2015-16 Departmental Performance Report: Supplementary Information Tables

Horizontal Initiatives

Name of horizontal initiative: National Anti-Drug Strategy
Name of lead department(s): Department of Justice

Lead department PAA Program: Stewardship of the Canadian Legal Framework

Start date: March 13, 2012
End date: March 13, 2017

This information will be reported by the Department of Justice. Please refer to the Department of Justice’s Horizontal Initiatives for more information.

Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy

Green Procurement

Overview

Departments and agencies bound by the Policy on Green Procurement or by the Federal Sustainable Development Act (FDSA) must complete mandatory reporting on meeting the requirements of Section 7.2 of the Policy on Green Procurement using this section.

During the 2015-16 reporting cycle, the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) considered the environmental effects of initiatives subject to the Cabinet Directive on the Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals, as part of its decision-making processes.

As the PBC did not develop any initiatives that required a strategic environmental assessment, no related public statements were produced.

Performance Measurement

Expected Result

Environmentally responsible acquisition, use and disposal of goods and services.

Performance indicator	Performance level achieved
Departmental approach to further the implementation of the Policy on Green Procurement in place as of April 1, 2014.	April 1, 2015.
Number and percentage of procurement and/or materiel management specialists who completed the Canada School of Public Service Green Procurement course (C215) or equivalent, in fiscal year 2015–16.	1 100%
Number and percentage of managers and functional heads of procurement and materiel whose performance evaluation includes support and contribution toward green procurement, in fiscal year 2015–16.	1 100%

Implementation strategy element or best practice	Performance level achieved
7.2.1.5. Leverage common-use procurement instruments where available and feasible.	Achieved.
7.2.2. Incorporate environmental considerations into procurement instruments. [Applies only to Public Services and Procurement Canada]	N/A
Best Practice 7.2.3. Train acquisition cardholders on green procurement.	Achieved.
Best Practice 7.2.4. Increase awareness of the Policy on Green Procurement among managers.	Achieved.
The PBC is committed to: Approach: The PBC’s approach to implementing green procurement is to continue to target the use of Public Services and Procurement Canada’s (PSPC) procurement instruments into which environmental performance considerations are already integrated, to continue to provide continuous training on greening to personnel, and to continue to promote environmental considerations in our daily workplaces. Management Processes and Controls: The PBC uses PSPC procurement instruments as its primary procurement mechanism and leverages the environmental considerations incorporated into these standing offers/supply arrangements by PSPC. Furthermore, when there is no PSPC standing offer available, all other contracting documents include a clause addressing environmental considerations in the performance of the work required. Specific Targets: The PBC continues to encourage staff to use the recycling/shredder bins provided for paper and plastic, to reduce paper usage by using electronic alternatives, encourage staff to minimize printing and copying, print double-sided and avoid printing in colour. With the implementation of the Electronic File (E-File), Board members will be able to access decision-making information electronically thus eliminating paper handling. This project is expected to be completed (i.e., incorporated into the day-to-day business of the PBC) by the end of 2016-17. Green Procurement Training: The PBC has only one Contracting Management Advisor and the employee completed the Canada School of Public Service online course C215 in May 2008. Training on Green Procurement will continue to be provided to key acquisition cardholders and managers involved with acquisitions on an ongoing basis. Performance Evaluations: In 2015-16, the PBC ensured that an objective to take environmental considerations into account for all procurement activities was included in the performance agreement of our Contracting Management Advisor.

Reporting on the User Fees Act

General and Financial Information by Fee

Fee name	Record Suspension User fee ($631.00)
Fee type	Other Products and Services
Fee-setting authority	User Fees Act (UFA)
Year introduced	2012
Year last amended	2012
Performance standard	Record suspension applications for summary convictions are processed within 6 months of application acceptance; record suspension applications for indictable offences are processed within 12 months of application acceptance; and, record suspension applications that the PBC is proposing to deny are processed within 24 months of application acceptance.
Performance results	In 2015-16, the PBC received a total of 12,384 record suspension applications and accepted 8,901 for processing. The accepted applications were successfully processed within the established standards at 99.99%. Average processing time for files: Containing offences tried summarily; 151 days; Containing offences tried by indictment; 282 days; and Where the PBC refused to order a record suspension; 242 days.
Other information	In February 2012, PBC moved to a full cost recovery model for record suspensions, which resulted in a further increase of the user fee to $631. It is significant to note that the new fee structure imposed according to the User Fees Act requires new service standards for the processing of a record suspension application. PBC is currently resourced to manage all new applications received under the $631 user fee in accordance with the new service standards. Consequently, the implementation of the new user fee required PBC to shift its focus to exclusively process applications received under the new user fee regime.

The figures below represent the re-spendable revenue portion of the fee.

Financial Information, 2015-16 (dollars)

Forecast Revenue	Actual Revenue	Full Cost
4,700,000	4,183,470	4,547,833

Financial Information, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 (dollars)

Planning Years
Fiscal Year	Forecast Revenue	Estimated
2016-17	4,230,000	5,005,438
2017-18	4,230,000	4,836,962
2018-19	4,230,000	4,836,962

General and Financial Information by Fee

Fee name	Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act (ATIA)
Fee type	Regulatory Service
Fee-setting authority	Access to Information Act (ATIA)
Year introduced	1983
Year last amended	1992
Performance standard	Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request. The ATIA provides fuller details.
Performance results	Response times 96% within Performance Standard (ATIA): Total 44 requests within 30 days = 37 requests; 31-60 days = 5 requests; 61-120 days = 0 requests; over 121 days = 2 requests. Response times 65% within Performance Standard (Privacy Act): Total 1037 requests: within 30 days = 541 requests; 31-60 days = 214 requests; 61-120 days = 3 requests; over 121 days = 279 requests.
Other information

Financial Information, 2015-16 (dollars)

Forecast Revenue	Actual Revenue	Full Cost
0	210	328,513

Financial Information, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 (dollars)

Planning Years
Fiscal Year	Forecast Revenue	Estimated
2016-17	0	330,000
2017-18	0	330,000
2018-19	0	330,000

Summary of Financial Information for All User Fees and Regulatory Charges

Summary of Financial Information for All User Fees and Regulatory Charges, 2015–16 (dollars)

	Forecast revenue	Actual revenue	Full cost
Regulatory subtotal	0	210	328,513
Other products and services subtotal	4,700,000	4,183,470	4,547,833
Total, all fee types	4,700,000	4,183,680	4,876,346

Summary of Financial Information for All User Fee Totals, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 (dollars)

	Planning year	Forecast revenue	Estimated full cost
Regulatory subtotal	2016–17	0	330,000
	2017–18	0	330,000
	2018–19	0	330,000
Other products and services subtotal	2016–17	4,230,000	5,005,438
	2017–18	4,230,000	4,836,962
	2018–19	4,230,000	4,836,962
Total, all fee types	2016–17	4,230,000	5,335,438
	2017–18	4,230,000	5,166,962
	2018–19	4,230,000	5,166,962

Reporting on the Policy on Service Standards for External Fees

General Information by Fee

External fee name	Record Suspension Fee - $631
Service Standard	Record suspension applications for summary convictions are processed within six months of application acceptance; record suspension applications for indictable offences are processed within 12 months of application acceptance; and, record suspension applications that the PBC is proposing to deny are processed within 24 months of acceptance.
Performance Result	Average processing time for files: - containing offences tried summarily: 151 days; - containing offences tried by indictment: 282 days; and - where the Board refused to order a record suspension: 242 days. The accepted applications were successfully processed within the established standards at 99.99%.
Stakeholder Consultation	The service standard was established as a result of the requirements under the User Fees Act (UFA). The most recent consultation was in February 2011. This consisted of: an on-line public consultation; a meeting with other government departments (OGDs); and a consultation meeting with external stakeholders.
Other information	A re-examination of the original user fee costing assumptions from 2012 is presently underway to determine whether the current fee continues to be valid. The use of an independent contracted the firm was engaged to complete the costing review. The exercise included a review of the previously undertaken work to determine the current record suspension user fee. Additionally, an online consultation has been conducted with key stakeholders (i.e., general public, criminal justice system partners, individuals who have a criminal record, record suspension companies, offender advocacy groups, and Indigenous groups) to get their input on the record suspension user fee regime. Through this exercise potential modifications will be identified for the record suspension program as its associated user fee.

Page details

Date modified:: 2019-01-14

Language selection

Search