend that was established prior to COVID has now been
. . . we saw a bit of a dip and that’s returned to the same trends
that were set prior to COVID in terms of outcomes for graduation and credit
attainment.
We’ve
also spent the last couple of years implementing and using a new set of online
tools that support and help teachers to improve their relational and culturally
responsive pedagogy. The tools do three different things. The first one is
called a clarity pack, and a clarity pack assists teachers in lesson planning,
and so it helps them clarify a learning intention. It creates success criteria.
It helps them with something called a teacher pack with their lesson planning.
The third tool is called a peer
observation tool. And the peer observation tool allows teachers to watch one
another teach and gather some data on their teaching practices and use that
data to set a goal and an action plan to improve their teaching practice in
their classroom.
So all three of those tools
are all connected. They provide real-time data back to teachers to plan for
improvement. So those are recent tools that we’ve employed in FTV that will
help continue to improve outcomes for Indigenous students in participating
schools.
Hugh
Gordon: —
Just a question about the survey completion rate noted in the auditor’s report.
How many schools did the ministry meet with due to the decrease in the survey
completion for Following Their Voices or failure to meet targets?
Tim Caleval:
— All right. So in terms of survey completion and the school that was
referenced in the report, just to back up maybe I’ll explain a little bit about
our process of working with schools.
So staff that work in my
branch connect with all Following Their Voices schools weekly. And when we
connect with the schools, we check on their implementation of the initiative.
We have established what we call a 40‑week plan. So for every week,
schools have work that they have to undertake, and so we track the expected
teacher activity that they’re doing, the tasks that they undertake. We
establish topics for discussion when we meet with them. We have deadlines for
reporting that we have. We have established meetings that we set with them.
[10:15]
And so part of that work also
includes the review of the data from those surveys that are completed. And when
we meet with the schools, we’ll talk to them about their data and what their
plans are to stay on track. And if they are not able to stay on track, we
actually meet directly with the schools and sometimes involve senior leaders
from the school divisions to put in place a corrective action plan. And then we
implement that corrective action plan, and we move forward with that school and
get them back on track and hit the markers that they’ve established themselves
in terms of targets for completion.
Hugh
Gordon: —
Can you give me a number of schools though that you had to meet with or discuss
a failure to either fill out the survey or meet their targets?
Tim Caleval:
— So our work with the schools is an ongoing, weekly piece of work that we do
and is fluid. So we’re checking in with them on an ongoing basis, and if data
doesn’t look like it should be hitting the mark over several weeks, we’ll check
in with more senior leaders. And in our work we’re checking in with all of our
participants all the time.
So it would be very difficult
for me to sort of say to you that this is the number of people that I checked
in with last year, because it’s very fluid. I check in with all of our
participating school divisions and education authorities on a regular basis.
And if things aren’t proceeding as they should, we’ll have a quick conversation
about that and build a corrective action plan and move forward.
So I would say that, of the
45 schools that we work with, we’re checking in with them regularly. And it’s a
consistent sort of ongoing iterative process that we have in place.
Hugh
Gordon: —
Did any invitational shared services initiative partners fail to meet its
targets last year?
Tim Caleval:
— Last year we had one of our partnerships that failed to meet our
expectations.
Hugh
Gordon: —
Thank you.
Deputy
Chair Wilson: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — So the title of this chapter
is “Improving Educational Outcomes for Indigenous Students.” And one of the key
indicators of course is going to be grade 12 graduation rates over a period of
time. And we want to see them improving.
And
also I think a key factor would be, how is that being rolled out and by whom is
that being rolled out? Would you be able to give me the ratio of Indigenous
staff that are involved in setting these goals and working in the ministry to
help support the schools that are trying to improve Indigenous students’
educational outcomes? And the ratio being Indigenous staff versus
non-Indigenous staff involved in this endeavour?
Jason
Pirlot:
— Jason Pirlot, ADM [assistant deputy minister], Ministry of Education. Could
you clarify the question for us? Is it in relation to setting a target like
grad rates, per se, as it relates to Indigenous students?
Joan Pratchler: — No. Two parts to that
question, and that was my fault to ask two questions at one time. Number one,
what’s the ratio of Indigenous and non-Indigenous staff at the ministry who’s
helping to support the school divisions or schools in these endeavours — the
ISSI program, the listen to their voices program — basically to help improve
Indigenous outcomes? So how many ministry staff are Indigenous and
non-Indigenous, that ratio?
And
number two, well we’ll get to that next time.
Clint
Repski:
— Okay. Thank you.
Joan Pratchler: — But one at a time.
Clint
Repski:
— It’s difficult to pinpoint who specifically is working on it. It’s a
ministry-wide approach to improving outcomes, as it is an overall target of
ours. But within the Ministry of Education, approximately 6 per cent of people
self-identify, of the employees. However as it pertains to working explicitly
on Following Their Voices and ISSI, 67 per cent of our staff self-identify as
Indigenous.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. Now let’s move
into grade 12 graduation rates, trends. Can you tell me what the graduation
success rate has been to date for our Indigenous students in the province? And
then could you tell me what your targets are set for three, five years going
out and beyond?
Clint
Repski:
— Based on our last reporting for Indigenous students in the province, the
three-year graduation rate is 47.9 per cent. The five-year graduation rate is
67.1 per cent.
And
you had asked a question regarding what is the target moving forward on this.
As we’re working through the provincial education plan, that is exactly what
we’re doing right now. There isn’t a provincial “you need to hit this number.”
But rather we’re working with individual school divisions to set those local
targets and measures.
We
had our first meetings with divisions just last week or the week before, and
over the course of the following months those are going to be locally set
targets. Of course we’re going to have a goal of those need to be increased,
clearly, but we’ll be working with the local school boards on those targets.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — Could you give us some
examples of those Indigenous-specific targets, apart from grade 12 graduation
rates, that the ministry has developed? Is there any other specific targets
with respect to Indigenous learning outcomes?
[10:30]
Clint
Repski:
— So in addition to the three- and five-year grad rates, as I indicated, school
divisions are going to be developing these plans at the local level. They know
their students. They know their communities. And one of the things that we’re
asking them to do is to create targets and measures that are relevant for them.
Some
examples of what we had asked them to give consideration to: student
attendance, looking for an annual increase in that; obviously grad rates; but
we’d also be looking at exiting kindergarten scores, readiness for grade 1;
student literacy and numeracy outcomes. We typically measure grade 3 as sort of
that turning point and that key timeline. And we would also ask them to pay
attention to the sense of connection and safety in schools, and that’s being
done through a perception survey that’s issued annually.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Any other questions,
committee members? Not seeing any, I’d welcome a motion to conclude
consideration of chapter 8. Moved by MLA Chan. All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair Wotherspoon: — That’s carried. We’re
going to move along to chapter 4 from the 2024 report volume 1, and I know
there’s seven new recommendations in this chapter here.
Victor
Schwab:
— Chapter 4 of our 2024 report volume 1, on pages 67 to 83, reports that we
concluded for the period ending December 31st, 2023, the Living Sky School
Division had effective processes to provide timely intervention services to
high school students with significant mental health concerns, other than in the
areas of our seven recommendations.
In
our first recommendation, on page 75, we recommended the Living Sky School
Division formally analyze counsellor caseloads to assess whether it has
appropriate resources to support high school students with mental health
concerns.
We
found the number of students seeing counsellors on a regular basis steadily
increased in the division since the ’20‑21 school year, but the number of
counsellors has stayed the same. We also observed that counsellor caseloads
vary significantly between counsellors. We found one counsellor who was
responsible for three schools and had a caseload of 89 students, whereas at
another school, two permanent and two part-time counsellors shared the caseload
of 97 students. The school division has not assessed whether these caseloads
are reasonable.
In
our second recommendation, on page 76, we recommend Living Sky School Division
have all counsellors use standard risk-assessment tools when documenting
decisions for high school students at risk of suicide.
We
found counsellors at school divisions assess students with significant mental
health concerns. However they do not always complete risk assessments using
good-practice tools for students at risk of suicide. The Living Sky’s
counselling handbook recommends counsellors use the Columbia suicide assessment
rating scale as an assessment tool. But during our audit, we found counsellors
did not consistently use that assessment tool. Instead they used their
professional judgment to determine the suicide risk level.
We
also found students assessed as low risk of suicide according to the
counsellors’ notes, but the counsellors did not document rationale for their
decisions. Not documenting decisions for students at risk of suicide based on
standard assessment tools increased the risk appropriate services may not be
provided when needed.
In
our third recommendation, on page 77, we recommend Living Sky School Division
have counsellors document safety plans for all high school students at risk of
suicide.
The
school division requires counsellors to document and retain information related
to students’ counselling goals, participating in counselling, and safety plans
for students at risk of suicide. During our audit, we found the ministry did
not consistently document a safety plan for all students assessed as at risk
for suicide. A safety plan contains information to help a student if they start
feeling like they could harm themselves, including information such as warning
signs, how to manage them, and contact information of supports and resources.
We
observed the counsellors continued to provide counselling sessions every two to
three weeks to the students assessed as low risk, but they did not document any
counselling goals or tools to use to further help these students. Not
documenting safety plans can make it difficult to assess progress and ensure
proper follow-up is conducted for students at risk of suicide.
In
our fourth recommendation, on page 79, we recommend Living Sky School Division
track referrals of high school students with significant mental concerns to
outside agencies.
We
found the Living Sky School Division does not track referrals of students with
mental health concerns to these outside agencies. It also does not have
information-sharing agreements with key outside agencies that help support high
school students with significant mental health concerns. During our audit, we
found counsellors referred some students to individuals, such as psychologists
or addictions counsellors at outside agencies, but none of these student files
included any information from the outside agencies about the timeliness of
services provided.
In
our fifth recommendation, on page 80, we recommend Living Sky School Division,
with leadership support from the Ministry of Education, develop and implement
information-sharing agreements with key outside agencies to share relevant
information relating to high school students with mental health concerns.
We
found the school division did not receive any information from the Saskatchewan
Health Authority if a student is admitted to the emergency room for mental
health emergencies such as attempted suicide. The school division staff
indicated that the division is only made aware if the student or
parent/guardian informs the school. This limits the division’s ability to
assess whether students with significant mental health concerns receive the
required supports.
Our
recommendation requested support from the Ministry of Education, as forming
information-sharing agreements may require collaboration from the Ministry of
Education and the Ministry of Health. Also it would be beneficial if the
agreements applied to all school divisions. Having information-sharing
agreements with key outside agencies that provide information services to high
school students with significant mental health concerns would help Living Sky’s
high school students receive appropriate and coordinated support.
In
our sixth recommendation, on page 81, we recommend Living Sky School Division
formally track and prepare mental health critical incident reports for its high
schools. The school division sets out requirements for handling critical
incidents in its safe schools handbook. Critical incidents would include
traumatic events such as suicides or student death. The handbook requires the
crisis team to prepare critical incident reports immediately after the
incident, documenting a description of the crisis, action taken, and current
status and follow-up.
We
found the division does not track critical incidents and does not always
prepare critical incident reports for student suicides or deaths. We found in
December 2023 the crisis team documented a retrospective report on two
incidents that occurred in November 2023. The report did not contain sufficient
detail describing each incident, current state of the incident, impact on other
students and staff, what could be done to reduce the impact; or action items,
plans to address root causes. Without tracking and reporting on critical
incidents, Living Sky is unable to adequately assess whether it sufficiently
identifies trends, addresses root causes, and determines corrective actions.
Lastly
in our seventh recommendation, on page 83, we recommend Living Sky School
Division analyze and report key information to senior management and the board
related to timely intervention services provided to high school students with
significant mental health concerns.
The
school division’s grade 7 to 12 survey showed students’ level of anxiety and
depression worsened since 2015‑16, with 32 per cent of students
experiencing moderate or high levels of depression or anxiety. We found no
analysis done to indicate what the division plans to do to address worsening
mental health concerns of its students.
We
have found, for two of three schools we tested, the number of students with
mental health concerns increased from 33 to 37 per cent from ’22‑23 to
’23‑24. The school division has not analyzed possible causes for this
increase or determined proper allocation of counsellors at these schools.
Without
tracking and analyzing key information, the division is unable to sufficiently
analyze trends and better assess the levels of mental health support — for
example, counsellor allocations, intensity and nature of supports — needed for
its high school students. In addition, without reporting key information
annually to senior management and the board, each will be unaware of trends in
the main issues, themes affecting mental health of students within the school
division.
This
concludes my presentation. I’ll now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thanks for the
presentation. Certainly an important focus around mental health and well-being
of students. I want to welcome the leadership that’s here as well from Living
Sky School Division. I know they’ll be introduced by DM Repski. I’ll turn it
over to DM Repski to make that introduction and comment on the chapters along
with however you want to work it with Living Sky leadership. And after that
we’ll open it up for questions.
Clint
Repski:
— Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the auditor’s work on the Living Sky
School Division “Providing Intervention Services to High School Students with
Significant Mental Health Concerns” audit. Mental health and well-being is one
of the key priorities in the provincial education plan. The goal is to have
students feel supported in their mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual
health and well-being. The school division has reported that out of the seven
recommendations made, six are considered fully implemented.
Joining
us here today from the Living Sky School Division is Tonya Lehman, deputy
director; and Jennifer Harder, the service lead. And we would welcome questions
at this time.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, committee members,
anyone have questions? MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. Provincially
speaking, would you say that Living Sky is an average division in terms of its
mental health needs, or does it have higher needs than perhaps other school
divisions in the province?
Clint
Repski:
— Yes, thank you for that question. I can’t sit here with any accuracy and say
if it’s average or below, above. It’s not one of the factors. When we are
giving consideration to, I’m going to say vulnerability indicators as part of
our funding model out to school divisions, the type of things that we do take
into consideration would be socio-economic factors, number of children in
foster care, as well as EAL, English as an additional language. That’s easier
to say the words than the acronym, apparently.
Those
are the type of things that we take into consideration as we roll funding out
based on high levels of vulnerability or low, but not mental health.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. So we know in
health care that patient ratios matter. We know in education that class size
matters. When we deal with mental health, the amount of service providers
matters to how many clients you have.
So
I just wondered if you could give me a sense — and you may not have these
details right here and you could submit them later — is what are the caseloads?
We know psychologists in school divisions, the amount of psychologists in
school divisions, is obviously going to be different than school counsellors.
[10:45]
So
would you be able to give the committee a sense of what the caseloads are for
psychologists in school divisions and also school counsellors? So that’s quite
a detailed list, like I say you may not be able to provide, and an average is
not helpful because that’s just going to be outside of that continuum.
So
I just want to know what those would be, let’s just say for last year and this
year. It would be helpful. And maybe for our topic today, if you could just say
if they’ve been increased over time and maybe the last two or so years, that
would be helpful.
Clint
Repski:
— So provincially that’s a level of detail that we just don’t collect. One
would need to contact individual school divisions to get the breakdown of
caseloads by professional. However I think Living Sky would be prepared to talk
about the experience in their school division.
Jennifer
Harder:
— So our educational psychologists do not work in the area of mental health.
They work in terms of assessment, educational assessment, looking at
achievement and cognitive assessment. So I’m not sure their caseloads pertain
quite to the mental health issue.
And
in terms of our counsellors, in response to the recommendations from the audit,
we did try and look at a system that we could use that would be transparent and
equitable for the assignment of the counsellors that we have working for the
school division. And so we had someone create a formula that includes factors
around school enrolment, so the size of the school; community factors; socio-economic
status; and drive time to the school because we felt that that impacts the
amount of time that the counsellor gets to see students at the school as well.
And then have applied that formula for the past two years to assign the 12 FTE
[full-time equivalent] counsellors that we have within the school division.
So
implementation of that formula has brought down the size of the caseload, but
each school and each counsellor would have a different number that they’re
currently working with.
Joan Pratchler: — So what would be the average
would you guesstimate?
Jennifer
Harder:
— Yes. Like per school often maybe 20 to 30 students might be actively on the
caseload.
We
only have two counsellors that work full-time in a school, and they’re in the
same school, the North Battleford Comprehensive High School. All our other
counsellors have at least two schools that they work at and they’re assigned
to.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. And so would you say
that’s a provincial standard to have 20 to 1 for a counsellor? Is that typical?
I don’t know.
Clint Repski: —
The school divisions structure their support based on their local context. In
some cases teachers are going to provide that support. In some cases head
psychs are going to provide that support. In some cases school divisions rely
on EAs to handle some of the workload at the local level. So I can’t comment
intelligently on what the average is.
Joan Pratchler: —
Okay. Would you be able to supply that to the committee?
Clint Repski: —
I honestly don’t know how I would be able to do that. What I can provide to the
committee is based on staffing levels of school divisions. I can give you a
breakdown. It is something we collect. We’re in the process of finalizing what
that looks like for staffing complement across school divisions.
Joan Pratchler: —
Of counsellors and
psychologists is what you’re suggesting, yeah?
Clint
Repski:
— They would be included in that, yes, if they’re employees of the school
divisions.
Joan Pratchler: — So would I be correct in
assuming that school divisions have a minimum of one psychologist per school
division?
Clint
Repski:
— I can’t comment on what the staffing complement is.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — Just wondering if you could
tell us, do counsellors now ensure that every student at risk of suicide has a
documented safety plan?
Jennifer
Harder:
— Yes, that is something that we have ensured that all counsellors are doing.
They have a standardized risk assessment that they use and upload to their
files, and a safety plan that goes with it.
Hugh Gordon: — With respect to
recommendation no. 5, I see it’s still not implemented and that you are
looking to obtain legal counsel to draft a memorandum of understanding,
essentially a shared-services agreement, correct?
Jennifer
Harder:
— Mm-hmm.
Hugh Gordon: — I’m just curious what your
plans are once this MOU [memorandum of understanding] has been formalized. What
are your next steps in ensuring that you can actually fulfill that
recommendation?
Jennifer
Harder:
— So the MOU has been drafted, and so I think it’s to engage with the community
partners that we have and the Ministry of Education to push or have people sign
the MOU. I think there is definitely in our community, and with the ministry
there is certainly a willingness to engage. It’s the issue around privacy and
the rules with that, that really has stalled the process. Everyone knows how
important privacy is, and at the same time we care for our students. But it
really has been a stumbling block for us to figure out how to deal with the privacy
rules.
Hugh Gordon: — So is that something you’re
going to be able to address with an MOU, or is this, like, a separate process
you need to engage with? Is there some form of legislation that needs to be
changed?
Tonya
Lehman:
— We’re at a point now, I think, that we’re going to be looking to the ministry
for some assistance with this MOU because I do believe it will involve some of
that crossover in our ministries to be able to move this forward. I think
there’s a real need for some of this work.
When
we talk about when a student is at risk, it’s that wraparound process that’s
really important. Privacy of people’s health and education is also very
important. And so as this is developed, it’s really critical that we look at,
you know, when would we enact some sort of collaboration? When is it important
where that student’s safety is most at risk? And when shouldn’t it be enacted?
And so I think we would be looking to the ministry for some guidance with that
as they help work with the other ministries, yes.
Hugh Gordon: — So in the meantime you’re
relying, I guess, on communications with either the student, the parents,
caregiver?
Tonya
Lehman:
— For sure. We always try to open those lines of communication with our
families, but some families aren’t at that point where they’re really wanting
to share, right. It’s trying to break that barrier of that mental health, you
know, that it’s real and that the more that we can come together, the better
results I think we’ll have.
Hugh Gordon: — Is Living Sky also now
formally preparing and tracking mental health critical incident reports for its
high schools?
