PACP - Government of Canada Inquiry of Ministry - Nov 24, 2020
Question number: Q-371, by Mr. Blaikie, Elmwood-Transcona, February 26, 2020.
Reply by the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, Honourable Marco Mendicino
Question
With regard to recommendations from the Office of the Auditor General of Canada to federal organizations, between 2011 and 2019, broken down by year and by federal organization, for each recommendation: (a) was it accepted, rejected or partially accepted; (b) what is the rationale for acceptance or rejection; and (c) for each recommendation in (a) that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented fully, partially or not at all?
Insofar as Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) is concerned: Please see Annex A. Insofar as the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) is concerned: Please see Annex B.
Q-371 Annex A
Q-3712 — February 26, 2020 — Mr. Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona) — With regard to recommendations from the Office of the Auditor General of Canada to federal organizations, between 2011 and 2019, broken down by year and by federal organization, for each recommendation: (a) was it accepted, rejected or partially accepted; (b) what is the rationale for acceptance or rejection; and (c) for each recommendation in (a) that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented fully, partially or not at all?
Name of organization: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC)
Row
Year/Report
2019 Spring Report Call Centre
Recommendation
Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and IRCC should review how they manage incoming calls to improve access to agents. The departments should consider practices such as allowing callers to decide if they prefer to wait, use self-service options, or have the call centre call them back later.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC continues to work toward improving support to clients and has already taken important steps to achieve this goal. Steps include hiring more agents for the Client Support Centre and putting a process in place to support clients who do not speak English or French and who contact the Client Support Centre using an interpreter. The Department recognizes that many clients now prefer to use self-serve options or to contact the Department via email. As such, the Department is committed to pursuing a multi-channel support strategy to give clients the support they need in the channel of their choice. The Department has taken steps to improve its website and case status tools so clients can self-serve more easily. The Department has also taken steps to offer personalized client support through email and other dedicated avenues for support.
In 2018, the Department adopted a three-year strategy to further improve the accessibility and timeliness of the Department’s client support. As part of the strategy, the Department sought funding in Budget 2019 and received $43 million over the next two years to provide the Client Support Centre with the resources required to meet client needs. The strategy includes further improvements to the Client Support Centre. Specific improvements include reviewing training and work processes to ensure that clients receive support in a respectful and efficient manner; offering clients the choice of asking the Client Support Centre to call them back rather than waiting on hold to speak with an agent; resolving some of the issues that lead clients to seek support; ensuring that the Department’s programs and services are designed with the client in mind; and setting the foundation for transformation by improving the Department’s technology and tools.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
2019 Spring Report Call Centre
Recommendation
ESDC, IRCC, and Veterans Affairs Canada should: set call centre service standards that are relevant to clients and consider client feedback as per the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat Guideline on Service Standards; and publish call centre service standards and performance results in a transparent and consistent manner and verify the results to confirm accuracy.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC has published service standards for many of its programs and services, and the Department is committed to continuous improvement in this area. The Department is currently undertaking a comprehensive review of its service standards to ensure that they are meaningful to clients and achievable by the Department. In addition, the Department plans to establish service standards in 2019 for client support services. These service standards will be set in consultation with clients and in consideration of resource capacity.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2019 Spring Report/ Processing of Asylum Claims
Recommendation
To better respond to the fluctuating volume of claims made each year, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), IRCC, and the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) should: work with central government agencies to design and implement a flexible model that allows them to access additional funding quickly to better match shifting volumes of claims; and update their performance and productivity expectations for key steps in the refugee determination system.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The CBSA, IRCC, and the IRB will continue to utilize existing funding mechanisms and will work with central agencies to explore potential flexible funding approaches to meet current and projected intake. Proposals will be brought forward for government consideration. To support this work, the deputy-led Asylum System Management Board will oversee the adoption of updated performance targets that will be used to report on intake, capacity, and productivity across the system. In view of the doubling of refugee intake since 2016, when Canada received 23,900 asylum claims, the CBSA, IRCC, and the IRB have taken a number of innovative approaches to improve the effectiveness of the in-Canada asylum system. The Government of Canada has also allocated additional resources to temporarily increase the capacity for refugee intake and for refugee protection decisions. In March 2019, Budget 2019 announced investments of $1.18 billion over five years, to enable the processing of 40,700 asylum claims in the 2019–20 fiscal year and up to 50,000 claims in the 2020–21 fiscal year, as well as to strengthen processes at the border and accelerate the processing of claims and removals in a timely manner.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
2019 Spring Report Processing Asylum of Claims
Recommendation
The CBSA, IRCC, and the IRB should: work together to identify what information needs to be collected and shared for an asylum claim; and find a way to share the information securely, accurately, and efficiently, moving from paper to digital processing of asylum claims.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The CBSA, IRCC, and the IRB are committed to proactively sharing information among the three organizations to ensure the effectiveness and integrity of the in-Canada asylum system.
