ARCHIVED - Official Languages Program in Organizations Subject to the Act (Audit Guide) - March 1996

Objective no. 1

To determine equitable participation by members of both official languages groups and to determine whether the composition of the organization's workforce reflects the presence of both communities, taking into account the nature of the institution, its mandate, the public it serves and the location of its offices.

1.1.1

Verify the language requirements of positions and duties in order to determine whether the profiles are based on the organization's real needs, taking into account its mandate/nature and its clients.

1.1.2

Substantiate, by means of a review of relevant documents, the mechanisms in place to monitor the composition of the workforce and the measures taken to improve the participation of the two official groups where appropriate:

• official languages plan;
• analysis of the linguistic composition of the workforce to determine its appropriateness;
• analysis of participation trends;
• analysis of staffing actions in order to ensure that both groups are reached;
• analysis of personnel movements;
• study of the linguistic composition of employees in the office, the institution, the region and the province;
• short- and long-term human resources planning;
• use of unilingual positions; and
• use of language training.

1.1.3

Analyse competition notices in order to determine whether they provide equitable access to members of both linguistic groups.

1.1.4

Examine the measures taken to attract applicants from both linguistic groups (e.g. when competitions are open to applicants from outside federal institutions; meetings with minority groups, contacts with minority official language associations or educational institutions, advertising in the minority media, etc.).

1.1.5

Verify the linguistic ability of selection boards in order to determine whether they are taking into account the presence of both official language communities, given the nature, the service, the public and the location of the unit subject to the audit.

Objective no. 1

To determine whether the process of identifying the language requirements of positions and/or duties and the level of proficiency required is based on actual needs directly related to the performance of the duties.

1.1.1

Examine work descriptions and Official Languages Input Forms (OLIF) in order to determine whether the language requirements have been identified on the basis of actual duties and not by reference to the level of language proficiency of the incumbents.

1.1.2

Determine, using a sample of a few positions recently established or reviewed, whether identification of language requirements is based on actual needs (service to the public, personal and central services, etc.) ²⁷

²⁷ The guide for the identification of the language requirements of positions (Appendix H) can be used for this purpose.

1.1.3

Examine the linguistic profiles of all employees and positions or of a sample of employees and positions and determine the extent to which they meet needs.

1.1.4

Interview managers and employees in the units in order to determine whether the positions or the duties are identified on the basis of operational needs and not by reference to the level of language proficiency of the incumbents.

1.1.5

Interview employees occupying bilingual positions to determine whether they have the opportunity to use the other official language and to determine the frequency of use of the second language.

1.1.6

Verify whether language training is offered to employees whose positions are identified as bilingual and determine whether employees have the opportunity to practice and use their second language when they return from language training.

1.1.7

Examine the criteria which managers use to identify the language requirements of positions/duties.

1.1.8

Examine procedures and guidelines for identifying the language requirements of positions/duties in order to determine whether they are relevant and comply with the policies of the institution and of the Treasury Board.

1.1.9

Analyze the ratios of bilingual positions to unilingual English positions and unilingual French positions in the work unit and determine whether they are appropriate.

1.2.1

Conduct interviews with managers and employees in the work units or use some other means to determine whether the level of proficiency required is based on the actual duties of the position and not on the level of language proficiency of the incumbent.

1.2.2

Based on a sample of a few positions recently established or reviewed, evaluate whether the level of language proficiency is based on actual needs and makes it possible to effectively perform the duties of the position in the official language or languages required (was an expert contacted to ensure that the linguistic profile of the position was properly identified and is realistic?).

Objective no. 2

To determine whether the staffing process²⁹ is based on the criteria outlined in the Treasury Board policy.

²⁹ With regards to selection boards in particular, and their linguistic capacity refer Language of Work, Objective no. 1, criterion 1.5, and to Equitable Participation, Objective no. 1, criterion 1.1.

2.1.1

Review imperative staffing files in order to determine whether the criteria for using imperative staffing are followed and whether the nature of the duties of each position, the degree of operational impact of the duties and the type of position justify using imperative staffing.

2.1.2

Interview managers and staffing advisors in order to determine whether there are alternatives to imperative staffing to provide services (language training, reorganization of resources, temporary hiring, etc.). Review the organization's plans to rectify the situation, where applicable. Identify the measures taken to endeavor to resolve the situation before using imperative staffing.

Objective no. 3

To verify the continuity of services in both official languages, where the Act so requires, when an employee is on language training, is exempted from the obligation to meet the language requirements of the position or has incumbent's rights.

3.1.1

Determine whether and how services are provided in both official languages on a continuous basis. If they are not, review the steps, such as administrative arrangements, management plans to take to rectify the situation (part-time staff, temporary transfer, agency personnel, automated services, translation services, etc.).

3.1.2

Determine whether the services provided (verbal, written and automated communications, voice mail) in the other official language are of comparable quality by playing the role of client, by conducting a survey of clients, by examining the correspondence and forms faxed, by studying the measures taken while the incumbent is on language training, by reviewing work planning, etc.

Objective no. 4

To determine whether eligibility for language training complies with the policy and with the administrative rules governing language training services.

