Canada Spends Logo

Explore our Budget 2026 analysis

Program directory · Canadian Grain Commission

Quality Assurance Program

Program code
AAZ00 (CGC)
Core responsibility
Canada's grain is safe, reliable and marketable and Canadian grain producers are properly compensated for grain deliveries to licensed grain companies.
In Departmental Plans
Not in a Departmental Plan · actual spending 2010-11 – 2017-18

What it does

GC InfoBase has no Program Inventory description for this program.

History and lineage

First appears in GC InfoBase's actual spending by program in 2010-11. The data does not record when a program was created; it may be older than its first appearance here, which is limited by the sources (program spending starts in 2010-11, Departmental Plans in 2018-19).

2010-112011-122012-132013-142014-152015-162016-172017-18Quality Assurance Program 2010-11: $5.9MQuality Assurance Program 2011-12: $7.7MQuality Assurance Program 2012-13: $8MQuality Assurance Program 2013-14: -$7.8MQuality Assurance Program 2014-15: -$38.3MQuality Assurance Program 2015-16: -$41.9MQuality Assurance Program 2016-17: -$44MQuality Assurance Program 2017-18: -$32.3MQuality Assurance Program
Bars: spending by fiscal year (dark: actual; light: actual restated on the 2017-18 program structure; outlined: the latest plan's forecast; grey: related programs). Bands: each program in the lineage over the years it has data.
ProgramRelationYears with dataActual spending over those years
Quality Assurance ProgramThis program2010-11 – 2017-18-$143M

No earlier or later program in the same department has a similar name.

Significant changes in scope and budget

Detected from the data: renames between plans, programs it appears to replace, merge with or split into (matched by name), year-over-year changes in spending of at least 25% and $5M, or in employees of at least 20% and 25 FTEs, linked budget measures, and results indicators added or dropped.

YearWhat changedSource
2013-14Employees (FTEs) 250, against 342 in 2012-13 (−27%).FTEs (GC InfoBase)
2013-14Spending -$7.8M, against $8M in 2012-13 (−198%).Actual spending (GC InfoBase)
2014-15Employees (FTEs) 199, against 250 in 2013-14 (−20%).FTEs (GC InfoBase)
2014-15Spending -$38.3M, against -$7.8M in 2013-14 (−390%).Actual spending (GC InfoBase)
2017-18Spending -$32.3M, against -$44M in 2016-17 (+27%).Actual spending (GC InfoBase)

Success criteria

Neither this program nor its core responsibility has results indicators in GC InfoBase (internal services, for example, have none).

Spending and employees: planned against actual

Spending

2013-14: -$7.8M2013-142014-15: -$38.3M2014-152015-16: -$41.9M2015-162016-17: -$44M2016-172017-18: -$32.3M2017-18
Outlined bar: planned in that year's Departmental Plan (dashed: the latest plan, for years not yet reported). Filled bar: actual.
Show the numbers
Fiscal yearPlannedActual
2013-14—-$7.8M
2014-15—-$38.3M
2015-16—-$41.9M
2016-17—-$44M
2017-18—-$32.3M

Employees (FTEs)

2013-14: 2742013-14: 2502013-142014-15: 2332014-15: 1992014-152015-16: 2262015-16: 2152015-162016-17: 2192016-17: 2192016-172017-18: 2112017-18: 2242017-18
Outlined bar: planned in that year's Departmental Plan (dashed: the latest plan, for years not yet reported). Filled bar: actual.
Show the numbers
Fiscal yearPlannedActual
2013-14274250
2014-15233199
2015-16226215
2016-17219219
2017-18211224

Planned spending, plan by plan

Each row is one year's Departmental Plan and its forecast for the next three fiscal years; read a column down to see how the forecast for one year changed. The last row is what was actually spent. Click an amount for its source. Biggest changes in federal spending plans

Plan
Actual

Actual spending is from Departmental Results Reports and the Public Accounts, as published in GC InfoBase. FTEs are full-time equivalents.