The small-scale Integrated Claim Analysis Centre pilot project, recently hosted in Montréal, is proof of concept of this commitment, demonstrating effective and proactive information sharing in support of program integrity. This model permits refugee claims to be systematically examined and for case-specific information to be shared with the IRB before a hearing is scheduled. Budget 2019 permits the government to build on this model and to establish a fully funded pilot.
In support of this commitment, all three organizations will work together to establish a clear understanding of what claimant-specific documents are to be shared, when and how. The CBSA, IRCC, and the IRB will establish a quality assurance program to identify where there is unnecessary delay or error and monitor overall compliance with this approach. Through regular monitoring, issues such as missing, delayed, incomplete, or illegible claimant information will be identified and addressed in a timely manner by the responsible organization.
In addition, the three organizations will work together with central agencies to identify options and potential mechanisms for government consideration to further develop information technology capabilities in support of improved interoperability, information sharing, and client service. Further improvements will be made to existing digital interfaces to provide for the exchange of real-time information (for example, forms, submissions, documents, and updates) among the organizations, and to support the shift to a digital processing environment.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
2019 Spring Report Processing Asylum of Claims
Recommendation
The CBSA and IRCC should notify the IRB as soon as their review of an asylum claim for intervention is complete, whether or not they plan to intervene. The IRB should consider this notification in its scheduling strategy to reduce wait times for protection decisions.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The CBSA and IRCC are committed to ensuring the integrity of the in-Canada asylum system. The Ministerial Reviews and Interventions Program (IRCC) and the Hearings Program (CBSA) work together to examine each refugee claim to identify issues related to integrity, credibility, criminality, and security before a refugee protection decision is taken by the IRB. Ministers’ representatives intervene in proceedings to challenge refugee claims if investigations have uncovered adverse evidence that is directly relevant to the claim. IRCC and the CBSA will seek to provide timely notification of their intention to intervene or not intervene in a claim. In turn, the Board will take this notification into consideration when scheduling refugee claims.
In addition, IRCC and the CBSA remain committed to proactively sharing information which will support the IRB having hearing-ready files, including information such as previous visa applications and supporting documentation and the results of biometric information sharing with partner countries, while respecting privacy legislation and information sharing agreements. In support of this objective, the CBSA, IRCC, and the IRB have been and will continue to test innovative approaches to streamline their procedures and to improve information sharing in an effort to avoid duplication, to reduce overall processing times, and to facilitate the creation of hearing-ready files, which will support an efficient strategic scheduling approach for the Board.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
2017 Fall Report Settlement Services for Syrian Refugees
Recommendation
IRCC should improve its planning and approval processes to ensure the timely transfer of funding to service providers in order to meet urgent programming needs resulting from such events as the Syrian refugee initiative.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
A key element of IRCC’s success in managing its grants and contributions is ensuring that funds are made available on a timely basis, aligned with where demand for services exist, and that the Department exercises due diligence in its disbursement. The Department planned for and completed deployment of funding for almost 750 new settlement and resettlement contribution agreements with about 500 separate recipients for the 2017–18 fiscal year, including the disbursement of funds within the unprecedented context of the Syrian refugee initiative.