Tonya
Lehman:
— We are, yes.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — How many critical incidents
have occurred since the implementation of this recommendation, and how
typically are they resolved?
Tonya
Lehman:
— I’m thinking in my head. I wouldn’t have that exact number. We definitely
could get it to you. I believe there were four last year, critical incidents.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay.
Tonya
Lehman:
— And when we talk about our critical incidents, partially it is that on how we
respond to them as a team and how we give the support to the school and the
staff after an event has happened, right. And sometimes that takes weeks,
sometimes that’s follow-up months later, and sometimes there’s . . .
You know, we’re coming to some anniversaries now, and so part of it is those
teams coming back together to review things to ensure that our schools are
prepared for upcoming events too.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you, and that’s very
important work. Thank you for what you do. That’s all my questions.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thanks so much. Any
further questions on this chapter? Maybe just a comment for anyone that’s
following along and for those that are here. Obviously the focus here is on
these auditor’s reports and on measuring sort of, you know, what’s going on and
adherence to policies.
Just
for anyone watching as well, we have all these wonderful school divisions that
are here. What this committee doesn’t do is debate the budget that’s needed for
education. That’s a different committee that focuses in on that policy field
entry. There’s an estimates process around budget. And I know there’s very
strongly held views around sufficiency of funding and to make sure that boards,
divisions are in a position to meet those goals all across the province.
So
I just want to make sure that — we have all these good leaders here today —
that they know that’s not lost on us that are sitting around the table. And we
sure appreciate the leadership and the service that they, along with their
divisions, provide with the resources that they’re provided.
Looking
to committee members to see if there’s any further questions on this front. Not
seeing any.
So
we have seven new recommendations. I’d welcome a motion to concur and note
compliance with recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7. Moved by MLA Beaudry. All
agreed? That’s carried.
And
I’d welcome a motion to concur with recommendation 5. Moved by MLA Crassweller.
All agreed? All right, that’s carried as well.
Okay,
we’ll move right along to another new chapter, and that’s chapter 5 with the
2024 report volume 1. And as I see the Living Sky leadership depart, thank you
very much for joining us here today and for your service. I’ll kick it over to
the Provincial Auditor.
Victor
Schwab:
— Chapter 5 of our 2024 report volume 1, on pages 85 to 106, reports that we
concluded, for the period ended January 31st, 2024, Regina Public School
Division had effective processes to deliver pre-kindergarten programming other
than in the areas of our seven recommendations.
In
our first recommendation, on page 92, we recommend Regina Public School
Division formally analyze its pre-kindergarten enrolment to help identify and
mitigate barriers to students entering the program and full space utilization.
For 2023‑24 the division had 708 pre-kindergarten spaces available
through two half-day programs in 17 schools and one half-day program in seven
schools. We found the division is not fully utilizing its available
pre-kindergarten spaces despite existing wait-lists at certain schools.
The
space utilization has decreased from 93 per cent in ’19‑20 to 79 per cent
in ’23‑24. We found the division had not formally analyzed its
pre-kindergarten enrolment, including consideration of possible barriers to
families and associated actions to help mitigate those barriers.
Our
discussion with the division’s early learning staff and pre-kindergarten
teachers found a lack of transportation to pre-kindergarten as a common barrier
for families. The division used to provide transportation for pre-kindergarten
students, but it stopped over a decade ago due to safety concerns of young
students riding on school buses.
Without
formal analysis of pre-kindergarten utilization, there is increased risk of the
division not appropriately responding to possible barriers, such as
transportation or program barriers, to full pre-kindergarten program enrolment.
Significant underutilization of pre-kindergarten spaces is an inefficient use
of public funds.
[11:00]
In
our second recommendation, on page 94, we recommend Regina Public School
Division centrally monitor and analyze its pre-kindergarten wait-lists. The
school division monitors demand for pre-kindergarten programming, but we found
it does not centrally monitor wait-lists for its schools.
Each
school in the division informally maintains a wait-list for its
pre-kindergarten program. As of February 2024, we found 75 students waiting for
acceptance in pre-kindergarten across the city, with almost 70 per cent of
these students waiting at three schools. However the division had 559 students
enrolled in its pre-kindergarten spaces in 2023 compared to 708 spaces
available, which means it’s not utilizing 20 per cent of its available spaces
when 149 spaces were available for wait-listed students.
Centrally
monitoring wait-lists can provide the division with relevant information to
analyze its wait-lists across the city and improve utilization of its
pre-kindergarten program or determine possible classroom relocations.
In
our third recommendation, on page 95, we recommend Regina Public School
Division use sufficient measures to assess and report on the delivery of its
pre-kindergarten programming.
During
our audit we found the school division measures overall student achievement in
the primary grades, but it does not have measures to specifically assess the
performance of its pre-kindergarten programming. The assessment of overall
student achievement in the primary grades is not sufficient for making
conclusions about the performance of its pre-kindergarten program. Establishing
measures and targets specific to pre-kindergarten can assist the division in
assessing the quality of its program and identify potential areas for
improvement.
In
our fourth recommendation, on page 99, we recommend Regina Public School
Division periodically conduct formal assessments of its pre-kindergarten
classroom environments. We found the ministry established guidance for its
administrators, including principals, to assess pre-kindergarten learning
environments and programs, including a one-page checklist they may use to guide
and document their assessments. But it does not formally assess whether
learning environments meet those expectations.
During
our school visits, the principals indicated they frequently visit kindergarten
classrooms to observe teachers delivering the program to students. But we found
none of the principals documented their assessment of the pre-kindergarten
learning environment.
In
our fifth recommendation, on page 102, we recommend Regina Public School
Division communicate with pre-kindergarten teachers about its partnerships with
other agencies providing support services to children.
Regina
Public School Division established partnerships with several outside agencies
in relation to pre-kindergarten. These agencies include KidsFirst Regina,
Regina early childhood intervention program, Saskatchewan Health Authority’s
Wascana Rehabilitation Centre, Métis Nation-Saskatchewan, and Regina Early
Years Family Resource Centre.
We
found inconsistencies among pre-kindergarten teachers’ awareness of these
partnerships and the benefits that they may provide. During our visit at three
pre-kindergarten classrooms, we found teachers did not have an understanding of
the division’s partnerships with other agencies. If pre-kindergarten teachers
do not know of the division’s partnerships with other agencies, they may not be
aware of all the supports available to their students. This increases the risk
of students and families not receiving appropriate external supports when
necessary.
In
our sixth recommendation, on page 104, we recommended Regina Public School
Division implement a consistent method for pre-kindergarten teachers to track
family visits. Family engagement is an important part of pre-kindergarten and
for children’s learning. The school division requires pre-kindergarten teachers
to engage with students’ families throughout the year, including two family
visits and monthly family engagement events.
During
our audit we visited three schools and observed that the teachers of those
three schools tracked families’ attendance at monthly family engagement events
but did not formally track family visits. We found inconsistencies between the
families attending monthly engagement events and the expected family visit
schedule. Lack of an effective method to track family visits increases the risk
that pre-kindergarten teachers may not conduct family visits for all students
as expected.
In
our seventh recommendation, on page 105, we recommend the school division
provide its board with detailed analysis of changes to its pre-kindergarten
enrolment. We found the division’s reports do not include a detailed analysis
of changes to its pre-kindergarten enrolments, such as explanations for
underutilization of the program.
Not providing the board with
further analysis about possible causes for changes in pre-kindergarten
enrolment increases the risk of the board not having sufficient information to
make decisions about the pre-kindergarten program, such as resource
allocations.
That concludes my
presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Okay, thank you for the
presentation. I’ll turn it over to DM Repski. And I want to welcome as well the
leadership from Regina Public Schools that have joined us here today as well.
Clint Repski:
— Thank you. And thank you for the auditor’s work on the Regina Public School
Division delivering pre-K programming audit. Pre-kindergarten is a high-quality
learning program targeted for three- and four-year-old children and their
families who experience vulnerability. The school division has reported that
all seven of the recommendations made are considered fully implemented.
Here with us today from
Regina Public are Rick Steciuk, the deputy director, and Juanita Redekopp,
supervisor of student services. And we’d be happy to answer any questions you
have today.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Okay. Right on. We’ll
open it up now to committee members that may have questions. MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you. And good morning and welcome. When did the pre-kindergarten
programming initially begin in Regina Public?
Rick Steciuk:
— Thank you for the question. We do know that the Ministry of Education
introduced pre-kindergarten programming in the 1990s. And Regina Public
Schools, while we don’t have the specific date, our recollection is around the
mid‑1990s is when we started it.
Joan
Pratchler: —
So generally, generally, leading up to the auditor’s report — let’s give it
five years prior to the auditor’s report — what would have been the metrics you
would have been following prior to that? Or evaluation metrics for, you know,
your programming prior to that? Just ballpark. I don’t need specifics.
Juanita Redekopp:
— So in terms of metrics for pre-kindergarten specifically, currently we would
have access to and we would use attendance; we would use enrolment. We use EYE
[early years evaluation], which is actually a kindergarten readiness
assessment. But we can use that as a lagging indicator that we can use saying,
well when pre-kindergarten left in June, here’s how they arrived in fall. And
so we can use that information.
Prior to the EYE, and that’s
probably been in use in our division since mid‑2000, and before that we
used the EDI [early development instrument], which was another similar
assessment that looked at student readiness.
Joan
Pratchler: —
So what performance measures are you finding yourself using now to assess your
pre-kindergarten delivery?
Juanita Redekopp:
— So following some of this work, I think we have refocused on a number of
assessments and data that we do have available to us. So we have enrolment
data. We can use wait-list data. We have family engagement data. We would have
our EYE. We have a program called Dossier that allows us to manipulate data,
and we’ve been able to put a toggle switch in. That allows us to pull out from
our kindergarten data our previous pre-kindergarten students, so now we can get
that information and use that more carefully or more intentionally.
We are currently using a
phonemic awareness and a phonics screen to assess our pre-kindergarten and
kindergarten all the way up to grade 3. And so we start that with pre-K and
then we pass that information on to kindergarten, then pass it on to grade 1. So
that’s something that wasn’t part of this audit, but it was in the works at the
same time that the audit was being conducted.
So those are the ones that
come to mind off the top of my head, but I think that gives a good breadth.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you. And then provincially, could I say that this . . . Is this
type of standard of assessment typical in all school divisions for evaluating
the metrics of pre-kindergarten programming?
Clint Repski:
— The consistent measure across the province would be the EYE, the readiness
indicators, the attendance piece. What Regina Public was referring to was I
think there’s been a lot of additional work that’s been done as a result of
this audit. They have a system that lends itself to really getting into some of
the data that may not be readily available to other school divisions.
So it would depend on where
you are and what kind of system that you are using to collect that information.
As an example, being able to drill down into subsections of self-identified
First Nations, Métis students, some school division systems just simply do not
collect that information. And so building metrics is going to depend on the
availability of information.
[11:15]
Joan
Pratchler: —
So is there an understanding that those metrics are going to be created,
standardized, and used for provincial reporting?
Clint Repski:
— I think it’s safe to say it’s under consideration at this point in time.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Okay.
Clint Repski:
— Based on the work of the audit we’ll be having conversations with the school
division, clearly who’s undertaken this, to determine how effective the new
measures and metrics are. The system implementation, the work with the staff,
and in terms of improving outcomes, those will be the conversations that we’re
looking at.
We’re always looking for ways
to improve what those metrics are, certainly to share them. Obviously they’re
publicly available now, but this is exactly the type of conversation that we
try to bring to the collective.
Joan
Pratchler: —
And would you say that those kind of conversations have been happening over the
last 20 to 30 years, about metrics and sharing metrics and being accountable
for metrics going from pre-kindergarten to kindergarten?
Clint Repski:
— Twenty to 30 years might be a bit of a stretch for me to comment on. What I
can say is, I’m going to go back to a conversation that we’d had regarding our
provincial education plan, of which this is certainly a part. I’m going to say
there’s a period of time when sharing information broadly wasn’t as acceptable
or used as it is now. That is no longer the case. What I have seen from our
school divisions has been an absolute thirst for this information.
Within the ministry we’ve
rolled out what we call a dashboard of information where they can click on this
information and have it at their disposal. But in terms of sharing information
broadly for school divisions’ specific performance measures, no problem at all
sharing that information. And what we’re trying to facilitate is that
conversation of sharing best practices. So in terms of making sure it’s readily
available, you bet. In terms of adapting that and to creating those metrics and
measures that we’ve spoken about this morning, absolutely. School divisions are
excited to do this work.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Excellent. So there is expectation by the ministry that school divisions will
report on pre-kindergarten metrics.
Clint
Repski: —
Right now there’s no specific requirement for a school division to be reporting
specifically on pre-K, but the EYE is. So that’s the readiness for
kindergarten. So that is going to be the kindergarten programming, and
subsequent to that was the pre-K program. But there isn’t a specific
requirement for that.
What
I can say is that annually we do meet to talk about the specific metrics with
school divisions. Some are likely going to be reporting it locally; some may
choose to not do that. But right now it’s not a requirement but is certainly
brought to the table.
Joan
Pratchler: — Okay. Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Gordon.
Hugh
Gordon: — I just actually had a question for the auditor. I’m
not sure if it’s included in the report, but I was just . . . we were
curious as to what has precipitated the auditor’s report for the Regina Public
School Division in this regard. What were the precipitating factors that led to
your report here? Why was it engaged?
Tara
Clemett: —
So what we usually do is we probably would have looked at this school division
and determined that basically when it came to pre-K programming, that it was a
school division that had obviously significant amount of delivery in terms of
the schools that it was delivering such programming at.
What
we also do is when we undertake work at the various school divisions, we try to
be thoughtful and spread our work out across the province. So it might have
just been Regina’s turn to be picked in terms of the list and work we do.
I
would also say that when we do this work . . . And so I do think the
questions you’re asking . . . Obviously the work and the audit and
the level of assurance I can provide and the recommendations I made were only
directed at Regina Public School Division. That said, we do always encourage
the ministry, all school divisions to read the results of that work and to
really take consideration whether or not the recommendations may apply and be
utilized elsewhere.
So
it’s good to hear that it’s almost . . . Some of these areas for
improvement will probably get rolled out broader than just one school division.
But it’s just very difficult for us to just be everywhere and go to every
school division, so we do end up focusing our audit work usually on one
specific school division at a time.
Hugh Gordon: — I appreciate
your insights into that, Auditor. It’s helpful. And of course, yes, definitely
we get caught up sometimes in particular chapters and particular entities and they do have a broad
application, for sure.
My
specific question though for the school division is, can you tell me how many
students have transportation-related issues or other issues that prevent them
from accessing pre-kindergarten programming?
Juanita
Redekopp:
— So in terms of some of the barriers to families that may enrol or apply for
pre-kindergarten — because there is a selection process — and for families who
then take the spots that are offered to them, there are a number of different
barriers. And as a result of the audit and the recommendations, when we did our
annual accountability report to the board last January, all that fall our
pre-kindergarten teachers had been submitting monthly reports as a result of
this work, and asking them to report on the barriers identified by families and
identified just through observation.
And
so the top areas, I don’t have specific numbers, but I can tell you which were
the top areas. And so we had transportation and distance, families that moved,
family emergency, or families that went out of country for a significant amount
time.
Age
of their children. Some were too old because it’s for three- and four-year-old
children. Some weren’t yet three; they were still two, and so they needed to
wait.
Preference.
A lot of families do apply for pre-kindergarten. Not every school has
pre-kindergarten. They’re only in select schools in the city that are approved
by the ministry. But we do attach all of our pre-kindergarten programs with
another catchment area so that everyone has a pre-kindergarten program that
would serve their area. And we do know that families, they apply but they still
want their kids at home in their home school, and so it’s their preference to
just wait.
And
in several of our schools where we have high wait-lists, those programs are
full, thus the need for the wait-list. And so there are families who say, we
don’t want to transport to another location; we’ll wait here until we can have
a space.
And
so, yes, transportation has been identified, but it’s one of a number of
issues. And I don’t think it’s the only challenge that some of our families
face.
Hugh Gordon: — Just a very quick follow-up
to that. Is ESL [English as a second language] another barrier that you’re
encountering at your division, and maybe across the province? The deputy
minister could respond too.
Juanita
Redekopp:
— Well I think when we take a look at pre-kindergarten and the vulnerability
factors that we are asked to take a look at when selecting students, language
is one of those but it’s not necessarily, and it’s not specific to English
language proficiency. It’s where are they at in their language development. Do
we have a high number of English as additional language learners that are part
of our pre-kindergarten program? We actually just double checked that number
this morning because we thought that might come up. And now I have forgotten
the percentage.
Rick
Steciuk:
— 24 per cent.
Juanita
Redekopp:
— There you go, 24 per cent. And so yes, we do have a high number of English
language learners who are selected for our pre-kindergarten programs. But we
don’t . . . That’s not a shoo-in. That doesn’t mean that you’re
automatically eligible, because it’s about where is the language proficiency
level for those learners.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler
. . . [inaudible interjection] . . . Let’s hold on a sec
for . . . I think Repski’s coming.
Clint
Repski:
— I wish I could give you an answer as proficiently as my colleague here. But
we effectively look at very similar things province-wide. EAL in and of itself
is not an indicator of who is going to be given pre-K seats. We look at
percentage of alone parents. We look at percentage of 15‑year-olds and
older without grade 12, social assistance recipients, percentage of housing
need. So we look at those high-level macro indicators. We would make the exact
same comment that was just made of EAL in and of itself is not a vulnerability
indicator, but we would make the same position that the proficiency is the
indicator.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — When I look at page 85 of
the report, the first bullet it has there is, “We found the Division did not
utilize 21% of . . . prekindergarten spaces” which amounted to 149 of
those 700 spaces in ’23 and ’24. It’s understandable that there might be a few
spaces in each school for a variety of reasons, some of them that happened
here. Can you talk a little bit about those open spaces and some of the
challenges you have with them, and maybe some of the remediations you’ve found
to reduce that number to make the spaces more available for programming
required by these little ones?
[11:30]
Juanita
Redekopp:
— So thank you for the question. Big question. I tend to over-respond so I’ll
do my best to keep on track.
When
we talk about enrolment numbers and what we’ve done to really increase that enrolment
in buildings, I think as a system, through the audit, we identified that we had
a lot of processes in place, but they weren’t necessarily formalized and
consistent from one building to another. And so we put a lot of those processes
into place through this work.
Our
teachers complete a monthly report. We have formalized some process. We also
have some forms they can use if the one they’re using doesn’t give us the
information we need. So those are some of the things we’ve put into place to
really support the enrolment and the wait-list component.
We
do share our wait-lists between schools. We share applications from families
who’ve given us permission to share them with other buildings. Last year, as
part of our report to the board when we met with them in January, and so we had
September through November data. So we started the year at a lower enrolment,
but by the time we had our accountability report, if we had been able to keep
every student in school that had been enrolled in pre-kindergarten — so that’s
the ins and outs, right — we would have been at 94 per cent. But we have a very
transient community and so that impacts families moving in and out.
And
I think that our pre-kindergarten teachers work really hard at gathering those
applications. They are in community. They are in library. They are handing out
applications at reading programs, really to get to really promote and build
awareness and bring those applications in.
I
think one thing we’ve also done — and we did that a number of years ago — is
that every pre-kindergarten program is attached to another catchment area or
more. So we are supporting vulnerability across the city, not just in the areas
in the catchment areas where the programs are located. We have 41 programs that
are located across 24 schools.
