Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission
What Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission spent in fiscal year 2011-12: its net expenditure by standard object, from the Public Accounts of Canada, Volume II.
Reports through Health; the overview shows it in that ministry.
Spending, 2011-12
Net spending, 2011-12
$4.5M
spent by Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission, less revenues it kept
Share, 2011-12
0.0%
of the net spending of every federal organization
How did Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission spend its budget in 2011-12?
By standard object. Revenues it kept are negative and netted against its spending.
Spending by standard object, 2011-12
Personnel
Professional and special services
Utilities, materials and supplies
Transportation and communications
Information
Rentals
Repair and maintenance
Acquisition of machinery and equipment
$4.2M
$170K
$63K
$62K
$32K
$19K
$3K
$1K
Total: $4.5M.
Spending by program, 2011-12
The same net spending by program, as GC InfoBase reports program actuals: $4.5M in all. Select a program for its history, plans and results.
Workforce, 2011-12
Full-time equivalents
40
the actual FTEs of its programs, as GC InfoBase reports them
Personnel spending
$4.2M
salaries, wages and benefits (the personnel standard object)
Personnel spending per FTE
$105K
personnel spending divided by full-time equivalents
A full-time equivalent is a measure of employment, not a headcount: two half-time employees are one FTE. Personnel spending includes benefits and pension contributions, so per FTE it is not an average salary.
Hazardous Materials Information Review Commission’s share of federal net spending
Other organizations in Health
Sources
- Public Accounts of Canada 2012, Volume II: Ministerial expenditures by standard object (Table 3)
- GC InfoBase – Federal Programs – Actual and Planned Spending (programs_spending.csv)
- GC InfoBase – Federal Programs – Actual and Planned Employees (programs_ftes.csv)
Department figures are net expenditure (Public Accounts, Volume II), which doesn’t add up to the accrual expenses of the overview’s headline. See the methodology.