The Department intends to review where it can make further improvements to its planning and approval processes, particularly for urgent and unexpected programming needs such as the Syrian refugee initiative, by December 2017. This review will include business processes established by the Department to effectively manage grants and contributions. The review will also examine the Department’s mechanisms to engage and work collaboratively with provincial and territorial governments and other stakeholders, regarding Settlement Program funding, priorities, and intake processes.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2017 Fall Report Settlement Services for Syrian Refugees
Recommendation
To more efficiently manage and meet the demand for language training, IRCC should improve its management of wait-lists in consultation with service providers.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC recently created the Settlement and Integration Sector to provide a single point of accountability for the strategic vision and oversight of the Department’s settlement and integration policy, programs, and operations. This will also allow for a more focused and integrated approach and will help support our commitment to ensuring that newcomers to Canada receive timely, high-quality Department-funded settlement services. The Department has already conducted a review of language training and wait-time issues so that it can better understand the dynamic nature of contributing factors, such as financial, structural, geographic, and personal factors. This review is already informing plans to improve wait-list management monitoring and reporting and, going forward, will encompass the sharing of best practices among provinces, territories, and key stakeholders.
Further, in collaboration with provinces and territories, the Department is currently advancing a Pan-Canadian Language Strategy to improve the coordination of English as a second language (ESL) and French as a second language (FSL) programming for adult immigrants and refugees in Canada (outside of Quebec). The strategy, which was approved by senior federal and provincial officials in May 2017, is now being implemented, with enhancements anticipated by March 2019 in the areas of employment-related language training, ESL and FSL literacy, and e-learning. Finally, the Department is exploring options for a national wait-list management system, including expanding the Ontario system to other provinces on a pilot basis.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2017 Fall Report Settlement Services for Syrian Refugees
Recommendation
To ensure that the quality of settlement services across Canada is consistent, IRCC should include clear service expectations in contribution agreements for services delivered by settlement service providers.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC is committed to ensuring value for money in the delivery of all its grant and contribution programs. The Department has already set clear service expectations in almost all April 2017 to March 2020 contribution agreements for language training and assessment services. The Department will expand this by developing more robust service expectations for other settlement services in new and amended agreements. Service expectations will build on existing program descriptions, standards, and policies, as well as any new guidance or policies emanating from follow-up actions related to the Settlement Program evaluation. This will be addressed throughout the duration of the existing agreements and before the signing of the next round of agreements, which is planned for March 2020.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2017 Fall Report Settlement Services for Syrian Refugees
Recommendation
IRCC should update and implement its performance measurement strategy for the Syrian refugee initiative to ensure that the Department can fully and consistently monitor the integration of Syrian refugees into Canada.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC developed a comprehensive framework for the monitoring of outcomes for Syrian refugees. This framework was anchored in a multi-year approach and based on multiple data sources. The Department also completed a rapid impact evaluation of early outcomes of the Syrian refugee initiative. As a significant amount of performance information on resettlement and settlement was collected and reported regularly to partners and the public, data collection strategies were adjusted to reflect and meet the critical information and reporting needs of both internal and external stakeholders.