We
do have a vulnerable population, and we know that they do move and they also
come and go from in-program. An example from last week: I was at one of our
schools and we were looking out the window. We were talking about pre-K but
looking out the window, and there’s a family with two children. I was like,
“Why haven’t we gotten those families in here?” And the principal had said,
“Well I took them the applications, the pre-kindergarten took the applications,
and here’s an application for you if you’d like to drop it off as well.”
So
we are making some of those efforts and really looking hard to promote our
pre-kindergarten programming. Have I missed anything?
Rick
Steciuk:
— I think I would just add one thing, that every year we analyze the data and
we look at the schools that currently have pre-kindergarten programming and
say, “Do we have it right?” and whether or not we need to shift things around
into other areas.
Some
of the challenges at division that we would see some of our more vulnerable
schools, maybe some schools within north central Regina where our pre-K numbers
might be a bit lower and we know we might have a higher degree of success maybe
in another community, but we also know the needs within that area are so
substantial that we’ll continue to work and try to increase the numbers and not
pull the pre-K program from that particular neighbourhood.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. And our job here
on this committee is to be the citizen of Saskatchewan and say, is everything
being used like it should? Are we really helping the people that need the most
help and are we doing it in the best way? And so I salute you and your school
division for all you’ve done for these young ones because we know a good start
is so important. Thank you very much. Those are all my questions.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Good words. MLA Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — Just one last question,
thank you. How is the division ensuring that teachers in the program are aware
of partnerships with other agencies to provide those additional supports to
your young students?
Juanita
Redekopp:
— Well I think when we talk about partnerships and working with various
organizations, you have formal partnerships and you have informal partnerships.
And so the formal partnerships are listed in our annual report and we know that
that is there and available. And we share with our pre-kindergarten teachers,
take a look here for our formal partnerships. Some read, some may not, but it
is available through that annual report.
We
also have a list, and it’s quite extensive, of a variety of organizations in
Regina that do support early learning, provide various programs, supports, and
services. And so now during that start-up meeting we take a look at that as a
large group. We tackle and we talk about those supports that we are familiar
with. We learn a little bit more about others that are not. So we’re building
that capacity over time amongst that entire team.
Hugh Gordon: — Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thank you. MLA
Crassweller.
Brad
Crassweller:
— Yeah, just to clarify. So what I’m hearing is like when it says you didn’t
utilize 21 per cent, it’s not for lack of trying. A lot of times it’s
situations that are out of your control, which has to be incredibly frustrating
when you’ve done all you can. So I just want to commend you guys for that and
encourage those teachers and staff that are still working hard to try to do
that. When there’s stuff that’s outside of your control, that’s pretty
frustrating. So that’s very helpful to clarify. So I just want to make sure I
heard you correct. Okay.
Juanita
Redekopp:
— And thank you. I’ll share that with my team.
Brad
Crassweller:
— Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Yeah, well said,
Crassweller. I’d welcome a motion here. Not seeing any other questions? I’d
welcome a motion that we . . . Oh, another one, MLA.
A Member: — No.
Chair Wotherspoon: — No, you don’t? You’re
ready for the motion? That’s great. Motion to concur and note compliance with
recommendations 1 through 7. Moved by MLA Crassweller. All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, that’s carried.
Yeah, and just to echo my colleague’s remarks here, just thank you so much to
the leadership at Regina Public Schools and those on the front lines right
across that division that are doing this exceptional work every day. Thank you
very much.
Okay,
we’ll move right along here. I think there’ll be some officials adjusting
there. Horizon’s coming this way. The pride of Humboldt’s making his way to the
table here. And I’m going to turn it over to the Provincial Auditor at this
point to make presentation on the chapter 14s, respectively, the 2022 report
and the 2020 report volume 1s.
Victor
Schwab:
— Chapter 14 of our 2022 report volume 1, on pages 169 to 176, reports the
results of our first follow-up, and chapter 14 of our 2024 report volume 1, on
pages 175 to 181, reports the result of our second follow-up of Horizon School
Division’s progress towards addressing the five outstanding recommendations
initially made in our 2020 audit of its processes to maintain its facilities.
By
January 2022 the school division implemented one recommendation, and by
February 2024 the division fully implemented the remaining four outstanding
recommendations. All five outstanding recommendations have been fully
addressed.
We
found the division provided its board with periodic, comprehensive maintenance
reports about the results of its maintenance activities and anticipated impact
to inform decision making. It started providing its board of education periodic
monthly and annual maintenance reports that included information on facilities
with higher maintenance concerns, year-over-year trends on facility conditions,
and outstanding maintenance activities.
The
school division has now also prioritized all identified maintenance
deficiencies associated with fire protection and suppression systems and
boilers to enable determination of the nature and timing of the necessary
maintenance.
We
found the division had current boiler inspections, updated fire protection and
suppression system inspection certificates in its IT [information technology]
system, and addressed deficiencies found during inspections timely.
By
February 2024 the division had developed a strategy to better use its IT system
to plan, track, and monitor completed and uncompleted maintenance of its
facilities and significant components. Additionally the division developed and
documented its definition of what it considers a significant component.
The
division has maintained up-to-date and accurate information on its maintenance
IT system about completion of assigned maintenance activities. The division
expects their staff to complete assigned maintenance with assessed priority or
stated time frames and document completion of maintenance in the appropriate
module of the maintenance IT system.
We
found staff appropriately documented the completion of maintenance activities
performed, including accurately reflecting the work outstanding to resolve a
maintenance activity, in the division’s maintenance IT system. The division now
monitors the completion timeliness of requested and expected maintenance
through weekly reports on outstanding service requests. Effective monitoring of
the timeliness of completion of maintenance activities helps ensure that
maintenance is completed as expected.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Well thank you very much
for the follow-up on this front. Thanks as well for all the actions that have
been taken that are reflected in this status update. Wonderful to have the
leadership of Horizon School Division here. I’ll turn it over to DM Repski to
lead the way into some remarks, and then we’ll get to the questioning.
Clint
Repski:
— Yes. Thank you for the auditor’s work on the Horizon School Division’s ’22
and ’24 maintaining facilities audits. We’re pleased with the follow-up audit
from the Provincial Auditor detailing that in fact all five recommendations are
now fully implemented.
Here
with us today from Horizon School Division are Kevin Garinger, director of
education; Justin Arendt, superintendent of operational services; and Kameron
Kiland, the manager of facility services. And we would be pleased to answer any
questions you have today.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Committee members, of
course we have considered these matters and concurred and questioned as a
table. But do any committee members have questions at this point? MLA
Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. How many schools
in the Horizon School Division are currently in poor or critical condition, and
are there any plans in place to address that?
Kevin
Garinger:
— Would it be okay if you qualify? What do you mean in poor condition?
Joan Pratchler: — There’s those different
levels of conditions. Are there any that are in that lower, you know, bracket?
Kevin
Garinger:
— I’ll just confer.
[11:45]
All
right. So we just took a look at the FCI [facility condition index] report that
we receive, and that’s what you’re referring to. Thanks for that, and I
apologize. I just wanted to get qualification on what that was about.
So
we took a look. We have one school that falls within that, in that factor, in
that range. And much of the issue is around mechanical, but we have just
recently replaced a number of furnaces and that sort of thing, which will
hopefully bring it to a good place.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay, thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — Could you tell us how the
use of the IT system is able to assist in tracking maintenance and improve your
division’s ability to maintain those facilities?
Kevin Garinger: —
I apologize to the committee. I didn’t acknowledge who I was to begin with. And
so I’m Kevin Garinger, director of education, CEO [chief executive officer] for
Horizon School Division. Anyway, apologies.
I’m going to let superintendent of
operational services, Justin Arendt, speak to this matter.
Justin Arendt: —
Good morning. Thank you for the question. So we utilize the asset planner IT
system in a variety of ways, starting with all of our preventative maintenance
systems are all documented within that platform. Additionally all of our
facilities are inventoried within that system.
And so one of the outcomes of this
report is that we’ve effectively gone through, identified all of the core
safety-of-life systems, critical systems in our buildings that could render them in need of
significant repair down the road. Those have all been inventoried within our
system, and we’ve got a good understanding of the condition of each of those as
it relates to each of them within the board.
Our
maintenance staff within facilities work within that directly, and so as
there’s break-fix operations that present themselves — leaky faucet in a
bathroom — that information gets input centrally into that system. Our
maintenance staff will effectively action on those requests.
And
we’ve outlined based on our new policy in terms of what is a low or a high or
an urgent priority, and so that information is captured in there. We’ve ensured
that our maintenance staff understand the difference between a low and a high —
and certainly our customers or our schools as well — and work to essentially
rectify those matters within the windows that we’ve established as acceptable
for closing those items off based on their criticality.
And
that is effectively logged and reported within that system, and we utilize that
as the basis of reporting on a variety of things, whether it be in terms of our
break-fix maintenance report or how we’re doing relative to preventative
maintenance and so on.
Hugh Gordon: — I guess generally though,
could you comment about how that has assisted you to improve, you know, the
maintenance or like the performance of maintaining these facilities?
Justin
Arendt:
— It’s provided us with visibility that we wouldn’t have otherwise. And so we
have certainly undertaken some activities that hadn’t occurred previously
whereby we were documenting and outlining a number of those capital components,
as an example. We’re tracking all of that information centrally, so we can
identify trends, for example, if there’s some specific things happening
throughout the system.
It
also improves communication between our facilities group and our schools, as
well as the rest of our staff. And so it helps just to ensure that we’re
providing a consistent safe and caring experience in schools and making sure
that the priorities are being addressed as appropriate, I guess, based on the
nature of their criticality or urgency.
Hugh Gordon: — Thank you.
Kevin
Garinger:
— If I could, I was just going to add as well that there’s the accountability
piece that is obviously critical. And so the sign-offs are necessary to ensure
that we know what’s happened, what’s taken place.
One
of the other things that is really important about how we’ve really dove into
the system in a different way through the auditor’s report, we have now been
able to identify some significant abilities that the asset planner also
provides. So our manager, Mr. Kiland, receives weekly updates. So he’s able to
make sure and he meets weekly with staff to make sure that those processes and
the tickets are dealt with in a timely fashion and that they’re signed off on.
Because that was one of the biggest issues is that we were doing work, great
work, but not signing off on those as well. So now he gets reports weekly,
monthly, etc., which has been very beneficial of course.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Gordon.
Hugh Gordon: — Yes, I was also hoping you
could provide us with some details about some of the metrics that you used in
your IT system to better track asset conditions.
Justin
Arendt:
— So thank you for the question. As an example I guess in terms of being able
to track that and actually improve some items, we, as an example, use a boiler.
And so if there’s an issue that would be coming up, we would put a brand new
boiler into a school; we would document it in such a way that “this is the
system, it has a useful life of X, and we would therefore expect it to last
that long under regular maintenance.”
We
would get understanding in terms of what the requirements are for that
particular item. We have thousands of those items that we would track
throughout the system. It’s full in terms of being included in our IT system so
that it provides alerts as to when these proactive maintenance items needs to
occur. That allows us to make sure that we go in there before things break,
hopefully, and cause outages for schools.
Additionally
as there is work being conducted on capital or non-capital assets, all of
that’s being tracked. But all of the service requests and all of the invoices
and items that are sort of associated with each of those core critical
components — we have a leaky roof or whatever it might be that way — all that
gets documented and tied back to that asset.
And
so we get some understanding when we run some reports through our system. We
can see higher performing, lower performing, that type of thing in terms of
what we expect out of useful life. We do track through our preventative
maintenance and renewal plans useful life of equipment and so on. And we find
oftentimes that, you know, we expected something to last 10 years; it lasted
five. And so that will lead us to dig into some additional conversations about
what might be causing this and go back into the system in terms of trying to
find like comparators, I guess, if they do in fact exist. I hope that answers
the question.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — One last question. So have
there been any cybersecurity threats to the maintenance IT system?
Justin
Arendt:
— So as I understand it, not specifically as it has been targeted for our
school division. We do not ourselves host that particular product, and so it’s
provided to us through the Ministry of Education. And we work with that vendor
in terms of having data-sharing agreements and information such that we can
protect the information that we would have.
But
my understanding as such, up to this point, is that there has been no
identified cyberattack or the like as it relates to the assets on our system
for us.
Joan Pratchler: — So are you comfortable in
saying that there are adequate safeguards in place to prevent cyberattacks or
cyber breaches to your IT maintenance system?
Kevin
Garinger:
— We would believe that to be the case. We work very closely with SaskTel. We,
like many school divisions, have a system that is subcontracted through
SaskTel, known as Arctic Fox. Arctic Wolf, pardon me. Yeah. And it really does
a great job of helping us make sure that we maintain those systems.
One
of the challenging things can be of course what happens with staff when they
perhaps open a document and that sort of thing. We’ve done a significant amount
of training with staff where we’ll send out fake . . . What’s the
term I’m missing?
Justin
Arendt:
— Phishing.
Kevin
Garinger:
— Phishing, phishing expeditions so to speak. And we’re helping to train our
staff to make sure that they do not open those types of things, which of course
could infiltrate our system. We’ve had no situations in our IT system that has
caused us to be delayed or down for any significant length of time. I know that
that’s happened in this province and with our colleagues, but that’s been
something, again, that we continue to learn and grow. And we’re doing some
really important work to protect the data and ensuring that we have safeguards
to prevent those types of things from happening.
It
doesn’t prevent it completely of course. You can do whatever you want; there
will always be somebody smarter out there who can get in through a back door
likely, and we just haven’t had that happen.
Joan Pratchler: — Well this is it, and with AI
[artificial intelligence] and hackers being able to come in with
. . . You know, they’re going all the time. So maybe this might be a
better question, you know, at the provincial level.
So
is this IT system that you have in your school division, is it one part of the
provincial system that’s managed throughout the province? Or would each school
division have to get their own maintenance IT system and hence obviously their
security protection on that?
Clint
Repski:
— For this level of implementation, school divisions are engaged in having
their own asset planner system.
Joan Pratchler: — I’m sorry . . .
Clint
Repski:
— I’m sorry. They have their own asset planner system at the local level. So as
it comes to tracking condition of boilers and other key critical
infrastructure, they would have their own system in place.
Joan Pratchler: — So there could be like 27
maintenance IT systems in the province?
Clint
Repski:
— Yeah.
Joan Pratchler: — And each school division
houses them themselves or gets a service provider to provide that. And it would
be incumbent upon the school division then to ensure that they had a
cybersecurity protection confirmation with their provider?
Clint
Repski:
— Yes.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay, thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Not seeing any further
questions, I’ll look to members one last time here. These of course are
outstanding recommendations that we’re doing follow-up, and implementation’s
occurred. So thanks so much to the team there at Horizon for their actions on this
front.
I’d
welcome a motion to conclude consideration of the two chapter 14s before us of
the 2022 and 2024 reports volume 1 respectively. Moved by MLA Chan. All agreed?
[12:00]
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair Wotherspoon: — That’s carried.
Director
Garinger and your team at Horizon that have joined us and all those that are
doing the good work across that division, thank you very much for what you guys
do every day, and for joining us here today as well. Any final words before we
kick you out here for lunch?
Kevin
Garinger:
— Yeah, just I certainly appreciate that, and appreciate the great work
happening across the province. I want to thank the Provincial Auditor. Because
one of the things, of course, that happens is that this is a process of moving
from what we would consider good to great, kind of following Jim Collins’s
perspective that way. And whether we ever get to great, we should always be
shooting for that.
And
if it isn’t for these types of reports, then we continue to do what we think is
the best that we can do. And these open our eyes to tremendous opportunities,
and so we are very grateful to the Provincial Auditor for this opportunity, and
to the committee for the questions and for allowing us to be here today. The
last time I was here, it was virtually, and it was a little bit of a challenge.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Yeah. This is way better,
right?
Kevin
Garinger:
— This is way better. You bet.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Yeah, yeah. Good.
Kevin
Garinger:
— Thank you. Thank you so much, everybody.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Right on. Thanks so much,
all. We’ll recess here for a quick bite and reconvene at 1 o’clock with the
Ministry of Education again.
[The committee recessed from
12:01 until 13:04.]
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, folks. We’ll
reconvene the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. We’re going to focus in on
matters pertinent to the Ministry of Education again and school divisions from
across the province. We thank all the leadership that’s joined us here in this
room from school divisions right across the province and of course all the
ministry officials that are here as well.
I
know our next focus will be on the two chapters pertaining to the Northern
Lights School Division. And really great to have Director Young joining us
along with some of his team. I know they’ll be introduced shortly by DM Repski
there. I’m going to turn it over to the Provincial Auditor to make a
presentation, and then we’ll come back your way.
Tara Clemett: — So thank you, Mr. Chair, Deputy Chair, committee members, and
officials. With me this afternoon is Mr. Victor Schwab, and he’s the deputy
provincial auditor that is responsible for the portfolio of work that examines
the school divisions. Behind us is Ms. Michelle Lindenbach, and she’s our
liaison with this committee.
Victor is going to present the chapters in the order
that they appear on the agenda, and this will result in six separate
presentations. He will pause after each presentation so the committee is able
to deliberate and consider each chapter. The last two chapters will be
presented together, and they do include 15 new recommendations for the
committee’s consideration. And they come about as a result of the financial
audits that we do at school divisions.
Strong financial-related controls are needed at
various school divisions to properly safeguard public resources. We found
certain school divisions did not properly review and approve bank
reconciliations, approve electronic fund transfers, independently approve
journal entries, or segregate incompatible duties in their IT systems. Not
doing so increases the risk of fraud or not detecting errors.
Before
I do turn it over to Victor to do his presentation, I do want to thank the
officials at all the school divisions, specifically Northern Lights School
Division for the co-operation that was extended to us during the course of our
work. With that I’ll turn it over to Victor.
Victor
Schwab:
— Chapter 15 of our 2022 report volume 1, on pages 177 to 187, reports the
results of our first follow-up. And chapter 22 of our 2024 report volume 2, on
pages 213 to 222, reports the results of our second follow-up of Northern
Lights School Division’s progress towards addressing the 14 outstanding
recommendations initially made in our 2019 audit of its processes to purchase
goods and services.
By
July 2024 the division implemented four recommendations, partially implemented
seven, and made limited progress on the other three. The division approved and
implemented a revised purchasing policy in September 2022. The policy sets out
requirements for use of different purchasing methods, such as quotes and
tenders, the expectation for purchase orders and contracts, and the
requirements for use of single- or sole-sourced purchases. However we found the
division did not always follow the updated requirements. It did not always
publicly post award notices for its tenders. It did not always use purchase
orders when one is required. It did not always document its justification for
single- or sole-sourced purchases.
Following
established requirements for differing purchase methods provides clarity for
staff and helps the division to purchase goods and services in a consistent
manner. Not following established requirements when using single- or
sole-sourced purchasing methods could result in the division being at risk of
not demonstrating fair and equitable treatment of suppliers and may not obtain
best value when making purchasing decisions. Good purchasing practices also
require organizations to track the use of single- and sole-sourced purchases
for additional monitoring. The division has not implemented a process to do so.
The
division revised its purchase card guidelines to align with good purchasing
practices. For example, it set out required approvals and processes for
changing transaction limits. However the division needs to ensure it implements
the revised guidance and actively monitors cardholders’ adherence to the
guidance.
For
the items we tested, we found monthly cardholder reconciliations were not
always completed, did not have all supporting receipts attached, or were not
properly approved. The division needs to ensure it implements the revised
guidance and actively monitors cardholders’ adherence to the guidelines. Not
following controls over purchase card approvals increases the risk of
inappropriate transactions or misuse of division funds.
