ARCHIVED - Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
2006-2007
Departmental Performance Report
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
The Honourable Diane Finley
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Table of Contents
Section 1: Overview
Message from the Chairperson
Management Representation Statement
Summary Information
Section 2: Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome
Common Elements
Refugee Protection Program Activity
Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity
Immigration Appeal Program Activity
Section 3: Supplementary Information
Organizational Information
Overview of Financial Performance
Section 4: Other Items of Interest
Corporate Management and Services Program Activity
Management Accountability Framework Assessment
Integrated Accountability Framework
Public Service Renewal
Information and Contacts
Section 1: Overview
Message from the Chairperson
I am pleased to present the 2006-2007 Departmental Performance Report for the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB). This report is my first opportunity as incoming Chairperson to provide a comprehensive review of the IRB's performance and accomplishments with reference to the stated plans and priorities for 2006-2007.
The IRB is an independent tribunal entrusted by Parliament with resolving cases, which includes making well-reasoned decisions, on immigration and refugee matters fairly and efficiently. In doing so, the Board contributes directly to Canada's humanitarian traditions, the security of Canada and the quality of life of Canadians. The dedication and integrity of our members and staff are vital to the IRB's success in fulfilling its mandate and ensuring that it maintains the trust and confidence of those who appear before it, Parliament and the Canadian public.
The past year has been marked by significant transition at the Board. We have seen changes in senior management ranks, the departure of experienced members and the reversal of a decline in the number of refugee claim referrals. Clarity of vision and continuity are important under such circumstances. I have made it a priority since taking the helm of the IRB in March 2007 to consolidate and reinforce the excellent work undertaken by my predecessor to make the IRB a more flexible and integrated institution. At the same time, I hold firmly to a vision of the Board where support for excellence, consistency, efficiency, accountability and independence of decision-making is the yardstick by which all our activities and initiatives are measured. By keeping this vision uppermost in our minds, we can remain focused on the IRB's core business-the resolution of immigration and refugee matters fairly, efficiently and quickly, in accordance with the law and as informally as the circumstances permit.
Our transformation agenda
It is critical that the IRB be able to respond effectively in a complex and ever-changing environment in which we have no control over the number or kinds of cases that come before us. We are therefore continuing to implement a multi-faceted transformation agenda aimed at further strengthening our operations to ensure that all of our Board members, irrespective of division, are competent, well-equipped and supported.
Implementation of the proposals arising from the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) Innovation initiative began in 2006-2007, with the aim of transforming the IAD into a more flexible and proactive division. The measures adopted are already achieving positive results: they are streamlining case resolution processes and generating operational efficiencies without compromising fairness. The IRB also continued to pursue the integration of common procedural, administrative and other activities across the three divisions. This initiative, supported by a comprehensive human resources (HR) plan designed to provide our people with the skills and competencies required in an integrated tribunal, reached a number of significant milestones during the reporting period, including the establishment of the new Tribunal Officer position, which will support the work of all divisions.
Operational and management enhancements
Throughout the year we continued to strengthen many of our systems and processes in pursuit of greater operational efficiency and accountability. In its 2006-2007 Management Accountability Framework Assessment, the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) recognized the IRB for putting a strong emphasis on the importance of accountability and modernization and for its work on improving management.
In line with the Government of Canada's commitment to achieve greater transparency for and accountability to Canadians, we extended management controls in key areas and implemented a management plan that is fully integrated across the organization.
In addition, we made significant progress in enhancing case management processes at the IRB with the launch of the Integrated Case Management System (ICMS) at the close of the reporting period.
Strengthening the member appointment process
Our members' work requires an extensive knowledge of immigration, refugee and administrative law and principles, such as natural justice. On a daily basis, Board members conduct proceedings and render decisions that have a profound impact on the lives, freedom and security of both the persons appearing before them and Canadians in general. Selection standards for new members are therefore high to ensure that they are qualified and possess the appropriate experience, skills and competencies. Throughout 2006-2007 the IRB collaborated with the Government of Canada to identify opportunities for further strengthening the existing merit-based member selection process for Governor-in-Council (GIC) appointments.
Stakeholder engagement
Canada's immigration and refugee determination system is recognized as among the finest and most innovative in the world. Our stakeholders have contributed significantly to this success, both through the regular exchange of views and perspectives and the provision of feedback and advice on new initiatives. For example, in 2006-2007 our stakeholders were important contributors in consultations held for IAD Innovation and the new Guideline on Procedures with Respect to Vulnerable Persons Appearing Before the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (Guideline 8), which was released in December 2006. The IRB was also active in networking with other Canadian tribunals through organizations such as the Council of Canadian Administrative Tribunals (CCAT).