The Department will update its Outcomes Monitoring Framework, including its performance measurement strategy, by January 2018, and continue to report internally and externally on the integration of Syrian refugees as more data and performance information become available.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2017 Spring Report Preventing Corruption in Immigration and Border Services
Recommendation
IRCC should develop a comprehensive internal fraud risk assessment based on analysis of the effectiveness of its controls.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC has developed the International Network Professional Conduct Standard, which focuses on the comprehensive management of risks related to internal fraud in the international context of program delivery. The standard, which is based on a continuous cycle of awareness, prevention, detection, assessment, response, and reporting, has already been incorporated into the International Network Integrated Management Plan and will be fully operational on a continuous basis beginning in the 2017–18 fiscal year.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2017 Spring Report Preventing Corruption in Immigration and Border Services
Recommendation
IRCC should conduct systematic monitoring exercises to detect improper actions that can alert the Department to potential corruption.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The International Network Professional Conduct Standard, which has been developed by IRCC, is based on a continuous cycle of awareness, prevention, detection, assessment, response, and reporting. Mechanisms are in place to capture baseline and ongoing data related to activities associated with internal fraud. Establishing baseline data provides information to not only report against, but also to track progress and identify trends or anomalies. Full implementation of the standard will be effective in the 2017–18 fiscal year.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2016 Spring Report Detecting and Preventing Fraud in the Citizenship Program
Recommendation
IRCC should improve its processes to enter and update problem addresses so they can be identified more reliably, and should establish quality control procedures to make sure citizenship officers implement these processes effectively and consistently.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC is committed to ensuring integrity in the Citizenship Program. The Department has already implemented measures to strengthen processes to better flag addresses in its Global Case Management System that have been, or are suspected of being, associated with fraud, so that applications with these addresses receive closer scrutiny. It is important to note that identifying suspect addresses is one of many controls in place to prevent fraud, and complements other fraud controls, such as border passage history checks to view applicants’ travel entries to Canada and in-person interviews with all clients, where citizenship officers review original documents to verify whether applicants meet requirements. The Department has provided updated guidance to citizenship officers on identifying, entering, and updating problematic addresses in its Global Case Management System so that these problem addresses can be identified more reliably and appropriate action taken. The Department has established quality control procedures and will undertake a quality control exercise in September 2016 to verify that these processes are being followed.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2016 Spring Report Detecting and Preventing Fraud in the Citizenship Program
Recommendation
IRCC should clarify citizenship officers’ authority to seize problem documents, provide officers with more detailed guidance and training, and ensure that officers implement this guidance.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC recognizes the importance of identifying and seizing fraudulent documents to remove them from circulation. The Department has since clarified the authorities related to document seizure, and has provided detailed guidance to officers regarding the process to seize suspicious documents. In addition, Bill C-6, An Act to Amend the Citizenship Act and to make consequential amendments to another Act, which was introduced in Parliament on 25 February 2016, contains amendments that would provide new authorities for the seizure of documents where there are reasonable grounds to believe that they were fraudulently or improperly obtained or used or that the measure is necessary to prevent their fraudulent or improper use. Recent changes to the Global Case Management System have provided citizenship officers with access to the Lost, Stolen and Fraudulent Document database. Detailed guidance has been provided to officers on using the database.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2016 Spring Report Detecting and Preventing Fraud in the Citizenship Program
Recommendation
IRCC and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) should revise their procedures to clarify how and when to share information on criminal charges against permanent residents and foreign nationals, and should review the optimal timing of the criminal clearance process.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC has engaged the RCMP to review the optimal timing for conducting criminal clearance, while bearing in mind the need to process citizenship applications in a timely manner. The Department has also engaged the RCMP to clarify processes for sharing information about criminal charges that impact citizenship applicants after the initial clearance. This will be completed by 31 December 2016.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2016 Spring Report Detecting and Preventing Fraud in the Citizenship Program
Recommendation
IRCC and the CBSA should improve information sharing to ensure that individuals linked to fraud investigations are subject to additional review to confirm their eligibility for citizenship.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC has taken active steps to ensure that information on individuals who are linked to immigration fraud be communicated to the Citizenship Program in a consistent and timely manner so it can be used in the eligibility process for citizenship. IRCC and the CBSA have clarified the legislative authorities supporting the information sharing needed by the Department to make Citizenship Act eligibility decisions. The organizations are collaborating to establish clear processes and procedures to ensure the Department receives timely information about fraud investigations. The new processes will be in place by December 2016.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2016 Spring Report/ Detecting and Preventing Fraud in the Citizenship Program