We
also observed that the division continues to issue purchase cards in the name
of schools instead of the name of cardholders, which does not align with good
practice. Assigning cards to schools reduces the division’s ability to hold
specific staff accountable for their purchasing decisions and increases the
risk of misuse. The division needs to agree purchases on its monthly fleet card
invoices to supporting receipts prior to making payment. Not agreeing fleet
card receipts to purchases on monthly fleet card statements prior to payments
increases the risk of the division paying for inappropriate purchases and not
promptly detecting fleet card misuse.
The
division’s purchasing policy requires the division to evaluate suppliers using
criteria outlined in tender documents. This aligns with good practices also. We
found the division did not consistently document its evaluation of suppliers.
It is necessary for the division to document the evaluation, as without doing
this the division cannot sufficiently support its supplier selection decision
and demonstrate achievement of best value for purchasing decisions.
The
Northern Lights School Division’s updated purchasing policy requires it to send
letters of regret and intent to award to all bidders. We found the division
maintained timely communication on tender awards with suppliers. Timely
communication with suppliers about the tender can help to demonstrate the
division’s purchasing process is fair and transparent.
The
division updated its purchasing administrative procedure. Updated purchasing
administrative procedure sets out a minimum of 21 calendar days to allow
suppliers to respond to tenders, as well as provide guidance on using a shorter
time frame. However we found the division did not follow its policy. We found
two instances where the division used a shorter time frame of 12 and 16 days.
Not
providing suppliers with sufficient time to prepare tender responses increases
the likelihood of suppliers choosing not to respond, resulting in the division
having fewer options to acquire goods or services. Fewer options may increase
the risk of not achieving best value. Using a standard minimum time also helps
to ensure the division treats suppliers fairly and equitably.
The
ministry needs to periodically assess the robustness of its service contract
and purchase order templates used for purchasing goods and services. Its
purchase order template does not include terms and conditions pertaining to
delivery, such as timelines, and ensuring goods meet specifications to
liability — for example, limited liability upon purchaser if goods not accepted
— or for authorization of changes to terms and conditions. Not having a robust
template increases legal or financial risks where purchase arrangements do not
sufficiently address relevant purchase terms.
We
found the division maintained complete documentation of contracts and approved
contracts in accordance with the purchasing policy. Following controls over
contract authorization decreases the risk of unknown financial liabilities or
commitments or misuse of division funds.
The
Northern Lights School Division needs to separate incompatible purchasing
duties. It needs to segregate duties relating to initiating purchases,
tendering, receiving goods or services, approving invoices for payment, adding
suppliers to the financial system. It also needs to closely monitor
transactions where it’s not feasible to do so.
As
we mentioned earlier, in September ’22 the division implemented its updated
purchasing policy to separate responsibilities of those managing the purchasing
processes from those responsible for approving the purchases. However we found
the division has not appropriately restricted who can add suppliers to its
financial system. Not segregating incompatible purchasing duties between
different individuals increases the risk of fraud and not detecting errors.
The
division’s updated purchasing policy requires staff to validate vendors prior
to purchasing goods or services from that vendor through the completion of a
supplier certification application form. However we found the division does not
use this form. Staff informally assessed the validity of suppliers upon receipt
of invoices for payment. Further the form does not include steps division staff
should take to verify the legitimacy of new vendors.
Not
carrying out sufficient due diligence processes to confirm the validity of
suppliers before entering them into the financial system increases the risk of
making payments to fictitious suppliers.
We
also found the division does not monitor the supplier listing in its financial
system and remove suppliers that are no longer relevant or remove duplicate
suppliers. Periodic maintenance of suppliers listed in the division’s financial
system reduces the risk of duplicate or fraudulent payments and helps monitor
the existence of fictitious suppliers.
We
found that the division now appropriately approves invoices and documents
evidence of goods received for heating fuel purchases. Documenting receipt of
purchases decreases the risk of the division paying for goods and services it
did not receive.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
[13:15]
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thanks for the follow-up
on this front. Thanks again to the leadership at Northern Lights for joining us
here today and all those involved in this work. I’m going to turn it over to
Deputy Minister Repski for response, and then we’ll kick it open for questions.
Clint
Repski:
— Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you for the auditor’s work on the ’22
and ’24 Northern Lights School Division purchasing goods and services audits.
This
is the second follow-up audit on recommendations made in 2019 relating to the
Northern Lights School Division’s purchasing processes. Out of the 14
recommendations made by the Provincial Auditor, the school division considers
10 recommendations fully implemented, three implemented, and one not
implemented.
Here
with us today from Northern Lights School Division is Director Jason Young and
its CFO [chief financial officer], Tom Harrington. And at this point in time we
would be happy to answer questions.
Chair Wotherspoon: — I look to committee
members who may have questions. And I want to thank the folks as well that
provided the actions that have been taken on the status update and submitted
that to us. MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you, Chair. Welcome.
There were a lot of things to consider in this one. Would someone be able to
address what some of the barriers to success of this situation might have
happened, you know, over time that led to this?
Jason
Young:
— Sure. First of all, so my name is Jason Young. I’m the director of education
for Northern Lights School Division. Thanks for having me here today.
I
would just like to start off by saying thank you to the auditor. I mean I think
for us we also take pride in our work as far as being good stewards of
taxpayers’ dollars. So we are very conscious of that and aware of that and
making sure that we’re doing our best to be good stewards. So that’s something
that I do, Tom does. Together we do that, you know, in our office for the
school division. And I look forward the next time that I come here because the
list won’t be so long. So I look forward to that.
When
you look at the list there, you see that in 2022 there were a number that were
partially implemented, not implemented, and maybe a few implemented, to now the
status is changing to where you’re seeing most of them being implemented. So
we’re proud of that work. And that’s not easy, that’s not easy work to do,
given our context and our situation.
This
past year we’ve had 35 teachers short in our school division, and so the
teacher shortage is real for us. It’s been real for us for a very long time.
And so that’s been very challenging in our context. What comes with that also
is challenges just to other staffing positions. And I know when you look at
other aspects of this audit, you’ll see that some of those challenges relate
to, you know, recruiting and I guess retaining folks as well. So that is one of
our other challenges that we face.
You
know, I think I can go on, but I’ll stop there in terms of those challenges.
But again even though there have been those challenges, we really appreciate
the efforts of our staff to address many of these recommendations that were put
forward by the auditor. Not sure if I answered your question.
Joan Pratchler: — Yes, I was just wondering
what some of the challenges were, the barriers. And obviously staffing is a big
one, and those things take time.
Jason
Young:
— I think, just given the reality of geography too, I’m trying to chase
receipts all over northern Saskatchewan from Stony Rapids to La Loche to
Cumberland House to La Ronge and everywhere in between. That also becomes very
challenging for us as well. And it’s not an excuse, but it’s a reality.
And
we do our best to try to ensure that we have all of those documents in place
for, you know, processes that my CFO has to follow. So I think that’s just the
other challenge that we have. But again, not excuses; we do our work to comply.
Joan Pratchler: — I believe you. What has the
ministry been doing to help support Northern Lights School Division to succeed
in this situation?
Clint
Repski:
— Thank you for the question. In terms of the ministry’s support, I guess first
and foremost I’d start off with we respect the authority of the school
divisions to be addressing their operational issues.
Specifically
on this one I can’t point to anything specifically. However, as school
divisions work their way through recommendations with the Provincial Auditor in
a general sense, it’s not uncommon for them to be reaching out to ministry
staff to work through and identify, who’s doing this well? Who’s not doing
this? How can we work through it? So effectively we continue to be available to
work through specific questions.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay, thank you. And have
you found that helpful?
Jason
Young:
— Yes. There’s an example I have just more recently, just with our annual
report. I know there was a recommendation for the ministry, and the ministry
has been working with us on that. So when there’s recommendations to the
ministry, we get support. So that’s appreciated. And we’ve gotten that support
so far, and we’ve been meeting with officials from the annual report side of
things. Noelle in particular has been assisting us. So we’re working through
that process, so we appreciate that when that happens. So that’s appreciated.
And
as far as working with my colleagues, absolutely, whenever we need anything I
reach out. And in fairness, I’ve not reached out to Clint specifically or any
of the ADMs for any support on this. I mean we just look internally to do our
work. And that’s expected of us, as Clint mentioned, and so we’ll do that.
Tom
Harrington:
— And the ministry did help us with most of our purchasing policies based off
another school division that went through the same process years before. So
they said, here’s one that’s pretty recently been audited, so use that as your
base. So that’s what we did. So, yeah.
Joan Pratchler: — All right. I’d like to just
touch on the sole-sourcing department here. What efforts have been made by the
division to fully implement the recommendations to enforce its requirements for
using single- or sole-source purchasing?
Tom
Harrington:
— So I guess what we’ve done is we have developed — it is in the policy — we’ve
developed a form now to gather information on what our assessment would be.
It’s not something we do a lot of.
And
some examples might be, you know, say where we have a proprietary software that
does our internet filtering, right? So the contract would come up, and you
know, we don’t want to switch because if we switch it’s a lot of
implementation. You’re changing everything. It’s something that’s working.
Contract expired, we want to renew.
So
in that case we wouldn’t put a tender out because we don’t want to entertain
different competitors and their products. We just want to renew this one. So we
would have those discussions and make those evaluations, but we wouldn’t
necessarily document that in a nice form and have it all assessed. So I think
in a lot of cases we’re missing some of the documentation. So we have made a
thoughtful decision, but we haven’t necessarily documented it all, put all our
rationale out for someone to come and see what we did.
So
I think with this form, let’s gather that information, make an assessment, and
then document why we made the decision that we made.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline Roy: — Yes, thank
you, Mr. Chair. Where’s the division today with respect to making some progress
on revising its purchase card guidelines in general?
Tom
Harrington:
— That’s been implemented. So we have a specific purchasing policy for our
purchase cards now which details how limits are changed, when they should have
their cards reconciled by.
Also
there’s now a form when they get a card. So it’s an acknowledgement of, you
know, this card’s only to be used for division business, and details all the
dos and don’ts of the card. So that’s signed off by all cardholders now.
We
think we have that covered off now. That will be reviewed, I think, next time
the Provincial Auditor comes and checks on our status. But it is, we do have
all that in place now.
Jacqueline Roy: — Okay, thank you. So you
would consider that fully implemented?
Tom
Harrington:
— Yes, the purchase card stuff, yeah.
Jacqueline Roy: — Okay. And just to follow up
to that, how does the division monitor adherence of the cardholder with its
purchase card guidelines to mitigate from that potential fraud?
Tom
Harrington:
— Yeah, so we more regularly track that they’re sending their statements in
regularly. If they don’t, their card gets locked down so they can’t make any
more purchases until they’re compliant again.
We
still do have cards in the school’s name. And I guess that’s not best practice,
but it’s better than what we used to do was give someone a wad of cash and have
them go buy stuff and bring the receipts back.
So
that does allow for someone to sign that generic card out, take it on a trip
with the students, have the purchases. The other option is, you know, then you
got to give everybody cards, even if they’re only using them every once in a
while. So I mean that’s not best practice, but I think it’s better than what
used to be done.
So
that might be one that’s still not quite there, but I think it is an
improvement on what used to happen anyhow.
Jacqueline Roy: — Okay. And could you, I guess
then, elaborate just a little bit on the cards themselves? Are there standard
controls on any credit card that you’re using, or do you request particular
controls be added therefore in that circumstance?
Tom
Harrington:
— Yeah, so each card, we can control the transaction limit and the monthly
credit limit. And that can be done very quickly. So now our process is if
someone wants a limit increase, they would request it and also copy their
supervisor so that their supervisor is in the loop. And then we would assess if
it’s reasonable. And then if it’s just to purchase, we try to keep them at
about $1,000 transaction limit. And then if they need it higher for a bit, we
just raise it for a bit and then lower it back down.
And
the cards also have controls built in. Like they don’t work at a jewellery
store, and they don’t work at casinos, and they don’t work at other places too.
So there are some built-in controls in the cards that come with them.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler:
— When I look at the first recommendation — because it looks from 2022 and 2024
— the planned actions say that compliance with the policy continues to improve.
Could you quantify that or tell me a little bit more about that?
Tom
Harrington:
— Yeah, I think it was quite a change I guess. We didn’t have a policy at all
beforehand. I mean we had our practices but nothing written. So I think it’s
communicating that out, getting that out to principals, getting compliance from
all the schools. So I think that’s taken some time.
So
you know, we meet with our principals two or three times a year. So it’s been
at the start, here’s the policy, here’s the highlights. And then next round,
okay, here’s the stuff that people are still struggling with.
One
was getting three quotes for things that were over certain thresholds. Schools
would have some trouble doing that. So just trying to assist them and showing
them how to do that to make sure we’re compliant.
And
there’s various, I mean, capacities at schools to pick that up. Some pick it up
very fast and it’s no problem. Others you’ve got to work with. We also have a
lot of turnover, so it’s just managing all those kind of things and making sure
everybody’s informed.
Joan
Pratchler:
— Could I ask a little bit about tendering? What’s the average length of time
for a tender, and what percentage of tenders are for just the minimum 21‑day
window?
Tom
Harrington:
— Yeah, I don’t know if I would have the stats. The Provincial Auditor might
have better stats on that. The recommendation was to set a minimum time, 21
days for the tender to be out, and I think that’s what we aim for. We don’t
also do a lot of tendering. There may be, I don’t know, half a dozen a year.
And
so something like a capital project, like something big, that would go through
the ministry and Sask procurement, and that would meet all guidelines.
For
us it’s a lot of bus contract routes, purchasing buses, some speech
pathologists — those types of things. So I think in some cases we have
knowingly not given 21 days in a few instances. One I can think of is we needed
a school bus quickly. So we put out a tender for a short amount of time, saying
we just want what you have on the lot, right. We don’t have time for a custom
order thing. Since that wouldn’t take as long to respond to, we gave a shorter
time window just because of the circumstances. So that would be one.
[13:30]
Yeah,
I think that’s another one where we just need to be compliant with it. And we
know it’s 21 days now, so you just got to make sure we allow for that time.
Joan Pratchler: — Have suppliers offered any
feedback on time frames?
Tom
Harrington:
— No, I think for things more complex, so if we’re doing something like if
we’re going to rewire a school, that’s very complicated. So we’re going to want
to give more time for someone to respond to that. So we do plan for those
better. I think in a lot of cases people aren’t falling over themselves to bid
on a lot of our stuff because it’s expensive, and it’s more complicated if it’s
construction work or on-site work. So I think that might be more the barrier
than the time frame.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline Roy: — Yes, thank you. We heard a
little bit earlier about the supplier certification application form. So does
the division now use that form to document the validity of its suppliers before
entering them into the system?
Tom
Harrington:
— Yes, so we now have that form that gets reviewed by the finance manager and
approved, and then the vendor is entered into the system by another employee.
And we’ve also segregated that so one person can add vendors; they can’t also
delete vendors. Another person deletes vendors; can’t add vendors.
What
we haven’t gotten to is evaluating our old, kind of dormant suppliers. So we
haven’t gotten to that point of cleaning that up, but we have gotten to the
point about vetting the new suppliers before they’re added.
Joan Pratchler: — Point of order. Are we going
through both of those audits here at the same time, or does the one have
. . . speaking between each?
Chair Wotherspoon: — Yeah, they’re both being
considered at the same time here. They were presented at the same time and
being considered at the same time. And they’re both follow-ups, or it’s a
follow-up audit on recommendations that have been concurred in in the committee,
and we’ve had the officials before us as well for questioning in the past.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. Who is responsible for
signing off on contracts?
Tom
Harrington:
— It would be me or the director, typically. Typically the director if he’s
available. If not, I would.
Joan Pratchler: — How many individuals have
the authority to add new suppliers to the financial system? And how many
vendors have been added since the segregation of the duties?
Tom Harrington:
— I believe there’s three people that can add vendors to the system. I don’t know
how many. I could get you that information, but I don’t know off the top of my
head how many . . . [inaudible].
Joan
Pratchler: —
10? 15?
Tom
Harrington: —
I guess there’s two types of vendors. I mean one would be staff vendors. So if
we have a staff person, then that gets added through payroll. And then if they
have stuff on the expense side, we pull that from payroll. So that’s already
been vetted, so we pull that. So there would be quite a few of those. Other
vendors’ companies, how many would we add in a year? Ballpark, I don’t know,
maybe 30. Like somewhere around there. Like not a ton. Yeah.
Joan
Pratchler: —
What’s the time frame for approval for a vendor?
Tom
Harrington: —
It would be pretty quick because I think we . . . And it would depend
on I guess the scope. If it’s something big, then we’re going to do a bit more
work to make sure that vendor is legit. But just a quick search, make sure
. . . If we’ve heard of them, we know they exist, right. If it’s a
hotel, we know this hotel exists. We’re good. Otherwise you do a bit more work.
You check, you know, the presence on the internet. You try and get a website or
call them to make sure it’s legit. But not more than a day, like a day. It
wouldn’t take too much work, but just it depends on what else is going on.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Do you have a current working definition for an inactive vendor? And are you
planning to have inactive vendors listed as such, or do you delete them from
the system entirely?
Tom
Harrington: —
Yeah, that would be our next step. So I think our system can just run a report,
say, if we pick . . . If it’s a year, if it’s two years, we just say
any vendor that hasn’t been used for two years. If that’s our threshold the
system could spit out a report, and we could just delete those vendors.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Does Northern Lights division have any rules about what date heat can be turned
on in their schools?
Jason
Young: —
I
wouldn’t say that there’s a date necessarily. No.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Temperature?
Jason
Young: —
Yeah.
Staff, yeah, letting us know. Yeah.
Joan
Pratchler: —
I know there was one recommendation around heat, you know, heating fuel and
that. How much has been spent on heating fuel since the recommendation was
implemented? Has the yearly average in essence gone up or down?
Jason
Young: —
Well
we do have I guess a minor capital application to address some of the fuel oil
in our units and in our schools. So that’s before ministry, and so we’re hoping
that once that’s approved it’s going to convert over to propane and help us
with that situation.
So
we’re looking forward to March and the potential of an announcement there for
the school division. That will allow us then to, you know, use those dollars
that we save towards other things, in terms of maybe addressing more items
related to Tom’s world. So more supports there so we’re not back here.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Good. Thank you. That’s the end of our
questions.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Any further questions
from committee members? Not seeing any at this time, I want to thank obviously
the leadership of Northern Lights for their time with us today, and everyone in
Northern Lights for their service and work every day throughout that vast
North. I suspect you get the heat turned on before the lakes are frozen?
Jason Young:
— Generally.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — All right. Now thanks
again. And these are previous recommendations we have. This is the follow-up.
We appreciate the commitments that have been made to implement them, those
outstanding ones as well.
I’d welcome a motion to
conclude consideration of chapters 15 and 22. Moved by Deputy Chair Wilson. All
agreed? Okay, that’s carried. And yeah, again, thanks so much. Director Young,
any final remarks before we shift gears?
Jason Young:
— I appreciate the opportunity and look forward to just bringing back more good
news, and we appreciate the accountability. So thanks so much.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Right on. Thank you very
much. Okay. As we shift gears, we’re going to turn our attention next to
chapter 15, volume 1 of the 2023 report.
I know we have some guests
that have come into the room. We’ll give them a brief introduction here today.
This is a very fine group from Robert Southey high school. They’re here for a
day in the legislature. They’ve had a mock parliament this morning. I got to
have lunch with them here today, along with their local MLA.
I want to welcome their
teachers that are with them here today: Principal Gerein who’s with us here
today, and Ms. Belland, and that group of students. I think they’ve had a
really good day here. I think they have a big football game tonight against
Lemberg. We wish you guys well in that as well.
