Next: The Treasury Board's next republication of the performance file. No publication schedule for it is recorded here, and the edition this reading rests on is the issuer's own March 2026 edition. The republication that…
Federal organizations reported meeting 1,510 of the 2,196 departmental result indicators they reached a verdict on in fiscal 2024-25 — 68.8% — and reported no verdict on a further 529.
The answer
The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat publishes one file that carries every federal departmental result indicator, the target it was assessed against, the result reported against it, and a verdict on whether the target was met. The verdicts are the reporting organizations' own: each organization selects the indicator, sets the target, reports the result and records the status. Nothing in the file is audited, and Countability verifies none of it. What follows counts what was reported.
For fiscal 2024-25, federal organizations reported 2,725 departmental result indicators. They recorded 1,510 as met and 686 as not met. On the remaining 529 they recorded no verdict at all: 289 as “to be achieved”, where the date the target is assessed against had not arrived, and 240 as “not available”, where no result was on hand to compare with the target.
That produces two rates, and both belong in the same reading. Of the 2,196 indicators that reached a decided verdict, 68.8% were reported met. Of all 2,725 indicators reported, 55.4% were reported met. The first rate answers “of the targets it judged, how many did it judge met?” The second answers “of the targets it published, how many did it report meeting?” They are different questions and they have moved differently.
Across the five reported years the rate on decided indicators rose from 62.6% in fiscal 2020-21 to 68.8% in fiscal 2024-25, with its highest reading in fiscal 2023-24 at 69.1%. The rate on all reported indicators rose further over the same window, from 45.6% to 55.4%, because the denominator moved underneath it: the share of indicators carrying no verdict fell from 27.1% to 19.4%. In indicator counts, the latest year carries 268 more reported met than the first, 56 fewer not met, 75 fewer to be achieved and 134 fewer not available, against a total that moved by 3. A rising met-rate and a shrinking undecided share are two descriptions of one movement in this record, and the record does not separate a change in what was delivered from a change in what was reported on.
The indicator set does not hold still either. Of the 2,722 indicators reported for fiscal 2020-21, 899 — a third of them — do not appear in the fiscal 2024-25 file at all, and 902 of that year's 2,725 were not in the 2020-21 file. The identifiers present in all five reported years number 1,822, and they carry a higher reported met-rate throughout: 70.4% on decided indicators in fiscal 2024-25, against 65.4% for the rest of that year's set. The 899 that stopped appearing had already been reported met less often in their base year — 58.3% of their decided verdicts — than the 1,823 that carried through to the latest year, at 64.5%. This file records that an identifier appeared or stopped appearing. It records no reason, and none is supplied here.
Organizations differ widely on the same measure. Among the 26 organizations that reached a decided verdict on at least 30 indicators in fiscal 2024-25 — together 1,416 of the 2,196 decided indicators that year — the share reported met runs from 32.4% to 96.9%, with a middle value of 70.9%. Across all 88 organizations reporting any decided indicator, the middle value is 75.0% and the readings span the whole scale, because 30 of those organizations reached a verdict on fewer than ten indicators and one indicator moves such a share by more than ten points. Every organization here chose its own indicators and set its own targets, so a difference between two of these shares is a difference between two self-set bars at least as much as between two performances.
What this means for the decision
A reader who takes the headline met-rate on its own will read a basis movement as an improvement. The share of indicators reported met rose on both denominators between fiscal 2020-21 and fiscal 2024-25, and over the same window the share arriving with no verdict fell by 7.7 percentage points; the record carries both facts and cannot apportion between them. A reader who takes the organization figures as a ranking will read them as something they cannot support: the measure is matched, but the targets underneath it are each organization's own, so a high share may mean a demanding target was met or an undemanding one was. What this reading does support is narrower and firmer — how many targets the federal government judged, how many of those it judged met, how many indicators it published without judging, and how much of the indicator set survives five years. Those are the quantities to hold a departmental performance claim against.
The key uncertainty
Three things could move this reading, and they are different in kind. The first is the verdict itself: every status is self-assigned by the organization reporting it, on a methodology that organization states in its own words, so consistency across organizations is not established and cannot be established from this file. The second is the indicator set: a third of the base year's indicators are gone by the latest year and 596 of the 1,822 that survive have had their published name restated at least once, so a five-year comparison of the same identifier is not guaranteed to be a comparison of the same measured thing. The third is the file's own edition. A republication adds a reported fiscal year and, by the same act, deletes the plan rows for the year it now reports on — which is why this file is preserved on capture rather than read live.
What would settle it
The Treasury Board's next republication of the performance file. No publication schedule for it is recorded here, and the edition this reading rests on is the issuer's own March 2026 edition. The republication that first carries fiscal 2025-26 results will also be the one that removes the fiscal 2025-26 plan rows this record already holds, which is why the file is preserved on capture.
Federal organizations publish thousands of performance indicators about themselves, each with a target and a verdict on whether that target was met. The verdicts are their own, and they are the raw material of almost every public claim a department makes about delivering on its commitments. A reader who has only a headline share of targets met cannot tell whether it moved because more targets were met or because fewer indicators arrived without a verdict, cannot tell whether the indicators being compared are even the same ones, and cannot tell what a met target establishes. The register that answers those questions is published by the government itself, in one file, and is simply less often counted.
Evidence reviewed through 2026-07-10 · 1 cited source · 0 member Resolutions · 8 chapters
Refreshed when the Treasury Board republishes the performance file. No publication schedule for it is recorded here, so no date is stated for the next reading. This one rests on the issuer's own March 2026 edition of the file, captured on 2026-07-10, whose latest reported fiscal year is 2024-25.
Chapter 1§
The answer
What federal organizations reported about their own targets in the latest reported fiscal year, and the two rates that answer follows from — stated once, at the top, with the denominator each one uses named beside it.
Chapter 2§
Where these verdicts come from
One published file, its two document types, and who assigns the status. The plan rows are counted here and scored nowhere: a commitment about a fiscal year that has not been reported on is not a result, and this file holds no year in both forms.
| Document | Fiscal year | Rows |
|---|---|---|
| Departmental Results Report | Fiscal 2020-21 | 2,722 |
| Departmental Results Report | Fiscal 2021-22 | 2,731 |
| Departmental Results Report | Fiscal 2022-23 | 2,799 |
| Departmental Results Report | Fiscal 2023-24 | 2,746 |
| Departmental Results Report | Fiscal 2024-25 | 2,725 |
| Departmental Plan | Fiscal 2025-26 | 2,687 |
| Departmental Plan | Fiscal 2026-27 | 2,600 |
| All rows in the file | — | 19,010 |
Results Report rows carry a verdict and are what this reading counts: 13,723 of them, across 91 organizations and the five fiscal years shown. Departmental Plan rows carry no verdict at all — every one of the 5,287 is empty in that column — because they state commitments for fiscal years that have not been reported on. No fiscal year appears in both forms, so no plan can be compared with the report that follows it. Each verdict is assigned by the organization reporting it, against a target that organization set; nothing here is audited by the Treasury Board or verified by Countability.
Chapter 3§
The two denominators
The share of indicators reported met, computed twice for each reported year — once over the indicators that reached a decided verdict, once over every indicator reported. Both rose. They did not rise by the same amount, and the difference between them is the movement in the basis.
| Fiscal year | Indicators reported | Decided verdicts | Reported met | % of decided | % of all reported | % with no verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fiscal 2020-21 | 2,722 | 1,984 | 1,242 | 62.6% | 45.6% | 27.1% |
| Fiscal 2021-22 | 2,731 | 2,063 | 1,361 | 66.0% | 49.8% | 24.5% |
| Fiscal 2022-23 | 2,799 | 2,205 | 1,485 | 67.3% | 53.1% | 21.2% |
| Fiscal 2023-24 | 2,746 | 2,158 | 1,491 | 69.1% | 54.3% | 21.4% |
| Fiscal 2024-25 | 2,725 | 2,196 | 1,510 | 68.8% | 55.4% | 19.4% |
A decided verdict is one reported as met or as not met. The remainder are reported as to be achieved or as not available, and both denominators are published because the second one moved: the share carrying no verdict fell from 27.1% to 19.4% across these five years, so the share met over all reported indicators rose further than the share met over decided ones. The record carries both movements and apportions between them nowhere.
Chapter 4§
What moved underneath the rate
The four published verdicts as indicator counts in the first and latest reported years, and the change in each. A share can rise because more targets were reported met, or because fewer indicators arrived without a verdict; this is how much of each the record actually carries.
| Reported verdict | Fiscal 2020-21 | Fiscal 2024-25 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Met | 1,242 | 1,510 | +268 |
| Not met | 742 | 686 | -56 |
| To be achieved | 364 | 289 | -75 |
| Not available | 374 | 240 | -134 |
| All indicators reported | 2,722 | 2,725 | +3 |
The four verdicts are every value the status column takes on a Results Report row, so this is a decomposition of the whole rather than a selection from it, and the final row is their total. Two of the four shed indicators while the total moved by +3: that movement is what a rising share of decided verdicts is measured against. Why any individual status moved is not recorded in this file and is not inferred here.