Recommendation
IRCC should develop a systematic, evidence-based approach to identifying the risks of fraud, including establishing a baseline and monitoring trends, as required by its Program Integrity Framework.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC has taken significant steps to prevent and deter fraud in the Citizenship Program. In 2010, the Department implemented a Citizenship Fraud Action Plan to prevent and deter fraud more effectively. The Department developed risk indicators and other fraud-detection tools and established triage criteria to ensure applicants at high risk of committing fraud are subject to closer scrutiny. Legislative changes that came into force in 2015 improved the Department’s ability to prevent and respond to fraud. Decision makers in the Citizenship Program are highly attuned to the risks of fraud, and regularly detect and prevent ineligible applicants from obtaining citizenship. As part of its ongoing efforts to improve program integrity, IRCC developed a Citizenship Program Integrity Framework in January 2016, which outlines a systematic, evidence-based approach to identifying and managing the risks of fraud in the program, including establishing various baselines and monitoring trends.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2016 Spring Report Detecting and Preventing Fraud in the Citizenship Program
Recommendation
IRCC should document its rationale for selecting risk indicators for residency fraud, and ensure that these indicators are checked consistently and are effective at detecting and preventing fraud.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
IRCC has improved information management practices by documenting its rationale for any modification to risk indicators. The Department has initiated an analysis of the triage criteria by conducting program integrity activities as part of the Citizenship Program Integrity Framework. As part of the framework, the risk indicators will be evaluated to verify they are consistently applied. The Department will conduct these activities regularly.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2016 Spring Report Detecting and Preventing Fraud in the Citizenship Program
Recommendation
To ensure continuous improvement in its efforts to detect and prevent fraud, IRCC should monitor its fraud controls to ensure they are applied appropriately and are achieving the intended results. The Department should examine the results of its continuous improvement processes regularly and make any needed adjustments to its fraud controls.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
As part of the Citizenship Program Integrity Framework, IRCC has established a process by which fraud controls will be monitored regularly to ensure they are being applied appropriately and achieving the intended results. They will be adjusted as necessary. As well, to ensure continuous improvement in efforts to detect and prevent fraud, the Department created a Citizenship Program Integrity Working Group in August 2015 to disseminate information on emerging fraud trends and best practices for fraud detection and prevention among citizenship offices across the country.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2014 Fall Report Departmental Progress in Implementing Sustainable Development Strategies
Recommendation
Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC), Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC), and Health Canada (HC) should review their strategic environmental assessment processes to ensure that the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals and its related guidelines are applied to proposals going to their ministers.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
CIC has defined “proposals” as memoranda to Cabinet and Treasury Board submissions, and has long-standing processes and mechanisms in place to ensure that proposals have been appropriately assessed pursuant to the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals. The Department will review its processes to assess potential situations where any other proposals would be subject to the Cabinet directive and will benchmark with other departments on their definition of “proposal” to ensure consistency with the Cabinet directive. These measures will be completed by March 2015.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2014 Fall Report Departmental Progress in Implementing Sustainable Development Strategies
Recommendation
AANDC, CIC, HC, Natural Resources Canada, and Transport Canada should ensure that they are appropriately concluding on the need to complete a detailed strategic environmental assessment when assessing the environmental implications of each policy, plan, and program proposal.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
CIC has put a process in place to review all preliminary scans to ensure that there is sufficient documentation to support the decision to proceed or to require a full sustainable development assessment. This will support monitoring of departmental compliance with the Cabinet directive. These measures will be completed by March 2015.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2011 Fall Report Issuing Visas
Recommendation
The CBSA and CIC should ensure that operational manuals, risk indicators, and relevant country-specific information are complete, up to date, and made available to visa officers in a timely manner to help them identify foreign nationals who may be inadmissible.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
A review of current risk indicators has begun in consultation with security partners. Also in consultation with security partners, a strategy will be developed to ensure that necessary country-specific information is available in a timely manner to support admissibility decision making. In addition, a review and update of policy manuals will be undertaken to ensure that accurate operational guidance is in place for all staff and management involved in the admissibility screening process. These measures will be completed by June 2012.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2011 Fall Report Issuing Visas