So this is the Public
Accounts Committee. Feel free to stick around for whatever time works for you
to observe our proceedings. We respect as well at some point if you have to
depart. I know you don’t have the best seating at the back of the committee room
there. So thanks for being here.
And I should give a specific
shout-out to Kadi Nordal back there. This is a grade 12 group, so their final
year of high school here. Thanks for joining us.
Okay. We’ll turn our
attention here now and I will turn it over to the Provincial Auditor to focus
on the chapter pertaining to Prairie Spirit, and we’ll have a presentation and
then we’ll come back this way here.
Victor Schwab:
— Chapter 15 of our 2023 report volume 1, on pages 167 to 173, reports results
of our second follow-up of Prairie Spirit School Division’s progress towards
addressing the six outstanding recommendations initially made in our 2016 audit
of its processes to maintain its facilities. By January 2023 the division
implemented all six outstanding recommendations.
The division set out the
expected key information that their staff should gather and record about its
facilities and significant components. We found the division entered its
information on all its facilities and related significant components into its maintenance
IT system. The division has approximately 3,700 assets considered as
significant components.
The division established
service objectives, such as the expected facility condition index levels for
both facilities and significant components. The division also established a
target for maximizing useful life of significant components and set inspection
frequency and assigned preventative maintenance work using its maintenance IT
system.
We also found that the
Prairie Spirit School Division developed an overall maintenance plan for all of
its facilities and significant components. Having an overall maintenance plan
assisted the division in determining the costs of its maintenance needs over
the short, medium, and long term and resources required. It assists the
division in reducing or potentially eliminating a need for, and the extent of,
major future repairs, and in determining the impact on its facilities of
delaying maintenance.
The division provided written
guidance to staff on the nature, extent, and frequency of inspections at its
facilities and related significant components. We also found the division uses
its IT system to track maintenance completed on significant components and
provides its board with periodic comprehensive maintenance reports.
Effective maintenance
processes help the division to enhance the future viability and safety of
schools, improve the quality of space, protect against loss of facility value,
and limit future repair costs.
That concludes my
presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Well thanks for the
follow-up on this front as well. Thanks to Prairie Spirit for being represented
here today. We have the deputy director with us here today, Bayles. I’ll leave
DM Repski to provide some brief remarks and an introduction.
Clint Repski:
— Yes, thank you for the auditor’s work on the Prairie Spirit School Division
maintaining facilities audit. This is the second follow-up audit from 2019
where the Provincial Auditor assessed Prairie Spirit School Division’s
processes to maintain its facilities. The school division agrees with the
Provincial Auditor that all six recommendations are fully implemented.
Here with us today from the
Prairie Spirit School Division is Bob Bayles, chief financial officer. And we
would welcome any questions at this time.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Okay, right on. That’s
great. We’ll open it up now to committee members that may have questions. MLA
Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you and welcome. Would you be able to share some insight into what
specific information is expected of staff to gather about facilities and
components?
Bob Bayles:
— Yes, thank you. And if I may start, thank you very much for having us here.
Really appreciate the audit process as it helps us improve our practice and
focus on those areas.
That was one of the main
points in the audit, as you bring out, is that we needed to require staff, not
just assume and have conversations, loose conversations perhaps. We needed to
actually have everything written down and documented. So the types of information
could be anything from greasing a motor on a monthly basis, it could be
inspecting boilers, all of our boilers for instance on an annual basis —
important things. As the committee said earlier, when do you turn on your heat?
That’s an important thing where we all live, as we all know.
And so those types of things
were being done but not being written down and not being documented. So they
couldn’t be verified that they were being done. So that would be an example of
some of those things that we did.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Any further questions,
folks? I know we’ve had these before in the past and concurred. Any further
questions?
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Sure.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
So how has gathering the information for each individual facility and
establishing those service objectives help to maintain the division’s
facilities in general?
Bob Bayles:
— Yes, thank you very much for that question. Generally speaking, it’s improved
our processes so that we know that — for instance, we’ll use that maybe same
example of a motor — we know for sure that it’s being, like our cars, that it’s
being cared for in a way that the specs have required it to be cared for. So
therefore insurance is more available perhaps if something goes wrong.
And it ensures that we are
doing the right things at the right time, versus maybe the right things not
always at the right time. So it helps us to prioritize when we are doing the
various maintenance work. Did that answer your question sufficiently?
Jacqueline
Roy: —
And I assume it’s helped with efficiency and effectiveness?
Bob Bayles:
— Oh yes, absolutely. And that maybe bleeds into the board-reporting component
of this, is that’s something that we report now to our board, is the
efficiencies and effectiveness of how this audit has helped us improve our
processes. Thank you.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thank you.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you. And how many schools under Prairie Spirit School Division have an
FCI rating of good?
[13:45]
Bob Bayles:
— That’s a great question and it constantly changes, of course. As we are
blessed with more funding to build more schools, our FCI rating is very, very
good. And as they tend to get older and our PMR [preventative maintenance and
renewal] dollars are not keeping up as much, then we have to prioritize that.
I don’t have a number for
you, but I could certainly get one as of today, or as of our last board report
where that is. But we track that with our board reports semi-annually, and we
show them the trend where it is on that day, and if we don’t do any preventative
maintenance, where the trend will continue, which is not good. But generally
speaking, our FCIs through this period have improved considerably, but there
may be more information coming here.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Okay, and then the second part of that question is, how many schools are in
poor or critical? So two parts to that.
Bob Bayles:
— I’ll need to confer, I think.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — So while we’re just
waiting, here we have the Provincial Auditor, who of course provides an
incredible independent function to the people of Saskatchewan around accountability
and provides these reports and these audits.
And we were chatting here,
and I said, well what a wonderful committee for students to come in and
observe, because sometimes you come watch question period and these sorts of
things and, well, you know, that’s a bit of a different beast at times. This one
you get to come in and see a really constructive exchange that has the
independent officer here, has the Provincial Comptroller.
As
they’re departing, another shout-out to Southey. Good luck against Lemberg here
tonight.
Bob
Bayles:
— Thank you for the question. We have three that are in the critical stage. And
as far as how they’re being addressed, we have one that’s been approved for a
new school build in South Corman Park which we’re very grateful for, so that is
ongoing. The construction has not yet started but they’re in the process. And
the other two, we have plans to improve the criticality of the various
facilities’ functions that need to be improved.
Joan Pratchler: — And what are you sensing are
the timelines on both of those two, the new school when you see that coming
online, and also when those criticalities could be addressed?
Bob
Bayles:
— Yeah, typically speaking it’s about a three-year process to have students in
the school, and so we would hope that that would be the case in this situation.
We’re working hard for that to be the case. In the other two schools we are
prioritizing that right now to figure out what pieces can we get on through our
preventative maintenance program.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. Are there still annual
inspections taking place? I mean have the 2025 inspections taken place already?
Bob
Bayles:
— Yeah, when you say annual inspections, you mean of the critical pieces like
boilers?
Joan Pratchler: — Yeah.
Bob
Bayles:
— Yes, those are ongoing throughout the year.
Joan Pratchler: — Do you have an IT system to
track facility maintenance and these kinds of things?
Bob
Bayles:
— Yes, we use the ministry-recommended asset planner. And that’s one of the
pieces that we’re very grateful for the audit, that it’s really helped us focus
more in on an asset planner. And we’re really leveraging that tool which we
didn’t leverage so much, so we’re very grateful for that criticality.
Joan Pratchler: — How often does the board
receive those comprehensive maintenance reports that would come from that
system?
Bob
Bayles:
— Twice a year, yeah.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. Okay, thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline Roy: — Sure, just one last
question. Is the division currently working on conducting playground
inspections as a result of this schedule?
Bob
Bayles:
— Yeah, we do playground inspections annually and so that’s ongoing.
Jacqueline Roy: — Perfect, thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Not seeing any further
questions at this time, thanks again for all the actions that have been taken
on this front. Thanks to all those in Prairie Spirit for their work every day.
Thanks for your leadership and, yeah, thanks for addressing these recommendations.
I’d
welcome a motion to conclude consideration of chapter 15. Moved by MLA
Crassweller. All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon:
— That’s carried. All right, thank you again. We’re going to turn our attention
now to a couple chapters pertaining to Saskatoon School Division No. 13, I
believe, and I’ll turn it over to the Provincial Auditor.
Victor
Schwab:
— Thank you. Chapter 20 of our 2024 report volume 1, on pages 215 to 220,
reports the results of our second follow-up of Saskatoon School Division’s
progress towards addressing 11 outstanding recommendations initially made in
our 2018 audit of its processes to support kindergarten to grade 8 students
with intensive needs.
By
April 2022 the division implemented six recommendations, and by March ’24 the
division implemented another three recommendations and made improvement on its
processes, and partially implemented the other two recommendations. At March
2024 two recommendations remain not fully addressed.
The
Saskatoon School Division continued to analyze average time to complete
assessments, but it has not set expected timelines for completing professional
assessments, like those assessments done by speech pathologists, of
kindergarten to grade 8 students with intensive needs.
The
division indicated it plans to use its tracking of assessments to set out
guidance on expected time frames for completing these professional assessments
of kindergarten to grade 8 students with intensive needs for the 2024‑25
year. Setting reasonable time frames to complete professional assessments can
help avoid delays in implementing learning supports for students with intensive
needs.
The
division implemented an internal review process in March 2023 to check whether
school staff documented parental agreement on individual learning plans for
students with intensive needs, or their attempts to obtain agreement on those
plans.
We
also found that the division regularly monitored student progress in achieving
individual learning plan goals by reviewing whether staff completed progress
reports for each student with intensive needs, the number of individual
learning goals, and the progress rating on each goal. The division also
analyzed the average number of goals set for students, as well as the overall
progress rating.
We
found that the division provides its senior management and board of education
with some information on learning supports for intensive needs students in
kindergarten to grade 8, but needs more robust reporting. The division analyzed
the number of learning plan goals and found most students had around three
goals, and the overall average progress rating of each goal, but it has not yet
shared these results with senior management and its board.
Providing
senior management and the board with robust reporting to determine the
sufficiency of learning supports would assist the division in assessing whether
it provides students with educational services consistent with those student
educational needs and abilities and sufficiently accommodates all students with
intensive needs.
That
concludes my presentation.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thank you very much for
the presentation and the follow-up on this front. Thanks as well to some of the
leadership that’s joined us from Saskatoon School Division No. 13. And I’m
going to turn it over to Deputy Minister Repski to provide proper introduction
of the leadership that’s joined us and to provide comment, quick comment. Then
we’ll get to some questions.
Clint
Repski:
— Yes, thank you for the auditor’s work on Saskatoon School Division’s
“Supporting Students with Intensive Needs” audit. This audit is the second
follow-up audit since recommendations were initially made in 2018. Students
with intensive needs are those assessed as having a capacity to learn that is
compromised by a cognitive, social, emotional, behavioural, or physical
condition. School divisions are required to reasonably accommodate students
with intensive needs in the regular program of instruction.
Out of the five outstanding
recommendations, Saskatoon School Division is pleased to report that all are
considered implemented. Here with us today from Saskatoon Public School
Division is Trish Reeve, superintendent of education, and Michelle Howard, coordinator
of early learning. And we’d be pleased to answer any questions.
Chair
Wotherspoon:
— Thank you for those remarks. I’ll open it up to the members here to see if
there’s any questions. MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: — Thank you. Welcome. Is there
a wait-list for completion of assessments of kindergarten to grade 8 students
with intensive needs?
Trish
Reeve:
— Thank you for the question and thanks for the opportunity, really appreciate.
As Director Young and Deputy Director Bayles said, the audit really gave us an
opportunity to look at our processes and our practices. And so we’re happy to
be able to say that we feel we’ve implemented these recommendations.
To
answer your question, yes, there continues to be wait-lists for assessments.
You know, in terms of just staffing, I would say we are not at our full
capacity of psychologists and SLPs [speech-language pathologist], and so we
continue to try to recruit. Even though we’re in a city, urban centre, it still
is difficult to recruit staff. So we do have a slight wait-list for some of our
assessments, but our goal is always to try and assess within that calendar year
of the recommendation to assess.
Joan Pratchler: — Just a follow-up.
Provincially would you sense that that is typical across the province as well
for recruiting speech-language pathologists and psychometrists?
Trish
Reeve:
— Absolutely, yeah. I get together with the northeast superintendent group
probably three or four times a year, and that is one of the topics we continue
to talk about. I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but the University of
Saskatchewan will be starting a master’s program for occupational therapists as
well as speech-language pathologists. We’re very excited about that.
I
think another barrier, I would say, in terms of speech-language pathologists is
that if they’re coming to work in Saskatchewan, that they do have to write an
exam to practise in Saskatchewan. And so that is a bit of a difficulty for
some, because I think the threshold for that exam is quite high. And so I think
that is a barrier for recruitment of having, you know, those SLPs that have not
got their schooling in Saskatchewan.
Joan
Pratchler:
— We can probably expect within a couple of years that those that have gone in
the program will be online and ready to be helping in our schools.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Any further questions,
committee members? MLA Roy.
Jacqueline Roy: — Can you talk a little bit
about how it’s impacted your use of resources, perhaps in regard to personnel,
and their reallocation throughout the division?
Trish
Reeve:
— Yeah, I think, you know, in terms of not only just some of our professional
staff, when we are looking at in terms of where the needs are within our
buildings, how we might allocate resources such as resource teachers to
buildings, and to really get a sense because we have Clevr, which I think if
you read in the report, an online platform that allows us to track student
data, particularly IIP [inclusion and intervention plan] goals.
And
so we’re able to readily know not only the number of students with intensive
supports at each school, but really kind of the complexity within each school.
So that is something that I work on with my coordinator — that’s not here —
every year, is determining how we’ll allocate those resources based on the
information that we get from those reports.
Jacqueline Roy: —
Thank you. And in terms of non-staffing resources, how has it affected that
reallocation?
Trish
Reeve:
— Can you be more specific? Sorry.
Jacqueline Roy: —
Yes. In terms of non-staffing resources, how has it impacted your use of
resources?
Trish
Reeve:
— Well with non-staffing resources, I would say that, you know, we have been
fortunate again in this city, that we have taken the dollars that we would have
for salaries, and have been able to contract services out.
[14:00]
So
that has been helpful to us in Saskatoon. And I think, again, with having the
program come to the University of Saskatchewan, we’re very hopeful that we’ll
have a number of internships or, you know, student SLPs that will be coming
into our buildings. So that’s something that we’re looking forward to as well.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — How would you describe the
school division monitors students with intensive needs’ progress in achieving
the goals set out in their learning plans?
Trish
Reeve:
— We’re really proud of that. I think one of the things that we have been
fortunate to do since we’ve worked on this audit is to develop a report through
Clevr, where we’re able to then not only write the goals and schools assessing
the goals and the progress there, but we’re able to pull that centrally. So
we’re able to see that and support the schools that require additional
supports.
Joan Pratchler: — Can the ministry share what
information is vital for senior management in determining sufficiency of
learning supports?
Clint Repski: — Yes. Thank you for the
question. The role of the ministry is we’re monitoring activity that’s
happening in our school divisions. As I’ve mentioned before, the high-level
indicators that we would use within the ministry that we certainly pay
attention to: changing enrolments, student vulnerability indicators,
non-official language, geographic dispersion. And we use those as a
representation of cognitive, physical, and psychological challenges, such as
deaf or hard of hearing, etc., etc.
We
also collect IIP information from school divisions on an annual basis, and
that’s how we monitor it from a provincial perspective.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Any further questions,
committee members? Not seeing any. Yeah, just thanks again to Saskatoon School
Division for your leadership that’s present here today, but also all of those
that are involved in this very important work in classrooms right across the
division. I know you’re not leaving us right away. We have one more chapter.
But
with respect to this chapter here, I would welcome a motion that we concur with
or that we conclude consideration of chapter 20. Moved by MLA Chan. All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair Wotherspoon: — That’s carried. Okay,
I’ll turn it back to the Provincial Auditor to focus on chapter 18.
Victor Schwab: — Chapter 18 of our 2025
report volume 1 on pages 189 to 192 reports the results of our second follow-up
of Saskatoon Public School Division’s progress towards addressing the five
outstanding recommendations we initially made in our 2020 audit of its processes
to monitor its success when readying students for learning in the primary
grades when exiting kindergarten.
By
January 2023 the division implemented three recommendations, and by February
2025 the division fully implemented the outstanding two recommendations. We
found that teachers of the school division used division-mandated tools to
assess kindergarten students’ readiness to learn. It no longer gives teachers
the option of using alternative assessment tools in place of division-mandated
tools.
We
also found the division implemented an online dashboard to help it analyze
kindergarten student assessment data to identify areas of struggle across the
schools. As a result of its analysis, the division relocated pre-kindergarten
programs to two different schools in 2024. Having effective processes to
monitor success in readying kindergarten students for learning prepares them
for future academic success in the primary grades.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thank you very much. I’ll
turn it over to DM Repski and Saskatoon to respond, then we’ll open it up for
questions.
Clint
Repski:
— Perfect. Thank you for the auditor’s work on Saskatoon division’s
kindergarten readiness to learn audit. This audit is the second follow-up audit
since recommendations were initially made in 2021 for improving processes to
monitor its success in readying students for learning in the primary grades
when exiting kindergarten.
Out
of the two outstanding recommendations, Saskatoon School Division agrees with
the Provincial Auditor that both are implemented. And here with me to help
answer questions are, continuing, Trish Reeve and Michelle Howard. And we’ll
open it to questions.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Yeah, thanks so much.
Thanks as well for the work too that’s occurred to implement these
recommendations. Are there any questions, committee members? MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. Has the ministry
seen any noticeable changes or impacts since the Saskatoon School Division
required kindergarten teachers to complete the five division standardized
assessments?
Clint
Repski:
— Sorry. Could you repeat that?
Joan Pratchler: — Has the ministry seen any
noticeable changes or impacts since the school division required the
kindergarten teachers to complete the five division standardized assessments?
Clint
Repski:
— Since the implementation from a provincial lens — and that would be our EYE
data — it’s been fairly static since ’22‑23. Just using high round
numbers, effectively 60 per cent achieving development, to the spring at about
80 per cent, and that’s been fairly consistent over the last number of years.
Joan Pratchler: — And would you say it’s
static across the province with all school divisions, or any variances on that?
Clint
Repski:
— Yes, we would say it’s been fairly static across the province.
Joan Pratchler: — And is there intentionality
to change that? Can it be increased? Should it be? Is that norm?
Clint
Repski:
— So we’re going to have a continued focus about increasing those scores. We do
think there are improvements. Complicated work, as you can imagine. But some of
the examples I point to of the focus is the ELIS program that we spoke to
earlier today, increasing PD opportunities for staff, increasing the number of
family resource centres across the province, and going so far as implementing
an early literacy screener to identify students for additional needs.
Joan Pratchler: — And now that’s
province-wide, correct?
Clint
Repski:
— Pardon me?
Joan Pratchler: — That’s province-wide, right?
Clint
Repski:
— Yes.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. Can either of you be
able to provide this year’s data on kindergarten student readiness across the
division?
Trish
Reeve:
— We actually have just closed our assessment window as of October 10th, and
the EYE window began on the 14th. So we don’t have that data right now, but we
will have that information here in the next month.
Joan Pratchler: — Would you be able to supply
that or provide that for the committee?
Trish
Reeve:
— Absolutely.
Chair Wotherspoon: — So maybe just as a
pointer, thanks so much for the undertaking to provide information back to the
committee. The committee Clerk, Miranda, will provide you the best route to do
that or the way to do that. And within 30 days your information might not be
. . . You might not yet have the data in 30 days; is that correct?