Chapter 5§
The indicators that stop appearing
How much of the indicator set survives all five reported years, how the surviving set's reported met-rate compares with the rest, and how far the surviving identifiers' own published names and targets moved. Presence and absence are facts in this file; reasons for either are not.
| Fiscal year | Present in all five years | % of decided met | Every other indicator that year | % of decided met |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fiscal 2020-21 | 1,822 | 64.4% | 900 | 58.4% |
| Fiscal 2021-22 | 1,822 | 66.6% | 909 | 64.5% |
| Fiscal 2022-23 | 1,822 | 70.0% | 977 | 62.2% |
| Fiscal 2023-24 | 1,822 | 71.1% | 924 | 65.0% |
| Fiscal 2024-25 | 1,822 | 70.4% | 903 | 65.4% |
Of the 2,722 indicators reported for fiscal 2020-21, 899 — 33.0% — are not in the fiscal 2024-25 file at all, and 902 of that year's 2,725 were not in the earlier one. 1,822 identifiers are present in every one of the five years; 1,823 of the base year's indicators reappear in the latest year, the difference being identifiers absent from a middle year and back again. Measured in their base year, the ones that stopped appearing had been reported met on 58.3% of their decided verdicts against 64.5% for the ones that carried through. An identifier is not a guarantee of a fixed measure: of the 1,822 present throughout, 596 carry a published name that is not identical in all five years and 882 carry a recorded target that is not. This file records presence, absence and restatement. It records no reason for any of them, and none is supplied here.
Chapter 6§
Organization by organization
The same measure — the share of decided indicators reported met in the latest reported year — computed identically for every organization: first as a distribution, then organization by organization in alphabetical order. Each organization chose its own indicators and set its own targets, which is why this is a comparison of one measure and never a ranking.
| Reading | Fiscal 2024-25 |
|---|---|
| Organizations reporting indicators | 89 |
| Of those, with at least one decided verdict | 88 |
| Lowest share of decided verdicts reported met | 0.0% |
| One quarter of organizations are at or below | 58.5% |
| Middle organization | 75.0% |
| Three quarters of organizations are at or below | 84.9% |
| Highest share of decided verdicts reported met | 100.0% |
| Organizations at 90% or more | 17 |
| Organizations at 75% to under 90% | 29 |
| Organizations at 50% to under 75% | 29 |
| Organizations at 25% to under 50% | 10 |
| Organizations at under 25% | 3 |
One organization reached no decided verdict at all that year and is counted in the first row only. The extremes are held by very small reporters: 12 organizations sit at 100.0% and the largest of them reached 14 decided verdicts, while 2 sit at 0.0% on no more than 4. Across all organizations the count of decided verdicts runs from 0 to 170, with a middle of 17, and 30 organizations reached fewer than ten — at which point a single indicator moves the share by more than ten points.
| Organization | Indicators reported | Decided verdicts | Reported met | % of decided met |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canada Border Services Agency | 64 | 63 | 48 | 76.2% |
| Canada Revenue Agency | 34 | 33 | 14 | 42.4% |
| Canadian Energy Regulator | 50 | 42 | 29 | 69.0% |
| Correctional Service of Canada | 76 | 72 | 51 | 70.8% |
| Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food | 60 | 37 | 25 | 67.6% |
| Department of Canadian Heritage | 79 | 52 | 29 | 55.8% |
| Department of Citizenship and Immigration | 55 | 55 | 30 | 54.5% |
| Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs | 50 | 33 | 25 | 75.8% |
| Department of Employment and Social Development | 110 | 90 | 53 | 58.9% |
| Department of Finance | 40 | 32 | 31 | 96.9% |
| Department of Fisheries and Oceans | 68 | 57 | 42 | 73.7% |
| Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development | 117 | 97 | 75 | 77.3% |
| Department of Health | 64 | 41 | 34 | 82.9% |
| Department of Housing, Infrastructure and Communities | 35 | 32 | 25 | 78.1% |
| Department of Indigenous Services | 70 | 37 | 21 | 56.8% |
| Department of Industry | 57 | 36 | 25 | 69.4% |
| Department of Justice | 45 | 31 | 22 | 71.0% |
| Department of National Defence | 214 | 170 | 81 | 47.6% |
| Department of Natural Resources | 67 | 46 | 43 | 93.5% |
| Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness | 41 | 41 | 19 | 46.3% |
| Department of Public Works and Government Services | 63 | 62 | 43 | 69.4% |
| Department of the Environment | 61 | 35 | 32 | 91.4% |
| Department of Transport | 67 | 64 | 50 | 78.1% |
| National Research Council of Canada | 70 | 70 | 51 | 72.9% |
| Royal Canadian Mounted Police | 39 | 37 | 12 | 32.4% |
| Shared Services Canada | 53 | 51 | 43 | 84.3% |
26 organizations clear the size cut, together holding 1,416 of the 2,196 decided verdicts that year. The cut is on how many verdicts an organization reached, never on the share itself, and the order is alphabetical: this is one measure computed the same way for every row — same variable, same fiscal year, same edition of the file, same basis, same method — and it is not a ranking. Across these rows the share runs from 32.4% to 96.9%, with a middle of 70.9%. Each organization chose its own indicators and set its own targets, so a higher share may mean a demanding target was met or an undemanding one was. Nothing in this table supports a judgement about which organization performed better, and none is offered.
Chapter 7§
What this reading cannot say
The boundaries a reader should hold against every sentence above: who assigns each verdict, what a met target does and does not establish, the field the issuer documents but does not publish, and why nothing here supports a judgement about any organization.
Chapter 8§
What to watch next
The publications that can change this reading, in the order they are expected — including the one that removes evidence when it arrives, because the plan rows for a fiscal year are deleted from this file when that year's results are reported.
Directly observed
Method and limitations
- Every figure on this Brief is counted here, from the published performance file this record holds under a content hash, and nothing is copied from the issuer's own commentary. Only Departmental Results Report rows are counted: a results row states an indicator, its target, its result and its verdict for one fiscal year, all in the same row, so it needs no join to anything. Departmental Plan rows are counted as rows and scored nowhere, because a commitment about a year that has not been reported on is not a result. A verdict is the reporting organization's own published status, taken as published; no status is recomputed from the target and the result, none is overridden, and no reason for any status is inferred. A share is two counts divided, expressed as a percent and rounded half away from zero to one decimal — on the percent, never on a count. Two shares are published for every year: one over the indicators that reached a decided verdict, one over every indicator reported. An indicator is identified by the issuer's own indicator identifier within a fiscal year, and that pairing is verified unique on every build rather than assumed. Organizations are compared on one measure, one year, one basis and one method, and are listed in alphabetical order. Every number stated above appears, with its basis, in the tables published beneath the chapters of this page.
- Every verdict here is self-reported. The status recorded against a departmental result indicator is assigned by the organization reporting it, against a target that organization set, on a methodology that organization states in its own words. It is not audited by the Treasury Board, and it is not verified by Countability. This Brief counts published statuses; it does not confirm any of them.
- A met target is not a measured outcome. Nothing on this Brief states, or can support, that a target worth meeting was met, that meeting it changed anything, or that an organization reporting a higher share performed better. The measure is the share of an organization's own decided verdicts recorded as met, and that is all it is.
- Organizations are compared, never ranked. The comparison is matched and metric-specific: one variable, one fiscal year, one vintage of the file, one basis, one evaluation method, computed identically for every organization and listed alphabetically. No composite score is formed, no measures are combined or weighted, no organization is graded, and the table supports no better-organization verdict of any kind.
- Two denominators, always. The share of indicators reported met is published both over the indicators that reached a decided verdict and over every indicator reported, because the second denominator moved: the share of indicators arriving with no verdict fell across the five reported years. Quoting either share without the other reports a change in the basis as a change in delivery.
- An identifier that stops appearing is an absence, not a finding about intent. This file records which indicator identifiers appear in which fiscal year. It records nothing about why one stopped appearing, and this Brief asserts nothing about it. A discontinued indicator may have been replaced, restructured, completed, or superseded by a departmental results framework amendment; the file distinguishes none of those and neither does this reading.
- The same identifier is not guaranteed to be the same indicator. Of the 1,822 identifiers present in all five reported years, 596 carry a published name that is not identical across them and 882 carry a recorded target that is not identical across them. Whether a given change is a restatement, a re-baselining, or a wording edit is not recorded in the file, and is not decided here.
- The issuer documents a field naming each indicator's data source and does not publish it. Without it, no indicator in this file can be checked against an independent official series, which is why this reading counts verdicts rather than verifying them. A whole-of-government measurability reading over this file is not possible — not as a modelling limitation, but as an absence in the source.
- This is one preserved edition, not a live feed. The reading rests on the file as published in the issuer's own March 2026 edition, captured on 2026-07-10 and pinned by content hash. Its latest reported fiscal year is 2024-25. Federal organizations publish narrative departmental results reports of their own, which this reading does not incorporate.
- Contains information licensed under the Open Government Licence – Canada. Source: Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, GC InfoBase — Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports: performance information by program and by organization, 2026-03-19.
This Brief is published in full: the complete cited record behind its headline question. Countability can commission a related Brief with custom scenarios, a recurring refresh, or a different decision question.
Commission a related Brief.