Recommendation
In order to meet the objectives of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to protect the health and safety of Canadians, CIC should: develop a strategy based on risks to better identify applicants who present a danger to public health or a danger to public safety; and examine the methodology and process for assessing excessive demand on health and social services and take corrective measures as necessary.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
CIC has initiated and continues to develop a risk assessment and management strategy to better address danger to public health and danger to public safety in the immigration context. Among the activities conducted are the completion of a discussion paper on defining danger to public health, and the completion of an HIV policy review. CIC will implement a strategy that will result in consistent admissibility criteria, standardized processes, and improved monitoring of its programs. These measures will be completed by September 2013. CIC has started examining the excessive demand processes and will pursue its collaboration with the provinces and territories to review factors generating limitations and inconsistencies in the evaluation of excessive demands and will address the identified deficiencies. This measure will be completed by June 2013.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2011 Fall Report Issuing Visas
Recommendation
CIC should implement a standard quality assurance process to protect the integrity of the medical examination system and to ensure consistency and quality in the assessment of medical admissibility.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
CIC has already completed the development of a Quality Assurance Framework for its immigration medical examination and assessment programs. This framework will be integrated into the departmental Program Integrity Framework, providing the tool required to monitor and evaluate the quality of its immigration health program, worldwide, including the designated medical practitioners, other examiners, and CIC employees involved in the health assessment process. CIC is also in the process of implementing eMedical (an electronic medical system), enabling standardization and centralization of the medical examination process. These measures will be completed by March 2013.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2011 Fall Report Issuing Visas
Recommendation
CIC and the CBSA should fully implement their joint risk management and performance measurement strategies and monitor the results.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
CIC and the CBSA will implement and monitor their joint risk management and performance strategies for the shared delivery of the immigration and refugee program, including visa issuance. In this context, CIC and the CBSA will complete a review of Canada’s admissibility policy, in collaboration with security partners, in order to assess whether it is continuing to meet the needs of Canada and Canadians; to identify any gaps; and to recommend amendments to relevant legislation, regulations, or administrative guidelines. CIC and the CBSA will complete a joint priority-setting exercise based on key risks with respect to the intelligence program (including visa issuance) and resulting enforcement priorities. CIC and the CBSA will also complete work on key performance indicators with respect to visa issuance, which will be used to monitor the effectiveness of shared programs and to track the implementation of joint priorities. These measures will be completed by December 2012.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2011 June Stats Report Large Information Technology Projects
Recommendation
CIC should prepare a plan to address the costs and risks related to the remaining work to be done after completion of Release 2 of the Global Case Management System (GCMS) in order to achieve the project’s overall business objectives.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
Over time, the implementation of the GCMS project has been adapted to meet the changing business and operational needs of CIC. The overall project plan was amended in 2008 to focus on overseas immigration processing. GCMS Release 2 will be successfully delivered worldwide by March 2011, fulfilling the scope of the Major Crown Project. CIC is preparing a five-year Roadmap to achieve its overall business needs, which have evolved since the original business objectives of GCMS were established. As we move forward, we will continue to build on the GCMS platform and address any risks related to the changes to the original scope. The first year of this Roadmap will be funded through the CIC Business Planning and Investment Planning process, and the next deployment is scheduled for summer 2011. As business priorities shift and change quickly, the yearly process of approval will be followed for GCMS over the coming years. A portion of immigration inland processing will be implemented in the Case Processing Centre Mississauga and CIC Etobicoke in March, with minimal IT changes to the system.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2011 June Stats Report Large Information Technology Projects
Recommendation
When departments and agencies develop a business case, they should include a benefit measurement plan that: contains specific quantifiable benefits including clear benchmarks; assigns responsibilities for delivering identified benefits; and includes a process for measuring and reporting benefits.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
Future projects will leverage the CIC Performance Measurement Framework and Operational Baselining Strategy in order to quantify, measure, and report on benefits.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Note: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada was formerly known as Citizenship and Immigration Canada until 2015.
Q-371 Annex B
Q-3712 — February 26, 2020 — Mr. Blaikie (Elmwood—Transcona) — With regard to recommendations from the Office of the Auditor General of Canada to federal organizations, between 2011 and 2019, broken down by year and by federal organization, for each recommendation: (a) was it accepted, rejected or partially accepted; (b) what is the rationale for acceptance or rejection; and (c) for each recommendation in (a) that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented fully, partially or not at all?