Trish
Reeve:
— The EYE we will not.
Chair Wotherspoon: — You will not?
Trish
Reeve:
— We don’t receive that until after Christmas. But we could give you last
year’s data instead.
Michelle
Howard:
— And we will have our division data. It just came in, so we will have that
available and ready within the next few weeks.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thanks so much. If that
can be supplied, is 30 days reasonable as a time? That’s great. All right, 30
days. Miranda will provide you the information.
Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you. And in your
professional opinion, to the division, has this helped you better identify the
needs, or would you say it has stayed the same when you are going on teacher
expertise and professionalism alone?
Michelle
Howard:
— I would say that this has definitely helped us in terms of our processes
moving forward of identifying where the needs are. With our data dashboard
tracking system, we’re able to identify specific schools, classrooms, and down
to the teacher level and students.
So
you know, we have the larger division view of identifying where those needs are
and what resources and supports might need to be available in some of those
buildings by way of additional resource support, some professional learning,
some consultant work inside those buildings. And then at the school level we
help to support our leaders, our administrators to understand how that data
looks and how they are analyzing that at the school level so they can directly
support their teachers and students.
[14:15]
Trish
Reeve:
— Yeah, I might just add too, this year we have a mechanism now on the
dashboard where we’re able to desegregate the data. So that’s really important
for us this year to be really strategic in how we’re supporting our Indigenous
learners.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Committee members, any
further questions? Not seeing any, I’d welcome a motion to conclude
consideration of chapter 18. Moved by MLA Crassweller. All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair Wotherspoon: — That’s carried. Thank you
very much, Saskatoon, for joining us here today. And thanks to everyone across
your division and in classrooms across your division for what they do every
day.
Okay,
we’re shifting chairs and moving our day along. I’m going to turn it back over
to the . . . And we’re going to shift our day and then turn our
attention to chapter 23 with respect to St. Paul’s Roman Catholic separate
division.
Victor
Schwab:
— Chapter 23 of our 2024 report volume 1, from pages 233 to 235, reports the
result of our second follow-up of St. Paul’s Roman Catholic Separate School
Division’s progress towards addressing the outstanding recommendation initially
made in our 2019 audit of its processes to adapt technology for learning in
elementary schools.
By
February ’24, the division fully implemented the one outstanding
recommendation. During our follow-up audit, we found that the division
implemented an IT system to track the location of its educational technology
devices such as iPads, Chromebooks, and laptops. We also finally completed a
count of devices in 2023 to confirm their location, and plan to conduct these
counts annually. Regularly checking the accuracy of technology device listings
minimizes the risk of missing devices and verifies their actual location.
Verifying device locations helps ensure teachers and students have technology
available for use in the classroom.
That
concludes my presentation and I will now pause for the committee’s
consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thanks so much. I’ll turn
it over to DM Repski for remarks.
Clint Repski:
— Thank you for the auditor’s work on St. Paul’s Roman Catholic Separate School
Division, adapting technology for learning in elementary schools. St. Paul’s
Roman Catholic Separate School Division is pleased the Provincial Auditor has
found the final outstanding recommendation related to this audit as
implemented.
St. Paul’s Roman Catholic
Separate School Division has advised that they’ve invested in a new software
that tracks all of their IT equipment when connected to their network. This
software allows them to keep the inventory system constantly updated, providing
real-time visibility and control over their assets.
The officials aren’t able to
join us here today, so if you have any specific follow-up questions, we’d be
happy to provide a written response.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Thanks so much for the
action taken, to this school division here, to implement this recommendation. I
will look to committee members if there might be questions. We can see if there
are questions that could be answered by the ministry here today, or if there
are questions we need to pursue with the school division.
MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you. It looks like the Snipe-IT system has been in place for some time
now. My question is, is Snipe still accurately monitoring the school system’s
devices? And what would be evidence of that?
Clint
Repski: — Okay.
So regarding the specific
question around Snipe-IT, it would be a follow-up item that we would have with
the school division, but our understanding as we were following up was that the
inventory system is fully updated and it is fully in use and functional. But if
you’d like us to follow up specifically on your question, we would be happy to
do that.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Well maybe the following questions might help with that. How often are the
inventory counts completed, and when was the last count done? And that would
answer whether it’s working.
Clint Repski:
— Okay. Okay, we’ll undertake.
Tara
Clemett: —
I’ll just maybe weigh in out there. So basically what it is indicating — and
during the course of our audit, what we found — is almost this system has the
ability through technology to be tracking the devices and where they are in
real time. So they aren’t necessarily having to, you know, do counts anymore.
It’s almost like the system . . . They could run reports, right.
And then they might just want
to like periodically just confirm the accuracy of what everything’s telling
them, but it’s like they have that data available to them at their fingertips
at all times now. And then they could probably redeploy as they see fit within
their schools or among schools.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Okay, thank you. And it is a computer program. What kind of safeguards do you
have in place for addressing any security vulnerabilities?
Clint Repski:
— We’ll take it as an undertaking, for sure, for the specific aspect, but one
of the protective measures that I know the school division uses is Arctic Wolf.
Or Fox? Wolf. We do know that they were one of the instigators of using that.
So in terms of cybersecurity, they are on the cutting line of what is
appropriate. So that would be an effective measure here.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Those are all my questions.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Not seeing any further questions.
At this point I would welcome a motion that we conclude consideration of
chapter 23. Moved by MLA Beaudry. All agreed?
Some
Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Okay, that’s carried.
We’re going to turn our attention to chapters 1 and 2 from the 2024 and ’25
report volume 1s respectively, and that will be dealt with as one presentation.
We have a host of new recommendations with respect to these two chapters. I’ll
turn it over to the Provincial Auditor.
Victor Schwab:
— Chapter 1 of our 2024 report volume 1 and chapter 2 of our 2025 report volume
1 report the results of our annual integrated audits of all 27 school divisions
for the years ended August 31st, 2023 and August 31st, 2024.
As noted in the chapter, our
office works with school division appointed auditors to carry out these audits.
In these chapters we report that the school divisions for the ’23 and ’24 year
ended August 31st, they had reliable financial statements, complied with
authorities governing their activities, and had effective rules and procedures
to safeguard public resources, except for the matters we will discuss today.
In chapter 1 of our 2024
volume 1 report, on pages 15 to 21, we made six new recommendations. We
reported and found the following. Three school divisions did not follow
Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector when
recording capital transfers in their financial records.
The three school divisions
had not met all of the eligibility criteria for capital funding before it
recorded the revenue. Therefore on page 17 we recommended that the impacted
school divisions follow Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for
the public sector when recording capital transfers in their financial records.
During ’23‑24, we found the three impacted school divisions properly
recorded capital transfers in their financial records and financial statements.
Holy Family Roman Catholic
Separate School Division and Northwest School Division need to segregate duties
of its employees responsible for key functions in its IT financial system.
During 2023 and 2024, these school divisions did not adequately segregate
incompatible duties relating to setting up and updating employee payroll
information, setting up and updating vendor information, creating and approving
purchase orders, making and approving payments, and recording journal entries.
Not segregating incompatible
duties between different individuals in the IT system increases the risk of
fraud, and not detecting errors. Therefore on page 18 we recommended Holy
Family Roman Catholic School Division segregate duties of employees responsible
for key financial functions. And on page 20 we recommended Northwest School
Division segregate duties of employees responsible for key financial functions.
During 2024, Northwest School
Division fully implemented this recommendation by implementing manual controls
to segregate duties, such as manually approving journal entries.
The 2023 audit also found the
Northwest School Division needed to complete key financial reconciliations
monthly, and independently review and approve them in a timely manner. The
division did not complete or review key financial reconciliations timely, such
as bank reconciliations and reconciliations of its subledgers to the general
ledger, for example, the accounts receivable.
On page 19 we recommended
Northwest School Division complete key financial reconciliations monthly and
independently review and approve them in a timely manner.
The
division uses electronic signatures on cheques; however it does not have
controls in place to restrict the same individual from approving invoices and authorizing
release of payment. Not segregating incompatible duties between different
individuals for electronic fund transfers increases the risk of fraud and not
detecting errors.
The
Saskatchewan Rivers School Division needs to follow its purchasing policy and
obtain the required quotes for its purchases. The school division’s purchasing
policy requires staff to obtain written quotes from at least three suppliers
for purchases over $5,000 and up to $20,000. Audit testing found one purchase
for $9,000 where the school division did not obtain any quotes.
On
page 20 we recommended Saskatchewan Rivers School Division follow its
purchasing policy and obtain the required quotes for its purchases. During 2024
Saskatchewan Rivers properly obtained the required quotes in accordance with
its purchasing policy for the purchases we tested. We consider this
recommendation is now fully implemented.
In
September 2022 the Sun West School Division finalized and approved a revised
disaster recovery plan, and during 2024 the division properly tested its
documented disaster recovery plan.
Seventeen
school divisions did not adequately monitor a key financial IT system and the
related service provider as of August 31st, 2024. Improved monitoring of this
key financial IT system and the service provider would help school divisions
identify risks, such as security vulnerabilities, and make decisions about
mitigating identified risks that could adversely affect programs, data, or
system access.
We
also reported nine new recommendations in chapter 2 of our ’25 volume 1 report
on pages 20 to 23.
On
page 20 we recommended Conseil des écoles fransaskoises independently review
and approve journal entries.
Management
indicated it reviews journal entries and provides verbal approval but does not
leave evidence of this review. Lack of independent review and approval
increases the risk of unauthorized entries made to accounting records, which
could result in decision makers using inaccurate financial information.
On
page 21 we recommended the conseil require two independent signers in the
banking system to review and approve electronic fund transfers.
Appropriate
segregation restricts an individual from performing a key financial process
from start to finish without the involvement of another employee. Without two
independent signers in the system, an individual could make unauthorized or
incorrect payments that could result in a loss to the conseil.
[14:30]
Holy
Trinity Roman Catholic Separate School Division and Ile-a-la-Crosse School
Division need to prepare and review monthly bank reconciliations in a timely
manner, that is within one month of month-end. Audit work found the staff
reviewed bank reconciliations two to eight months after the month-end for Holy
Trinity Roman Catholic Separate School Division, and 90 days after year-end for
the Ile-a-la-Crosse School Division. The Ile-a-la-Crosse School Division
reconciliations did not have independent approval.
On
page 21 we recommended Holy Trinity Roman Catholic Separate School Division
prepare and review monthly bank reconciliations in a timely manner. And we
recommended the Ile-a-la-Crosse School Division prepare and review monthly bank
reconciliations in a timely manner.
On
page 21 we also recommended the Ile-a-la-Crosse School Division independently
review and approve journal entries and maintain support. The division’s policy
required approval of journal entries independent of preparation, but audit work
found entries not independently approved and no supporting documentation
maintained for the entries. Without independent review and approval, there is a
risk of unauthorized entries being made to accounting records.
On
page 22 we recommended the Ministry of Education provide Northern Lights School
Division’s annual report to the Legislative Assembly in accordance with time
frames set in The Executive Government Administration Act. Not tabling
Northern Lights’ annual reports within the time frames set in legislation
increases the risk that legislators do not have sufficient information to
monitor Northern Lights’ operations.
On
page 23 we made three recommendations related to Northern Lights School
Division. We recommend they obtain prior approval from the Minister of
Education for certain purchases in accordance with The Education Act, 1995,
prepare and review monthly bank reconciliations in a timely manner, and
independently review and approved journal entries.
Not
obtaining prior approval of purchases from the minister for certain purchases
increases the risk of money spent on items not considered a priority to the
education system. Good practice requires evidence of review and approval be
maintained for journal entries. Also regular bank reconciliations check the
accuracy and reliability of the accounting records and bank balances.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thanks so much for
the presentation, the focus of the chapter. We have a number of new
recommendations before us, quite a few actions that have been identified
already to implement those recommendations. So thanks to all those involved in
that work. I’ll turn it over to DM Repski for some remarks, then we’ll get to
the questioning.
Clint
Repski:
— The ministry appreciates the recommendations from the Provincial Auditor on
the school divisions’ ’22‑23 and ’23‑24 annual integrated audits.
The 2025 report volume 1 chapter 2 included information on 17 recommendations.
The Provincial Auditor identified four recommendations as fully implemented,
nine new recommendations, two recommendations as partially implemented, and two
recommendations as not implemented.
The
ministry and school divisions take these recommendations seriously and are
pleased to report that all recommendations are considered implemented except
for two that are considered partially implemented. I’ll give a brief update on
the two recommendations considered partially implemented.
For
the recommendation that Northern Lights School Division prepare and review
monthly bank reconciliations in a timely manner, the Northern Lights School
Division is happy to report that timeliness of completion has been improved and
that they will be fully compliant by the end of the ’25‑26 school year.
And
for the recommendation of “We recommend the Ministry of Education work with
impacted school divisions to establish a process to monitor the key financial
IT service provider,” the Ministry of Education is working to obtain additional
reporting for school divisions. We anticipate that this recommendation will be
fully implemented by the end of the ’25‑26 school year.
We
have representatives from most of the school divisions here today, and we will
do our very best to coordinate answers, should you have some, which we’ll
entertain at this time.
Jason
Pirlot:
— And to that end, if we could go through them in order of the audit report —
so like 4.1 and all the questions on 4.1; 4.2 and all the questions on 4.2 —
it’ll just help navigating the officials kind of coming up to answer questions.
Joan Pratchler: — And you’re talking about the
update? The order in the update?
Jason
Pirlot:
— Yeah, so if you’re looking in the audit report . . .
Chair Wotherspoon: — We’ll ask members to try
their best to organize them that way, but depending on the questions, it may
fall out of sequence there. I’m not sure what members have organized for
questions. But we’ll certainly aim for that.
MLAs,
any questions? MLA Roy.
Jacqueline Roy: — Yeah, thank you. Just so
that it’s clear as mud, what were the three school divisions that
inappropriately recorded capital grant revenue and overstated their accounts
receivable and revenues in the 2023 fiscal?
Clint
Repski:
— What recommendation number is that?
Tara Clemett: — It’s no. 1.
Jacqueline Roy: — Yeah, chapter 1.
Tara Clemett: — In ’24, volume 1. And page
17. No. 1, page 17, 2024.
Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — The auditor has something
to add on this front.
Tara Clemett: — If the ministry is
comfortable, I do have the three names of the school divisions with me. And
then you can confirm.
Clint
Repski:
— That would be great.
Tara Clemett: — So okay. It was Horizon
School Division, Living Sky School Division, and Prince Albert Roman Catholic
School Division. And then again those financial statements and that accounting
non-compliance was corrected in the following year.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Can the ministry share the
accounting principles the impacted school divisions are now utilizing when
recording capital transfers in their financial records?
Clint Repski:
— Effectively — and I can ask my learned colleagues from the comptroller’s
office to weigh in — but effectively the gap here is that the authorization of
payment, it’s not authorized until eligibility criteria is met.
Joan
Pratchler: —
So in this order, we have a question for Holy Family Roman Catholic, Northwest,
and then the two S school divisions, Saskatchewan Rivers and Sun West, in that
order. And I’ll turn it over to my colleague, Madame Roy, for a Northwest
School Division question. Or pardon me, Holy Family first and then Northwest.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Okay, so I’ll leave it to you then.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Hello. What progress has Holy Family Roman Catholic School Division made in the
segregation of duties for employees for key financial functions?
Britany Burnett:
— From our perspective, we’ve fully implemented the recommendations officially
as of September 17th, was kind of like the final recommendation.
What I know from the
consultations with our external auditor is that one of the key controls was an
IT control for journal entries. So even though there was manual processes and
approvals in place, essentially what they said is that if you can have the ability
to record a journal entry without any intervention through the IT system, that
essentially all the other controls were kind of null and void.
So we’ve implemented that.
We’ve worked with our accounting software, and we’ve created a workflow in the
software so that no one person can submit a journal entry all the way to the GL
[general ledger]. It has to be approved by somebody else.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you very much.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Yes, thank you. Moving on to Northwest School Division, Northwest.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Right, and maybe just a
reminder to anyone coming to the microphone. Just a quick . . . just
your name before you enter in and the school division that you rep.
Michelle Pickett:
— Michelle Pickett, Northwest School Division.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thanks so much for being here, Michelle. What steps has the Northwest School
Division taken to ensure that those financial reconciliations are done in a
timely manner?
Michelle Pickett:
— It actually had to do with the migration of the data because we switched
software, and the vendor didn’t migrate the data as quickly as it should have
been, so it delayed the process of doing the bank recs and the reconciliations.
Once that was completed, we are able to do them regularly, monthly.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Okay, thank you. And has that resulted in properly segregating incompatible
duties for payment approvals and cheque signings? Was that part of that?
Michelle Pickett:
— No, it wasn’t.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Okay, could you perhaps speak
a little bit to that?
Michelle Pickett:
— So in terms of, like, from when a cheque is issued to . . . So when
we issue a cheque or an EFT [electronic funds transfer] run, it is then
reviewed by the supervisor of accounting. And then once that is done, it then
goes to a further person, the supervisor of finance, to do the final approval
or into the bank. So there’s a lot of separation through that process.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Okay, so you would say for payment approvals and cheque signing that that is
now implemented?
Michelle Pickett:
— Yes.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Okay, thank you.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Are you moving on to Saskatchewan Rivers?
Clint Repski:
— Our officials from Sask Rivers and Sun West aren’t able to join us today. We
do have some written information. But please ask your question and we’ll do the
best we can with it.
Joan
Pratchler: —
So what efforts has the Saskatchewan Rivers School Division made to ensure that
it obtains at least three quotes for purchases over $5,000?
Chair
Wotherspoon: — We’ll just have the
auditor offer some input on this one.
Tara
Clemett: —
So this was an instance where for the year ended August 31st, 2023, you are
correct. The Sask Rivers . . . In terms of the auditor came in, they
did their testing, and there should be three quotes obviously obtained so that
there is obviously the pursuit for best value when you’re making purchases.
The auditor then made a
recommendation as such, and when they went to evaluate whether that control was
now — and the policy — being complied with for the year ended August 31st,
2024, they tested more instances. Three quotes were obtained, best value was
selected, payment was made, purchase authorized.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Okay, thank you. And when the auditor says it’s so, I suppose it is. Okay then,
just moving right along. Can you tell me, when does the Sun West School
Division plan to test its IT disaster recovery plan?
Clint Repski:
— A written response to that we have from the school division is that the
recommendation is fully implemented as testing of the document, the disaster
recovery plan, was completed during the summer of ’24.
[14:45]
Joan
Pratchler: —
Okay, thank you.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Any further questions
from any committee members on these chapters, which connect with a whole bunch
of different school divisions across the province? Not seeing any.
Thanks again. I know this
connects with a whole bunch of different school divisions, so you’re all
involved in this and patching into this work here today. So thank you for
helping us close that loop of accountability here at the Public Accounts table.
We have six new
recommendations in 2024. I believe it’s clear that implementation has occurred
in all six of those recommendations. I would welcome a motion that would
conclude and note compliance. Moved by MLA Crassweller. All agreed?
Some
Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — That’s carried. And with
respect to the 2025 report chapter 2, there’s nine new recommendations there. I
believe the only one that’s not implemented would be no. 8, so I’d welcome
a motion that we concur with recommendation 8 and note progress on that one.
Moved by Deputy Chair Wilson. All agreed? That’s carried.
And with respect to
recommendations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9, I’d welcome a motion that we concur
and note compliance. Moved by MLA Beaudry. All agreed?
Some
Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Okay, that’s carried.
All right, I think that’s it
for the Ministry of Education today, and a whole bunch of school divisions.
Thanks to the leadership and all the officials from the Ministry of Education.
Really importantly, thank you so much to all the school divisions that have
sent leadership and representation here today, and that have been involved in
this work. It’s been really good to have you all here.
And with that, I think
. . . Yeah, DM Repski, do you want to have a final remark? And
otherwise we’ll turn our attention to Advanced Education.
Clint Repski:
— Yeah. Very quickly, I’d just like to say thank you to the Chair, members of the committee for their
thoughtful questions posed to us today. We do appreciate the opportunity to
update folks on the status of our work based on the Provincial Auditor’s
recommendations.
Again
I would echo your comments around thanking the representatives from the school
divisions. Lots of time goes into the preparation certainly by them, as well
as, I’m going to say, ministry officials. Judging by the size of our binders, a
lot of thought and prep does go into answering the questions. So we appreciate
the opportunity to shine in front of this committee, and I’m glad we’re done by
4 o’clock. Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Right on, thanks so much for that. Yeah, got you
guys done in time for the Jays game. Advanced Education is up next. We’ll see
what time they’re out of here. So thanks so much, everyone.
[The committee recessed for a
period of time.]
Advanced
Education
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay folks, we’ll
reconvene the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. We’ll turn our attention
to Advanced Education and the 2023 report volume 2, chapter 16.
I’d
like to briefly welcome Deputy Minister Michaud and the officials from Advanced
Education that have joined us here today and all those that are involved in
this work as well. I’d ask Deputy Minister Michaud to briefly introduce her
officials here today.
Louise
Michaud:
— Thank you. With me today is Lindell Veitch who is assistant deputy minister
for corporate services and accountability, as well as Jill Tzupa who is
executive director for strategic policy and sector engagement.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thank you very much. I’m
going to turn it over now to the Provincial Auditor to make a presentation on
the chapter before us. And then I’ll come back your way for some brief remarks
and open it up for questions after that.
Tara
Clemett:
— So thank you, Mr. Chair, Deputy Chair, committee members, and officials. With
me today is Mr. Victor Schwab, and he is the deputy provincial auditor that is
responsible for the portfolio of work that does include the Ministry of
Advanced Education, and he’ll be doing the presentation today. Behind us as
well is Ms. Michelle Lindenbach and she is our liaison with this committee.
There
are no new recommendations for the committee’s consideration. And I do want to
thank the deputy minister and her officials for the co-operation that was
extended to us during our work. With that, I’ll turn it over to Victor.
Victor
Schwab:
— Chapter 16 of our 2023 report volume 2, on pages 155 to 158, reports the
results of our fourth follow-up audit of the Ministry of Advanced Education’s actions
on the remaining outstanding recommendation initially we made in our 2025 audit
of its processes to work with the advanced education sector to achieve ministry
strategies.
The
ministry has fully addressed the one outstanding recommendation. The Ministry
of Advanced Education now uses specific measurable targets and timelines to
monitor progress towards achievement of its strategies. We found the ministry,
in collaboration with post-secondary institutions, identified specific
measurable targets and timelines to monitor progress towards achieving the
ministry’s advanced education sector strategies. For example, it has set a
target of 80 per cent for first-time students to enrol in the same program in
the following year.
The
ministry also monitors progress towards achieving its strategies through a
performance framework for post-secondary institutions and accountability
reporting under the multi-year funding memorandums with post-secondary
institutions. Analyzing post-secondary institutions’ report submissions on
performance measures, targets, and timelines can help the ministry determine
the effectiveness of its sector-wide post-secondary education strategies.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thank you very much
for the steadfast follow-up over the years on this recommendation. And thanks
as well to the Ministry of Advanced Ed for detailing the actions that have been
taken to ensure implementation. I’ll kick it over to the deputy minister for
brief remarks, then open it up to see if there’s any questions.
Louise
Michaud:
— Okay, thank you. So on behalf of the Ministry of Advanced Education and the
post-secondary sector, I’d like to thank the Provincial Auditor of Saskatchewan
and her staff for the professionalism and support throughout the various audit
processes that we’ve participated in over the past few years. We do, with
regard to the recommendations under discussion, we agree with the Provincial
Auditor that they have been fully implemented. We’re happy to take any
questions. Thank you.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, thank you for that.
Now I’ll look to committee members now that may have questions. MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you, and welcome. I’m
looking at the recommendation, page 156, and on there your list of actions to
be taken, it mentions that you would be publishing enrolment and credential
data. I’m wondering, where are those public indicators published online and how
often are they published?
Lindell
Veitch:
— Thank you for the question. So we publish the enrolment and credential data
on Saskatchewan.ca under the Saskatchewan dashboard, education section. And we
also have a section of the provincial website that includes reports from the
ministry. Those are published as soon as the data is available, so kind of on a
regular basis you’ll see new information up on the public website.
Joan Pratchler: — So the general public would
have access to these as well by going onto the education dashboard, is that
correct?
Lindell
Veitch:
— Yeah, the education dashboard, and also on Saskatchewan.ca generally.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay. Thank you very much.
Jill
Tzupa:
— And in terms of frequency, enrolment and credentials is reported annually.
Joan Pratchler: — Annually? Okay. I’ll note
that as well.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you. And how have cuts
to international student enrolment and staffing layoffs at Sask Poly affected
the ministry’s ability to meet its targets of accessibility and high-quality
education in Saskatchewan?
Louise
Michaud:
— So I think it’s a little bit early to answer that comprehensively, but this
is something that we are monitoring.
Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you. What is the
forecast, say, in the next two to three months?
Chair Wotherspoon: — I’ll just intervene here.
It’s a good question, but it’s not within the mandate of the committee. The
committee is an after-the-fact audit. So anything that we’re talking about
looking for current forecast into the current fiscal year, good questions — you
can certainly send a note to the minister and pursue it at other committees and
other avenues — but it’s not within the mandate of this committee.
Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you so much.
Joan Pratchler: — Would you be able to tell us
a little bit more about some of the impacts that you’ve noticed since
implementing all of these actions?
[15:15]
Lindell
Veitch:
— I can start maybe. Thank you. So when we began the audit in 2015, so over a
decade ago, the sector had limited concise data and so the ministry worked
really hard with the urging of the auditor to identify key metrics across the
post-secondary system. We came up with methodology for collecting that
information that was consistent across all of our credit-granting institutions.
That
really resulted in much better information for the ministry. There was better
connections between what the ministry’s priorities were and what post-secondary
institutions were implementing. We were able to see connections between
government’s priorities and action in the post-secondary system.
So
we’ve been really pleased with how that has worked out. We can draw clear lines
between activity at each post-secondary institution and how they are achieving
things like the Saskatchewan growth plan.
Joan Pratchler: — And can you highlight some
of the successes?
Lindell
Veitch:
— Sure. So I think in the report it identifies a number of metrics that are
increasing: enrolment growing across the post-secondary system, credentials
increasing. And because we have better data and we’re monitoring these things
more closely . . . A good example would be, you know, we’ve seen
Indigenous enrolment across the system increasing. Unfortunately during the
pandemic those numbers dipped quite substantially and are just now starting to
recover. But we have a good handle on that information now that we’re
collecting it and monitoring it.
Joan Pratchler: — And did you find any
challenges or things that you wish could be better but you’re still working on?
Lindell
Veitch:
— Definitely, yeah. This is a work-in-progress. And we continually try to
improve our collection methodologies and our back-and-forth with the
post-secondary system.
There’s
22 different post-secondary institutions across the province. It’s a large
complex system. Each institution has its own mandates and priorities, and so
trying to come up with a consistent way of measuring that has been complicated.
But we work closely with the system to make sure that we’re collecting
information that’s relevant to government and to the institutions and that
those information flows lead to good conversations. It’s not just about
collecting the number; it’s about having the conversation with the institution
and continuously improving.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you very much.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Any further questions?
Not any there. I want to table this great status update that was provided. I
was going to do that as we started here. So I’ll table at this time PAC 60‑30,
Ministry of Advanced Education: Status update, dated October 17th, 2025.
I
don’t see any further questions from committee members at this point. We know
this was an outstanding recommendation. This was follow-up. We see
implementation, so thanks for that.
And
at this time I’d welcome a motion to conclude consideration of chapter 16.
Moved by MLA Crassweller. All agreed?
Some
Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — Okay, that’s carried. Thanks again
to
the Advanced Education officials that have joined us here. I suspect some of
you or all of you are sticking around here for Northlands College or
. . .
Louise
Michaud:
— No. We were just walking out.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay. That’s great. Well
listen, do you have any final remarks then before you depart this committee?
Louise
Michaud:
— I would like to thank again the Provincial Auditor and the committee for the
questions and for the consideration. And I look forward to being back here in
future.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay. Thank you very
much, and have a wonderful weekend. We got you out in time for the Jays game.
Okay.
We’ll take a very brief recess, and up next is Northlands College.
[The
committee recessed for a period of time.]
Northlands
College
Chair Wotherspoon: — Okay, we’ll reconvene the
Standing Committee on Public Accounts, and we’ll turn our attention to the
chapters pertaining to Northlands College. I want to thank the leadership of
Northlands College that has joined us here today and all those that have been
involved in the work that’s reflected in the chapters here today.
As
well, I would welcome President and CEO McCormick to provide just a brief
introduction of the officials who have joined him here today. You can refrain
from getting into the chapters under review at this time because we’ll go back
to the auditor for presentation, then come your way for a remark and then some
questions.
Michael
McCormick:
— Certainly. Thank you. So my name’s Michael McCormick. I’m the president and
CEO for Northlands College, and we’re stationed in La Ronge. And I brought with
me today Catherine Koch. She’s our VP [vice-president] of finance,
administration, and sustainability.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Wonderful, thank you very
much. I’ve toured your beautiful college in the past, and you’re certainly very
important to this whole province and the North. I’ll turn it over to the
Provincial Auditor to make presentation on chapter 23.
Tara Clemett: — So thank you, Mr. Chair,
Deputy Chair, committee members, and officials. With me today is Mr. Victor
Schwab, and he’s the deputy provincial auditor that’s responsible for the
portfolio work that does include Northlands College.
So
Victor’s going to do two presentations. So we will be doing the last two
chapters in one presentation together, and there are five new recommendations
for the committee’s consideration. Victor’s going to pause after each of his
presentations so that the committee can deliberate and consider those
presentations.
I
do want to thank the officials from Northlands College for the co-operation
that was extended to us during the course of our work. With that, I’ll turn it
over to Victor.
Victor
Schwab:
— Chapter 23 of our 2024 report volume 2, on pages 223 to 231, reports the
results of our second follow-up of Northlands College’s progress towards
addressing the nine outstanding recommendations initially made in our 2019
audit of its processes to purchase goods and services.
By
June 2024 the college implemented one and partially implemented eight
outstanding recommendations. Also during our follow-up audit in 2024, we
identified one new recommendation.
Northlands
College fully implemented our recommendation related to establishing a standard
minimum amount of time to allow suppliers to respond to tenders. The college
included a minimum amount of time — that is, 30 days — in its procurement
policy for tenders to remain open to suppliers.
For
the eight recommendations not fully implemented, the college needs to improve
its process as follows. While the college updated its purchasing policy in
November 2021 to implement the first recommendation, we found the staff did not
always comply with the updated policy. Staff did not always declare conflicts
of interest for its purchasing decisions. Staff with real or perceived
conflicts of interest may be biased in their decision making, increasing the
risk of the college not treating potential suppliers fairly and equitably or
obtaining best value for college purchases.
Also
staff did not use a contract or purchase order for its purchases. Purchase
orders and contracts allow for appropriate approvals before committing to
purchase goods or services. The college’s policy outlines requirements for
staff to use single-source purchasing but not for sole-source purchasing. We
found the college did not always rationalize single-source and sole-source
purchases. At the time of our follow-up, management also noted they have not
yet implemented a tracking system for single- and sole-sourced purchases.
Northlands
College does not always reconcile its monthly fleet card statements before
payments are made by agreeing purchase receipts to the statements. Without
this, there’s risk of paying for inappropriate purchases and not promptly
detecting misuse of fleet cards.
Northlands
College established transaction limits in its updated policies, but it did not
properly enforce the established limits. We found the college set up electronic
transaction limits with its credit card supplier; however they had not blocked
purchase amounts above its defined transaction limits. As a result, cardholders
could make purchases in excess of their approved limits. We also found two
instances where payments were split to avoid going over the established
transaction limit. Setting up and enforcing transaction limits on individual
purchases prevents staff from making purchases outside of their authorized
transaction limits.
We
found the college’s standard service template did not contain clauses about
performance requirements and evaluation or how to implement amendments.
Additionally we found the college’s purchase order template does not contain
terms or conditions related to delivery, purchase authorization, or changes to
originally agreed-upon terms or conditions. Not having robust templates
increases legal or financial risks where purchase arrangements do not
sufficiently address relevant purchase terms.
Northlands
College established a policy for when they use contracts in procurement;
however we found the college did not always complete its contracts timely or
obtain authorization in accordance with its delegation of authority. The
college has not documented processes for staff to confirm the validity of
suppliers before entering the suppliers’ information into the college’s
financial system. Staff also do not monitor the supplier listing in its
financial system to remove suppliers that are no longer relevant or to remove
duplicate suppliers.
Not
following due diligent procedures to confirm suppliers’ validity prior to
entering them in the financial system increases the risk of making payments to
fictitious suppliers. We also found the college’s procurement policy has
provisions to segregate the purchase and receipt of goods and services from
payment approval, but staff do not always maintain support to show appropriate
segregation.
[15:30]
For
example, during our audit we found one senior management staff directed credit
card purchases be made by a subordinate on their credit card. There was no
independent review and approval for the credit card purchases. Segregating
incompatible purchasing duties between different individuals decreases the risk
of fraud and not detecting errors.
On
page 231 of our report, we made one new recommendation. We recommended
Northlands College comply with its established policies for travel and business
expense claims and for corporate credit cards.
During
our follow-up audit, we found college staff did not comply with its travel and
expense claims and corporate credit card policies. For example, we found
instances where a corporate credit card was used for personal reasons initially
but later reimbursed for the college. We found the senior management incur
travel expenses without adequate support, one with an international trip
costing the college roughly $19,000 incurred without prior board approval.
Not
following the college’s established travel and expense claims policy and credit
card policy increases the risk of fraudulent or inappropriate purchases, as
well as creates a culture of tolerated non-compliance.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Listen, thanks so much
for the presentation and the follow-up on many of these outstanding
recommendations and then the new recommendation as well. Thanks as well to
Northlands for detailing the actions that have been taken to ensure
implementation. But I’ll turn it over to CEO McCormick to provide a brief
remark before we open it up for questions.
Michael
McCormick:
— Certainly. Thanks, Trent. I think there’s a number of things that we learned
along with the audit. You know, looking at process improvement and continuous
improvement within our policies is one of the key factors that started how we
address the gaps. From that we also looked at further enhancements to address
enforcement, culture change, education within our staff so that compliance was
maintained.
We’re
very thankful with our audit this year. A number of the concerns that were
identified in this provincial audit have been satisfied and are no longer
concerns. Obviously further time is required to show that due diligence is not
just one stopgap, that it can be on a continual, sustainable basis.
There
has been significant action in terms of point 10 where we are in litigation on
a civil suit with the individual. So I won’t be able to make a lot of comments
in terms of what happened to the individual or the actions that are being taken
from that aspect. But I can confirm that we, the college and the board, acted
swiftly upon discovery of some of the concerns that were identified.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thanks for that. I’ll
look to committee members who may have questions. MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler: — Thank you. Welcome. A lot of
work has happened over that period of time, I can tell. Would you be able to
highlight specifically, I don’t know, three to five items that really needed to
be updated in your procurement policy to meet compliance with those external
trade agreements?
Michael
McCormick:
— Yes, 100 per cent done. I think maybe we’ll first start off with some of the
simple items with identifying sole-source and segregation. We were in the
process of working with the regional colleges at implementing a new ERP
[enterprise resource planning] system that would have replaced our financial
system.
Upon
determination of that project, we did add a number of enhancements to bring our
current financial systems licensing up to a current standard. And then we also
added additional enhancements so that we could do better reporting to identify
single- and sole-source and create variables within our purchasing of goods by
dollar value so we could generate reports that could dive deep into day-to-day
analysis.
The
other item that we did with the robustness, we looked at the northwest trade
agreement and we identified key elements where the robustness . . .
We wanted to protect the college and its liabilities, so we did enhance all of
our terms and conditions that now carry from our purchase orders all the way to
our service or contract agreements. We are working towards continuing not to
sign on third-party agreements but to use our own documents for our protection
when we do sign agreements. So these are some of the key elements that have
started.
The
other one that was very instrumental was setting up templates for starting out
from a basic purchase order, so when you’re doing your competitive analysis
that it’s all listed on paper and recorded with each purchase as a starting
point.
And
then when creating tenders, whether that be for construction goods or services,
we generated templates and also educational components on how do you fill it
out. So now there’s certain segments that now are highlighted so the user is
able to be able to have the technical acumen when they fill it out versus just
doing free text or trying to create through memory. So by generating
standardized templates was a way that we really were able to ensure compliance
and enforcement of the new systems.
And I think, you know, like
any time you’re trying to enhance your processes — because I don’t use the word
“change” because we should have always been doing it — you get some resistance
that will this cause more work for the end user. And due diligence, the effort
at that front to do your due diligence satisfies and reduces the amount of
effort that would happen if something did go wrong on the end game.
So I think we’ve done a lot
of work. Myself, I was acting in a dual role as the VP of finance before
Catherine joined us, and the acting CEO for a term that really, from a top-down
approach, we drove the change in the culture shift that’s now being more instrumental.
So I think I’m pretty proud of the efforts we’ve done.
We do do six-month check-ins,
reviews to see how we’re doing, to see did we make the right mix. The
advantages we get is we hear back from the staff. So there’s always process
improvement that’s there. So are we able to do more electronic offerings versus
handwritten. So we are still enhancing what we have, not to the point of large
change models but just due to efficiencies, and how can we make our system
become part and parcel of our culture for procurement of goods and services.
Joan Pratchler:
— Thank you. That’s very thorough. You touched on a few things, but what would
you consider some of the challenges of turning that ship around?
Michael McCormick:
— I think some of the challenges was how the staff managed accountability. So
during my tenure as the CEO, I’ve done staff engagement, right from January to
having some next week, where we’re talking about stuff on culture. And the
culture is a culture of growth, accountability, student-first, and belonging.
And those four
characteristics play a vital role in the shifts of change, because the
belonging part is we accept anybody for where they are, help educate them, be
empathetic, give them the tools so they’re successful. Always having at the
back of our mind that everything we do at Northlands is for our students. We
are an educator; we want to be an educator of choice. And generating the growth
model is one where we are accepting of our sustainable activities to learn and
grow as we bring forward ideas and innovation that enhance our college.
And accountability is
probably the hardest one that’s been the largest obstacle because I think
anybody can fall to the victim loop quite easily, but we’re trying to elevate
people to take accountability for their actions. When they put their signature
or their name on any procurement of items, they’re responsible for doing their
due diligence at whatever level they have to be competent for that.
Obviously there’s delegations
of authority. So the checks and balances are designed not so that that senior
leader does the work of the junior clerk. It’s that they’re satisfying did they
do their due diligence successfully in being able to sign off on it or coaching
back on the growth model to say, you’ve missed some marks; please enhance what
was needed to complete the process.
So those are our main culture
streams that are happening right now throughout the college. I think it’s, like
I said, it’s an investment that isn’t just a one stop. The messaging is
continual. It’s continual with my monthly updates, with my engagement sessions,
and also with my development of my leadership and out-of-scope staff.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you very much.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thank you. Does the college now ensure that it agrees purchases on monthly
fleet card statements to supporting receipts prior to making any and all
payments? And if so, who is responsible directly for that?
Michael McCormick:
— Yeah, that’s a great question. So part of it is, you know, maintaining good
credit is why we put our credit cards on automated payment cycles. So how we
look at it now is we’ve enhanced our fleet logs and responsibilities for the
end user that completes the fleet logs.
With the fleet log, it tells
you where you’re going, which department’s paying for it, what was the purpose
of the trip. And so now we can map back to identify the person or individual
that may have a lost receipt because the time stamp will be on it.
How we make sure that we’re
reconciling these accounts in advance is we have a designed payment date, and
we have our accounts technician pull the report from our fleet card provider on
what is to be reconciled. We pull the logs in advance, and we’re able to ensure
that that’s done a week prior to payment.
Another aspect of that that’s
important to note with those fleet logs is, in the past there was a vehicle
that was assigned to one individual. That is no longer the case. All fleets are
considered the same, and all of the responsibilities that go with fleets are
expected of all individuals of the college.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thank you. So you said in one week prior to payment, there’s that
reconciliation.
Michael McCormick:
— Correct.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Okay. So who is responsible for that ultimately? And are you saying then that
in any and all circumstances that is happening?
Michael McCormick:
— Yes. So there’s two ways we can adjust that. So the person responsible is
classified as, the position is our financial technician. So they work in
finance, and they’re mainly responsible for receivables and credit card
purchases.
And the other way that
there’s a due diligence check, that it was done, is we implemented shortly
after this audit a monthly checklist of all expected financial duties. And so
the technician is responsible to submit that once a month to say that they met
the timeline. It’s signed off by the director of finance and then elevated to
the VP of finance.
So we’re able to address any
concerns before — how do I best put it? — before a continuation of poor habits
happen.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thanks. And can you provide an update on the development of a standardized
orientation program that’s expected to be implemented in December?
Michael McCormick:
— 100 per cent. So during this last year there was some investments the college
made in enhancing not only their financial practices, but their onboarding
practices. So that is from the recruitment of staff onboarding to their exit
strategies.
So when we looked at our
realignment, we also looked at succession planning and redundancy of tasks to
ensure that when we do have churn rate, we don’t run into gaps within our
structure or our business functions. So we’ve onboarded a consultant to help us
for a six- to eight-month period.
The onboarding package
basically takes the fundamentals of the job description. It places it into your
first week — your 30, 60, 90 days — and sets them up with a peer. And as the
supervisor signs off on those one-month periods to ensure adequate training,
coaching, and guidance, then mentorship is provided while a new employee comes
on board.
[15:45]
And the exit strategy is
being developed so that when a staff member is vacating the position for
whatever reasons, we are able to look at the transition of duties before they
exit as a temporary stopgap.
So this is part of
cross-training, onboarding, and exit. So it’s a holistic approach from our HR
[human resources] standing.
It’s taken some time to
develop this. As I noted, we went through a realignment, and unfortunately the
North, we were plagued with a number of evacuations this year that put us a
little behind schedule. It was targeted to have it ready for September, but
it’s been pushed to December due to us being out of office for a number of
periods this summer.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Would you say that all the staff receives that same financial training right at
the beginning when they begin their duties?
Michael McCormick:
— I think, MLA, that’s a great question in the sense of can I look at the
history and say everybody did? I wouldn’t be able to comment to satisfy this
committee that everybody did. What I can comment is go forward, yes, we are
going to ensure that everybody receives it.
The one big shift that happened
last year after the audit was we did generate communication training. And we
continue to give the communication on best practices — how to fill out a form,
how do you fill out an expense. So those were initial communication tactics;
that was how we initiated some of the investments to change the culture.
And now by creating the HR
strategy, now we’ll have a documented, signed 30/60/90‑day form that now
quantifies that both the manager and supervisor has identified that it’s been
completed, and the employee says yes, it’s been completed. So we’re going to a
further enhanced document and proof that it was done.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
What steps is the college taking to ensure that they maintain full and complete
documentation of their contracts with suppliers and finalizing them for
receipts of goods and services in addition to, of course, making sure there’s
no conflict of interest?
Michael McCormick:
— Yeah, those few things you brought up there. So the conflicts of interest are
signed by the person, the individual that is signing for the contract itself.
So depending on the dollar value, there’ll be different individuals. The higher
the value, the more senior official that’ll be signing off on those products.
When we talk about services,
the services, each invoice is signed by who holds that contract. So for an
example, if it’s a janitorial contract, facilities looks after janitorial. They
sign the monthly invoice at the end of the month to say that they verified that
the invoice matches the contract obligations, and they’re signing that it’s
released for payment.
In construction it’s very
similar. And there’s many times we do per cents of a contract depending on the
extent of the time that the construction’s being done. Other times it’s in 100
per cent format. But either way either the construction manager or the facility
manager sign off on percentage, completes that this amount of work, this
percentage of work matches the invoice, and they sign off. And when it’s at a
final completion for construction, it’s a deficiency report that’s done.
There’s a declaration of
their statutory compliance with paying vendors that happens at a very end of a
project. That’s for large-scale projects to ensure that we don’t reap
liabilities from subgroups. But other than that, it’s signed by the individual.
For other goods, so let’s use
the example in academics for books. It’ll be signed off by the supervisor and
then assigned to the academic group that requires those books. And how we
control the smaller delivery of goods is we have a centralized office where
products come in. They’re received on a log, and then the log is validated as
part of the invoice sign-off.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thanks. Sorry, just forgive me for a second. I’m just going to try and clarify
the one point you had mentioned about conflict of interest. So what is the
college doing to ensure it’s enforcing the updated policy with respect to
conflict of interest?
Michael McCormick:
— Thanks for that reminder; I didn’t answer it effectively. So when a conflict
of interest is required, how we ensure that it’s been received is the purchase
order isn’t released unless it’s provided with the purchase requisition or
tender analysis of the contract or service.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thank you.
Michael McCormick:
— You’re welcome.
Chair
Wotherspoon: — MLA Pratchler.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Thank you. Does the Northlands College publicly report their funds? If so,
where and how often?
Michael McCormick:
— Maybe you have to ask me that question again. Publicly in terms of outside of
our ministry requirements?
Joan Pratchler: — Yes, like are they
published anywhere else other than that? Is it on your website or AGM [annual
general meeting] or something like that?
Michael
McCormick:
— No, we do an AGM through our board and all of it is received through our
ministry, Advanced Education, what we’re seeing for all of our public books,
yes. And it’s done on an annual basis.
Joan Pratchler: — Okay, thank you. Annual
basis. Okay.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Any further questions on
this chapter, committee members? Not seeing any. We have the one new
recommendation, and we see the implementation that’s been detailed to us here
today. I’d welcome a motion that we concur and that we note compliance on this
front. Moved by Deputy Chair Wilson. All agreed? That’s carried.
We’re
going to turn our attention to the final two chapters there. They’re going to
be presented together. There’s new recommendations there. Before we do that,
though, I’ll just table the status update that was provided to us. Thanks again
to those that were involved in that work. PAC 61‑30, Northlands College:
Status update, dated October 17th, 2025.
I’ll
turn it over to the auditor.
Victor
Schwab:
— Thank you. Chapter 6 of our 2023 report volume 2 and chapter 6 of our 2024
report volume 2 reports results of our integrated audit of Northlands College
for the years ended June 30th, 2023 and June 30th, 2024.
Our
office works with the college’s appointed auditors to carry out these audits.
In these chapters we reported that Northlands College for the ’23 and ’24 years
ended June 30th had reliable financial statements, complied with authorities
governing their activities, and had effective rules and procedures to safeguard
public resources, except for the matters we will discuss today.
In
chapter 6 of our ’23 report volume 2, on pages 39 to 41, for the ’23 fiscal
year we made two new recommendations and reported that Northlands College did
not follow its policy regarding review and approval of credit card
reconciliations. The college could not provide evidence the reconciliations
were reviewed and approved for five months of the year.
Therefore
on page 41 we recommended Northlands College review and approve credit card
reconciliations as required by its policy. Not appropriately reconciling,
reviewing, and approving reconciliations increases the risk of inappropriate
credit card purchases occurring.
On
page 41 we also recommended that Northlands College restrict access to its
cheque-signing system to appropriately segregate duties. The college uses
software to electronically sign cheques for payment, and restricts access to
the software to certain accounting staff and payroll staff. However some
college staff could create and approve a payment and process a cheque for
payment.
Not
adequately segregating duties increases the risk of inappropriate or fraudulent
payments going undetected and is compounded by incomplete bank reconciliations.
In
chapter 6 of our ’24 report volume 2, on pages 37 to 40, we made another two
new recommendations. On page 40 we recommended that Northlands College complete
its monthly bank reconciliations timely. For the year ended June 30th, 2024,
the college did not complete any bank reconciliations until May 2024. Also they
were not reviewed and approved by a second person.
Regular
bank reconciliations and the review and approval of such reconciliations checks
that all charges to bank accounts are proper and all money has been received
and deposited into the right accounts. It also checks the accuracy and
reliability of the accounting records.
On
page 40 we also recommended that Northlands College independently review and
approve supported journal entries. Audit testing found three journal entries
made in error, totalling about $11 million. There was no review and
approval for these journal entries. Two of these journal entries did not have
support or rationale for why staff made the journal entry.
Lack
of independent review and approval increases the risk of unauthorized entries
made in the accounting records, which could result in decision makers using
inaccurate financial information and fraud going undetected.
That
concludes my presentation. I will now pause for the committee’s consideration.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thanks so much for the
focus of the work and the presentation. We’ve got new recommendations in both
of those chapters. I’ll turn it over briefly to the CEO to provide a brief
response and then we’ll get to the questioning.
Michael
McCormick:
— Thank you. So this chapter was very important as we look at, this is a lot of
due diligence in day-to-day operations and monthly expectations. So you know,
one of the things that we wanted to note is living and working in the North
sometimes can create challenges with finding talent, so there was a number of
times where there were gaps with staff that created some of these larger
deficiencies to become more apparent.
So
part of the realignment we went through this year as I noted was to create
redundancy in positions. So now we don’t have such a large reliance on one
individual to do an activity. The other item that I did want to note is we did
engage a monthly checklist, which now creates responsibilities and ownership of
the staff to sign off.
So
there’s three individuals that have a responsibility here, the larger
responsibility for sign-off. And that’s the director of finance, the VP of
finance, and the CEO. So the three of us work within redundancy of each other
to make sure we hold each other accountable for doing the due diligence for
checkups. I think Victor is 100 per cent correct that when you do not do these
due diligence on a daily and monthly basis, it does create the opportunities
for fraud or for wrongdoing. And when we talk about the journal entries, it
creates a larger workload to correct or satisfy those challenges at a later
date.
So
I think my summary is in the fact that this chapter, we did put a lot of
energies and efforts into creating the accountability within the field staff
and the leadership staff to ensure that it’s been removed from being a gap. And
by creating the redundancy in staff, we’re also addressing the accountability
across the organization for it.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thank you for that, and
thanks for the status update and some of the actions detailed there as well to
ensure implementation of these recommendations. I’ll open it up now to
committee members that may have questions.
Joan Pratchler: — Just a quick point of order.
We were planning on doing both of these at the same time, is that correct?
Chair Wotherspoon: — That’s correct. That’s
correct, yeah. Both were presented. And I suspect — it’s become predictable — I
bet you MLA Pratchler has a question.
Joan Pratchler: — I do, I do. But I’m going to
defer to my esteemed colleague next to me to ask the first one. She’s new.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline Roy: — Thank you. What are the next
steps if a reconciliation is not completed? What do you have in mind for that?
And what were the next steps in the past?
Michael
McCormick:
— So the go-forward step, if the reconciliation was caught at the monthly
checklist then we would adjust workload to have the reconciliation completed.
So this way it’s done in a timely manner.
I
think it’s a good question in the sense that, can things come up in a month
that you don’t get everything done effectively? That is true. But we’ve created
the stopgap with the . . . We’ve also added an additional position to
our finance team. We’re adding a second technician to address the shortfalls
which come with absences in the typical vacation, sick, or traditional leaves
throughout the year. So the forward motion was to implement an additional role,
an additional technician in our complement.
In the past how was it
addressed? I think that’s an excellent question because when it came up, I
believe the challenge was that the workload of the individual wasn’t having
correct sign-off. So they were trying to be responsible for their duties and
didn’t prioritize, as we should have, from a leadership standpoint.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Thank you.
Chair
Wotherspoon:
— MLA Pratchler.
Joan Pratchler:
— You have IT systems helping you?
Michael McCormick:
— In terms of the reconciliation?
Joan Pratchler:
— In terms of your finance department just in general.
Michael McCormick:
— In our finance department. Yes, we have a financial system. As noted in my
earlier statement, we had lapsed on some of the licensing updates because we
thought it was going to be a terminated system. So we did re-enhance and we did
have our service provider do an in-house finance training on the new
investments that we put in, how to use it. And we also added a number of
controls to ensure that the right people were in the right system within the
system.
Joan Pratchler:
— And so, do you have assurances, perhaps in the contract, of IT security on
that system?
Michael McCormick:
— Yes, we do have several levels of security now. You know, it’s a good
question because the security features weren’t being utilized as they should
have been in the beginning. So now we have categorization of staff and what
aspects they have. So there is checks and balances where certain members can
only physically make the batch, but on the other team, members release the
batch. So we’ve created segregation as well with the security features within
the system.
Joan Pratchler:
— Would you be able to confirm that your IT provider has a cyberthreat security
system embedded in that? And secondly, do you have a disaster recovery plan
that goes along with that?
Michael McCormick:
— I’ll defer one to Catherine in a minute on the Sage 300. But in terms of do
we have a disaster plan, we keep all of our records on an off-site server here
in Saskatoon. It’s not a working server; it’s a storage unit. So even through
the evacuation there, it does take approximately a day to turn that server into
an operating server so we can work remotely at any given time. But our records
are securely stored in Canada off-site, but easily accessible within
Saskatchewan.
And then for the insurance,
we do have insurances ourselves. And correct and forgive me, I don’t know 100
per cent on your first question with Sage. Are you familiar, Catherine?
Joan Pratchler:
— So the question was what assurances do you have from your IT provider that
there are cyberthreat security safeguards in place?
Catherine Koch:
— It is my understanding, though I haven’t confirmed it with them myself, that
they have those security systems in place. I would hope we wouldn’t have had
the contract with them otherwise, of course. And we do have cybersecurity
insurance ourselves.
Joan
Pratchler: —
Yes, and I think I was thinking more of assurance.
Catherine Koch:
— Yes.
Joan
Pratchler: — Hope is not a strategy. A signature is. Okay, good.
That was my question on that.
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline
Roy: — Thank you. Since implementing the monthly checklist,
have you found that Northlands College has consistently, 100 per cent of the
time, completed reconciliations on time?
Michael
McCormick: — There’s been one incident where it wasn’t done 100 per
cent due to a staff member being delayed on providing their information on
time. So it got escalated through leadership, and there’s been coaching
sessions on what the negative effects cost for that.
So
obviously the behaviours of one don’t dictate the behaviours of all. But to be
transparent, we did have one incident where the individual was late even with
multiple requests for the info.
Joan
Pratchler: — What impacts has the college seen since implementing
these recommendations on both operations and culture?
Michael
McCormick: — I think that’s a great question. From operations, we
created some assurances within the org that our systems are safe, and that
they’re being maintained and updated on a day-to-day basis and we’re compliant.
From
a culture standpoint, I think the advantage that we’ve come to — and there’s
further investment still to need — is I think in our term, we’ve got a training
session on financial acumen for non-financial personnel. And that’s something
that we’re going to be teaching actually at our next management PD event that’s
coming up in December to further enhance people’s comprehension of basic
fundamentals of what their impacts do for the college from a financial lens.
Joan
Pratchler: — Thank you. Is the accounting technician still
consistently preparing bank reconciliations in a timely manner?
Michael
McCormick: — Yes.
Joan
Pratchler: — Yeah, okay.
Michael
McCormick: — That part is happening. The credit card was
. . . [inaudible].
Chair Wotherspoon: — MLA Roy.
Jacqueline
Roy: — Thanks. I know we talked a little bit about journal
entries. So it’s my understanding they’re now being reviewed by the director of
finance, the VP of finance, and the CEO. Are any other steps being taken to
ensure journal entries are reviewed
in the long term? Yeah, I’ll leave it at that for now.
Michael
McCormick: —
Do you want to take that one, Catherine? Do you want me to?
Catherine
Koch: — I
would hope that they aren’t being posted without the appropriate signature. And
we have, as you heard, restricted access through a stage which we hadn’t done
before. So we have that assurance, and so then it comes down to the training,
that people aren’t posting without the signatures required.
Jacqueline
Roy: —
Okay, thank you. And that’s including when we’re talking about restricting
access to cheque segregation? Yes, okay.
Michael
McCormick: — And I guess just for clarity — the CEO’s listed on the
backup backup. So it’s usually done at the finance levels first, yeah.
Chair Wotherspoon: — No further questions here. Any other
further questions for the leadership here from Northlands that have joined us
here today? Not seeing any, I’d welcome a motion. I believe we’ve had
identified that all the recommendations — the new ones here, two from each of
the chapters — that implementation’s occurred, correct?
Michael
McCormick: — Correct.
Chair Wotherspoon: — That’s been detailed to us, so I
would welcome a motion that we concur and note compliance with the two
recommendations in chapter 6 from the 2023 report volume 2. Moved by MLA Chan.
All agreed?
Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon:
— That’s carried. I’d welcome the same motion, that we concur and note
compliance with recommendations 1 and 2 from the 2024 report volume 2, chapter
6. Do I have a mover? Moved by Beaudry. All agreed?
Some
Hon. Members:
— Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon:
— Okay. That’s carried as well. Thank you very much to the leadership of
Northlands that have joined us here today. President McCormick, would you care
to provide a brief final remark before we shut down our considerations for the
day?
Michael
McCormick: — Yes. I would like extend my thanks, you know. I enjoyed
working with Victor Schwab and the Provincial Auditor.
And
again I think throughout the whole process of the audit there was an
opportunity where we got to expose ourselves and allow for learnings and
continuous improvement. And as I noted, there’s been a significant culture
shift and realignment that came from that provincial audit. So I do have to say
thank you for the caveat for making change for the better at Northlands
College.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thank you for those remarks, and
thank you for your leadership and all within your team there at Northlands.
It’s a very important institution to this entire province, and certainly to the
North. And safe travels out of here as well. Thank you.
Michael
McCormick: — Thank you. Have
a great weekend.
Chair Wotherspoon: — Thank you. With that, committee
members,
auditor and her team, and our comptroller and Ms. Borland, thank you very much
for the last few days. We’ve had a full few days of considerations. Thanks for
your time and attention and work these last few days.
And with that I would welcome
a motion to adjourn. Moved by MLA Crassweller. All agreed?
Some
Hon. Members:
— Agreed.
Chair
Wotherspoon:
— It’s always a popular one. That’s agreed. And with that, this committee’s
adjourned until the call of the Chair.
[The committee adjourned at
16:09.]
Published
under the authority of the Hon. Todd Goudy, Speaker
Disclaimer:
The electronic versions of the Legislative
Assembly’s documents are provided on this site for informational purposes only.
The Clerk is responsible for the records of each legislature.