4.1.1

Determine, by examining performance appraisals and language training plans and through interviews, whether the language training needs have been identified:

• linguistic identification of all positions (date applicants were referred for screening, date of request for training, estimated duration of training, date of departure and date of return from training, measures taken to provide services during training); and
• level of language proficiency attained and to be attained.

4.1.2

Examine non-imperative staffing files in order to determine whether a language training plan was formulated within three months following the appointment (according to the new rules, effective on April 14, 1996, the incumbent must meet the linguistic profile of the position within 24 months following each appointment).

4.1.3

Determine whether the language training plan is followed.

4.1.4

Verify whether the number of requests for extension of the exemption period in the case of non-imperative staffing is not excessive and unjustifiable.

4.1.5

If there has been a change in level (A, B, C), review the criteria which justified the change (such as service needs) and determine their rationale.

Objective no. 5

To determine whether senior management has the necessary mechanisms to plan, coordinate and control the costs of language training, translation and the bilingualism bonus and to measure, where applicable, the effectiveness of suppliers.

5.1.1

Interview managers and employees in order to evaluate the application of the internal policy on language training and the extent to which it enables the organization to meet its objectives:

• language training priorities for staffing purposes;
• human resources planning;
• screening to determine the duration of training and the learning capability; and
• return from language training (familiarization period, interim measures).

5.2.1

Examine the mechanisms in place to enable the employee to put the training received into practice and the particular measures which management is taking or plans to take when the employee returns from language training to enable him to obtain maximum benefit from this training.

5.2.2

Identify and evaluate mechanisms for selecting suppliers (for non-statutory language training) and the follow-up measures for evaluating the quality of the training received, for achieving economies of scale, etc., through interviews with managers and those responsible for official languages.

Objective no. 6

To determine whether there is an internal policy on producing texts in both official languages and that this policy supports the principles of effectiveness, efficiency and economy, taking into account the purpose and the audience for which each text is intended.

6.1.1

Review the internal policy on producing texts in both official languages, including translation, in order to determine whether it includes:

measures that will ensure, before production starts, that the text is really required in both official languages;

measures that ensure comparable quality of texts in each language; and

cost control measures in order to avoid unnecessary translations.

By means of interviews with managers and persons responsible for official languages:

6.1.2

Identify the mechanisms in place to enable management to procure translation services as effectively and economically as possible (Translation Bureau vs. private sector, quality control and assessment of translations, identification of opportunities to take advantage of economies of scale, etc.).

6.1.3

Determine whether, where applicable, the unit is using its bilingual capability for the translation of short, simple, administrative texts, whether this workload is distributed fairly and whether the associated costs are calculated and reasonable (i.e. more economical than suppliers of translation services).

6.1.4

Determine all the means other than translation used to produce documents in both official languages and determine whether the most effective and most efficient means are chosen in each case.

6.1.5

Examine the contracts for goods and services to determine whether the institution or the unit also uses them to acquire documents requested in the other official language.

6.2.1

Review the texts produced in both official languages in order to evaluate and compare their quality.

6.2.2

Examine and evaluate the measures in place for ensuring the quality of texts.

6.2.3

Evaluate the level of language proficiency of the persons assigned to conduct quality control of texts, notably by examining their career history, their training and the quality of the final version of the texts produced.

6.2.4

Review the linguistic quality, technical terminology and terminological uniformity of documents produced in both official languages.

6.3.1

Verify whether translation needs are planned, notably whether translation is included in the various stages of document production.

6.3.2

Review existing cost control mechanisms, for example, budgetary follow-up, translation guidelines (when is it necessary to translate, what alternatives are available, how to use them, etc.).

6.3.3

Determine whether the decisions taken are the most economical and, where applicable, evaluate their rationale, for example, by comparing and calculating the real cost of using a particular supplier.

6.3.4

Identify the criteria used by managers to decide to use a particular supplier rather than another and determine whether this is the most effective, efficient and economical use of resources.

Objective no. 7

To determine whether the eligibility conditions for the bilingualism bonus are met and that there is a mechanism for confirming this or for requesting a SLE in order to justify it.

7.1.1

Review the organization's internal policy in order to determine whether it complies with the Treasury Board policy.

7.1.2

Review the language requirements of the positions in the organization and verify whether the incumbents of bilingual positions who receive the bonus meet the language requirements of their positions (date of last SLE, date of confirmation, observations, interviews):

• obtain a list of employees who receive the bilingualism bonus; and
• examine the measures planned in cases where employees are receiving the bonus but are no longer entitled to it.

7.2.1

Interview managers and those responsible for official languages to identify the method used for confirming the bilingualism bonus (the SLE results are valid for an indeterminate period, as long as the employee continues to occupy the same position³¹; however, the manager can require the employee to take another test in case of doubt; if the position was properly identified, the incumbent should normally use the second language on a regular basis).

³¹ However, they are valid only for 5 years for staffing purposes. In other words an incumbent of the same position for a period of seven years, as an example, must undergo a new SLE if he enters a competition. According to the new regulations effective April 1st, 1996, in a non-imperative staffing action, an incumbent has a 24-month exemption period to meet the linguistic requirements of the position.

Objective no. 8

To verify that data on official languages are accurate, complete and up-to-date and that they make it possible to monitor the implementation of the official languages program and to measure and verify the results.

8.1.1

Interview the persons responsible for entering official languages data in order to determine what means exist to ensure the integrity of the information (list of errors, reconciliations with PCIS, pay system, data provided to the TBS, hours of reported language training³¹ etc.)

³¹ It should be noted that effective April 1st, 1996, organizations no longer have to record data pertaining to language training in the Language Training Module (LTM). However they must ensure that candidates do not exceed the maximum number of hours of language training deemed necessary to meet the required competency level.

8.1.2

Compare data sources and reports produced by the systems.

8.1.3

Determine whether data verification mechanisms exist.

8.1.4

Determine what measures are taken to quickly correct any deficiencies in official languages information systems.

8.2.1

Review management reports on official languages and previous audit reports and interview managers in order to determine whether the reports are useful for the decision-making process:

• does the information make it possible to identify any deficiencies and points to be improved?
• does the information cover all aspects of the program?
• can managers make decisions and plan based on this information?
• are the data reliable? If not, what is being done to improve the situation?
• review the organization and the nature of the data.

8.2.2

Review official languages letters of understanding or agreement between the Treasury Board and the institution, the multi-year plan and annual management reports in order to determine whether accountability, objectives and attainment of the objectives are clearly reported, whether the official languages program is a part of the overall objectives of the organization and of the performance appraisals of managers, etc.

8.2.3

Verify whether corrective measures have been taken to correct deficiencies in the official languages information systems and whether follow-up has been done.

8.2.4

Analyze previous audit reports and any follow-up action taken.

Objective no. 9

To determine whether the institution has an appropriate infrastructure for managing and monitoring the implementation of the official languages program.

9.1.1

Interview the persons responsible for official languages in order to determine whether someone in the institution has been designated to be responsible for program management, notably with respect to planning, formulation of policies, coordination, communications and information, control, follow-up and management reports.

9.1.2

Review the mandate, roles and responsibilities of those responsible for official languages and line managers and determine the extent to which the infrastructure facilitates good program management.

9.1.3

Determine whether those responsible for program management have the power and authority necessary to effectively perform their duties.

9.1.4

Examine the institution's official languages accountability process and framework and evaluate its effectiveness.

9.1.5

Determine whether those responsible for official languages are informed of the official languages situation in all regions and sectors of the institution and that they have the means and the authority to recommend corrective measures.

9.1.6

Interview a sample of managers in order to determine if they know to whom to turn to obtain an opinion or advice.

9.2.1

Review the organization's operational planning process and determine whether and how the official languages planning process is a part of it.

9.2.2

Determine whether and in what manner line managers participate in the preparation of the corporate plan. Review the official languages activities included in the operational plan:

• language training;
• identification of the language requirements of positions;
• follow-up of language training;
• work standards with respect to service to the public, equitable participation;
• action to be taken to solve problems;
• use of translation; and
• program budget.

9.2.3

Determine the accountability of managers with respect to official languages in terms of the attainment of the objectives set out in the operational plan.

9.3.1

By means of interviews with those responsible for official languages in the institution, determine the processes for handling complaints involving official languages, for coordination with the central agencies (committees, working groups, formal and informal networks) and for internal communications (policies, advice and guidance, preparation and review of plans, etc.) and determine whether they function in a satisfactory manner (for example, fast and accurate information).

9.3.2

Review the files on official languages complaints and determine whether there is an information and feedback mechanism which makes it possible to follow up the corrective action taken.

9.3.3

Determine whether mechanisms exist for exchanging information and sharing sound management practices and for fostering the pursuit of excellence in the area of official languages.

9.4.1

Interview line managers and those responsible for official languages in the organization in order to identify the corporate objectives to be attained and the official languages activities.

9.4.2

Review official languages plans and reports to determine whether there is a link between the institution's overall objectives and the objectives of the official languages program, notably with respect to the management of support mechanisms such as translation and language training, etc.

9.4.3

Determine whether variances relative to the budget and to objectives are identified and analyzed. Following this analysis, determine whether the measures/actions deemed necessary are identified and followed up.

10.1.1

Examine communications from senior management to determine if they are in both official languages.

10.1.2

Examine minutes of meetings held by senior management to determine if they are available in both official languages.

10.1.3

Interview a sample of managers in order to determine the nature and extent of their commitment to official languages.

10.1.4

Examine directives and instructions issued by senior management to determine the importance given therein to official languages matters.

10.1.5

Review the performance criteria of a sample of executives and employees in order to determine to what extent the official languages are taken into account.

10.1.6

Analyze the official languages accountability framework and its related means and instruments, as well as their follow-up in order to measure senior management's commitment.

10.1.7

Examine the program's management infrastructure to determine whether it allows senior management to keep informed of the situation regarding official languages and to take necessary measures.

10.1.8

Carry out a survey among a sample of employees to evaluate employees' perception as to senior management's commitment in respect of official languages.