Name of organization: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB)
Row
Year/Report
2015-2016: The Governor in Council Appointment Process in Administrative Tribunals
Recommendation
No recommendations specific to the IRB.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
N/A
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
N/A
Row
Year/Report
2016-17: Audit of the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Government of Canada for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2017
Recommendation
Entities should work with Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) to obtain the information required to assess the accuracy and completeness of payroll information affecting departmental and agency appropriations and employees.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
Entities should exercise the same level of control and rigour when performing Section 34 approvals for payroll related payments as any other charges against appropriations. Processes should be put in place to monitor that employees performing section 34 have the delegated authority to do so. Entities, in collaboration with the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), should identify areas where guidance and training can be provided to improve financial reporting practices and strengthen internal controls.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
Entities should exercise the same level of control and rigour when performing Section 33 approvals for payroll related payments as any other charges against appropriations. Entities should implement a formal process, such as the salary forecasting tool (SFT), to assist in the detection and prevention of inaccurate payments and execution of the Section 33 process. Adequate controls should be designed and implemented to validate the accuracy and completeness of the data used in this process.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
Entities should regularly reconcile the expected salary expense, the payments made (IO50 reports) and the salary expense recorded in the G/L. Entities should also understand and document where the information in the IO50 reports is posted in the G/L.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
Entities, in collaboration with the TBS, should clarify the document retention policies for key human resources management documents to ensure proper personnel files are kept for each federal employee.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
Working with PSPC, entities should establish a clear and rigorous process for providing PSPC with evidence that the requests for Section 34 Manager access are authorized.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
Entities, in collaboration with PSPC, should put in place a process to manage changes to the trusted sources list. In addition, entities, in collaboration with PSPC, should implement a process to validate that the trusted source authorizations are authentic and appropriate. Entities should implement a process to monitor the status of Pay Action Requests.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
Entities, in collaboration with PSPC, should obtain a clear understanding of the existing roles granted to their staff in Phoenix. Entities should review the roles currently granted to their employees, assess the appropriateness of the access, and modify the assigned role when necessary.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
2017-18: Audit of the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Government of Canada for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2018
Recommendation
(Note that this is the only new recommendation that was identified by the Office of the Auditor General in their assessment and added to the Management Action Plan for 2017-18. The rest remain the same as the 2016-17 above.) Departments, in collaboration with PSPC and the Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer, should assess globally what the training needs are and develop an integrated training plan at all levels to ensure that all stakeholders properly understand their roles and responsibilities within the HR to Pay process. In addition, departments not serviced by the pay center, should evaluate the training needs for the Compensation Advisors and develop a training plan to ensure they can accurately process transactions in Phoenix. Once these training programs are established and delivered, they should be updated as needed and their effectiveness should be periodically assessed.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
2019 Spring Reports of the Auditor General of Canada to the Parliament of Canada Report 2 - Processing of Asylum Claims
Recommendation
To better respond to the fluctuating volume of claims made each year, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, (IRCC), and the IRB should: work with central government agencies to design and implement a flexible model that allows them to access additional funding quickly to better match shifting volumes of claims; and update their performance and productivity expectations for key steps in the refugee determination system.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
The CBSA, IRCC, and the IRB should: work together to identify what information needs to be collected and shared for an asylum claim; and find a way to share the information securely, accurately, and efficiently, moving from paper to digital processing of asylum claims.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Partially
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
The IRB should explore ways to reduce the number of postponed hearings, particularly for reasons within its control, and should reschedule hearings in a timely manner.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
The IRB should make better and more frequent use of the processes at its disposal to expedite protection decisions for eligible asylum claimants.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Field empty
Recommendation
The CBSA and IRCC should notify the IRB as soon as their review of an asylum claim for intervention is complete, whether or not they plan to intervene. The IRB should consider this notification in its scheduling strategy to reduce wait times for protection decisions.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
Accepted
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
The IRB agreed with the recommendation.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
Fully
Row
Year/Report
Follow up assessment to the 2016 report (Privy Council Office (PCO) led initiative, IRB is a participant)
Recommendation
Assessment is ongoing, IRB has provided documentation April 2019 and will continue to collaborate with this PCO led initiative.
A - Was it accepted/rejected/partially accepted?
N/A
B - What is the rationale for acceptance or rejection?
There are no recommendations as of yet as the report has not been published.
C – For each recommendation in A that was accepted, either fully or partially, was it implemented?
N/A
Page details
- Date modified: