Covid-19 Pandemic Report 1: ArriveCAN

Overall, the Canada Border Services Agency, the Public Health Agency of Canada, and Public Services and Procurement Canada repeatedly failed to follow good management practices in the contracting, development, and implementation of the ArriveCAN application. As a result of the many gaps and weaknesses we found in the project’s design, oversight, and accountability, it did not deliver the best value for taxpayer dollars spent. The enduring benefit of the ArriveCAN application is that it remains available for customs and immigration declarations. As of October 2022, ArriveCAN is no longer used to collect travellers’ contact and health information. The Canada Border Services Agency’s documentation, financial records, and controls were so poor that we were unable to determine the precise cost of the ArriveCAN application. Using the information that was available, we estimated the cost at approximately $59.5 million. At the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the agency determined that it did not have the resources needed to develop the application and that it would therefore rely on external resources. The agency’s decision to work with external resources, as well as the continued reliance on them throughout the project, increased the cost of ArriveCAN. The Canada Border Services Agency’s disregard for policies, controls, and transparency in the contracting process restricted opportunities for competition and undermined value for money. We found that the agency had little documentation to support how and why GC Strategies was awarded the initial ArriveCAN contract through a non-competitive process. We also found that GC Strategies was subsequently involved in the development of the requirements that the agency ultimately included in the request for proposal for its competitive contract. Although departments and agencies were encouraged to be flexible given the urgent need to respond to the pandemic, the need to document decisions and demonstrate transparency and prudent use of public funds remained. We also found deficiencies in how the Canada Border Services Agency managed the contracts, again raising concerns about value for money. Given the number and value of competitive and non-competitive contracts used to carry out this project, we are concerned that essential information, such as clear deliverables and required qualifications, was missing. We found that details about the work performed were often missing on invoices and supporting time sheets submitted by contractors that the agency approved.