Canada's international role
The IRB also continued to reach out to its international counterparts during the reporting period, benefiting from the exchange of expertise and best practices through participation in international fora such as the International Association of Refugee Law Judges (IARLJ), the Executive Committee of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (EXCOM) and the Intergovernmental Consultations on Asylum, Refugee and Migration Policies in Europe, North America and Australia (IGC). In addition, an agreement signed between the IRB and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) enabled us to send a number of employees on short-term assignments to provide training and guidance to UNHCR staff overseas.
Delivering results for Canadians
The Immigration Division (ID) concluded more cases than projected in 2006-2007, while the IAD made productivity gains through innovative adjudication strategies and case management practices. However, because of an increase in new cases and delays in member appointments and reappointments, the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) and the IAD were unable to finalize as many cases as anticipated in the plans for the year. Notwithstanding these challenges, only a small fraction-less than one percent-of IRB decisions reviewed by the Federal Court was set aside during the reporting period.
The challenges ahead
The year ahead promises to be challenging for the IRB. Without sufficient member resources in place, we will continue to experience an impact on the efficiency and timeliness of our decision-making. While we are taking all available measures to mitigate the effects on those appearing before us, we look forward to working with the Government over the coming months to reach a positive and sustainable resolution of our member complement situation in the RPD and the IAD.
We will also continue to pursue ways of promoting consistency in procedure and outcome, while respecting adjudicative independence. At the same time, we remain committed to moving forward with a transformation agenda that will allow us to achieve even better results for Canadians. Our members and staff play a critical role in the pursuit of our objectives, and given their dedication, creativity and adaptability, I am confident of our success.
Brian Goodman
Chairperson
Management Representation Statement
I submit for tabling in Parliament, the 2006-2007 Departmental Performance Report (DPR) for the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada.
This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in the Guide for the Preparation of Part III of the 2006-2007 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Reports:
- It adheres to the specific reporting requirements outlined in the Treasury Board Secretariat guidance;
- It is based on the department's approved Strategic Outcome(s) and Program Activity Architecture that were approved by the Treasury Board;
- It presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and reliable information;
- It provides a basis of accountability for the results achieved with the resources and authorities entrusted to it; and
- It reports finances based on approved numbers from the Estimates and the Public Accounts of Canada.
Brian Goodman
Chairperson
Summary Information
Raison d'être
Who we are
The IRB is an independent administrative tribunal that reports to the Parliament of Canada through the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC).
As an organization responsible for applying administrative justice, the IRB adheres to the principles of natural justice, and its decisions are rendered in accordance with the law, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This mandate is reflected in our mission, vision and values, which help shape our corporate priorities and identify the qualities we strive to embody. It also guides our day-to-day decisions, to ensure that everyone and their work at the IRB are aligned with our mission and our vision for the future.
Table 1.1: The IRB Mission, Vision and Values
| MISSION | |
| The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada is an independent tribunal established by the Parliament of Canada. Our mission, on behalf of Canadians, is to make well-reasoned decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly, and in accordance with the law. | |
| VISION | VALUES |
| We will excel in everything we do and will deal simply, quickly and fairly with everyone. Through innovation and flexibility, we will be a leading-edge administrative tribunal and a creative partner in building the future of the Canadian immigration system. |
|
The IRB is fully committed to applying fairness to all aspects of its work, which in turn means being just, lawful, honest, open and without bias. This includes recognizing that some individuals who appear before the IRB have experienced very difficult circumstances, and respecting the diversity of cultures of individuals who appear before the IRB. Most importantly, it means recognizing that the determination of each case directly and profoundly affects people's lives.
What we do
As Canada's largest federal tribunal, the IRB employed approximately 942 people at its headquarters and in regional offices in 2006-2007. The IRB consists of three divisions, each of which has its own mandate under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA):
Table 1.2: The IRB Division Mandates
| Refugee Protection Division (RPD) |
|
| Immigration Division (ID) |
|
| Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) |
|
Through each division, the IRB generally delivers a simpler and faster form of justice than that provided by the courts, but with no less attentiveness to the rigour of the law and its application to the particular facts of each case. The IRB is a human rights tribunal, and the women and men who work at the Board respect the human dignity of all those who come before it.
The three decision-making divisions are supported by corporate management and services that include a range of HR, legal services, communications, strategic planning, audit and evaluation, risk management, values and ethics, financial services, information technology, security and management activities, and provide the IRB with efficient management processes and administrative services while promoting organizational effectiveness.
Benefits to Canadians
Immigrants and refugees have always made significant contributions to Canada's growth and development. In the delivery of its mandate, the IRB benefits Canadians in three important ways:
- Its hearings on refugee claims ensure that Canada accepts those in need of protection in accordance with international obligations and Canadian law;
- Its hearings on admissibility and detention reviews help ensure the security of Canadians; and
- Its independent mechanism for resolving sponsorship, removal order and permanent residence status appeals ensures fairness of process for appellants and their families.
Through the decisions it makes, the IRB also contributes more broadly to the quality of life of Canada's communities by strengthening our country's social fabric, and by reflecting and reinforcing core values that are important to Canadians. These include respect for:
- Human rights
- Equality
- Fairness
- Peace
- Rule of law
IRB Logic Model
What we do, what we produce and the impact of these activities are captured in the following diagram. It represents a dynamic process in which information is shared throughout the IRB to ensure that everyone at the IRB is focused on the appropriate activities and outputs in order to achieve the expected results and benefits for Canadians.
Figure 1.1: The IRB Logic Model
(Click on image to enlarge)
Total Financial and Human Resources
The following tables provide summary data on the 2006-2007 total financial and human resources of the IRB.
Table 1.3: Total Financial and Human Resources for 2006-2007
| Total Financial Resources ($ millions) | ||
| Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
| 116.8 | 119.3 | 110.4 |
| Spending planned for the fiscal year as presented in the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities. | Level of spending authorized by the Government. | Amounts actually spent during the 2006-2007 fiscal year as presented in the Public Accounts. |
| Total Human Resources | ||
| Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 1,050 | 942 | (108) |
| Full-time equivalents planned for the fiscal year as presented in the 2006-2007 Report on Plans and Priorities. | Full-time equivalents actually used during the 2006-2007 fiscal year. | The difference between planned and actual full-time equivalents utilization. |
IRB Strategic Outcome, Strategic Priorities and Program Activities
This section provides information at the organizational level on the IRB's strategic outcome, strategic priorities and program activities.
IRB Strategic Outcome
Based on its legislated mandate, the IRB's single strategic outcome is as follows:
To provide Canadians with well-reasoned decisions on immigration and refugee matters rendered efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law.
IRB Strategic Priorities
To achieve its strategic outcome, the IRB developed four strategic priorities for 2006-2007. These contribute to the achievement of the IRB's strategic outcome by ensuring that the Board's plans, activities and expected results emphasize high quality, consistency and efficiency across the organization, foster an open environment that values its people, and promote flexibility, accountability and continual improvement.
Table 1.4: The IRB Strategic Priorities for 2006-2007
| 2006-2007 STRATEGIC PRIORITIES |
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. |
| Integrate common procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities in all divisions to further promote quality, consistency and efficiency measures. |
| Continue to build an organizational culture that supports its people, and is flexible and innovative. |
| Improve case management processes through the successful implementation of ICMS. |
| Implement a horizontal and fully integrated management plan that reflects the IRB's reality. |
IRB Program Activities
Based on the IRB's Program Activity Architecture (PAA), as approved by the TBS, the work of the IRB and its divisions is conducted through four program activities. The first three are responsible for all the tribunal decisions made at the IRB and the fourth is responsible for all the corporate management and services at the IRB.
Table 1.5: The IRB Program Activity Architecture
| Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada |
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. |
| Program Activity Architecture |
| Program Activity: Refugee Protection |
|
| Program Activity: Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews |
|
| Program Activity: Immigration Appeal |
|
| Program Activity: Corporate Management and Services |
|
The following table outlines the key results and performance status of the IRB's four program activities in achieving both the IRB's strategic priorities and strategic outcome.
Table 1.6: The IRB Performance Status
| 2006-2007 Strategic Priorities ($ millions) | |
| Planned Spending: 116.8 | Actual Spending: 110.4 |
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. | |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY 1 Integrate common procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities in all divisions to further promote quality, consistency and efficiency measures |
|
| Planned Spending: 87.7 | Actual Spending: 76.9 |
| Program Activity: Refugee Protection, Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews, Immigration Appeal, Corporate Management and Services | |
Results:
|
|
| Type: Previously committed | Performance Status: Successfully met* |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY 2 Continue to build an organizational culture that supports its people, and is flexible and innovative |
|
| Planned Spending: 1.4 | Actual Spending: 1.3 |
| Program Activity: Refugee Protection, Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews, Immigration Appeal, Corporate Management and Services | |
Results:
|
|
| Type: Ongoing | Performance Status: Successfully met* |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY 3 Improve case management processes through the successful implementation of ICMS |
|
| Planned Spending: 9.5 | Actual Spending: 10.9 |
| Program Activity: Refugee Protection, Corporate Management and Services | |
Results:
|
|
| Type: Ongoing | Performance Status: Successfully met* |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY 4 Implement a horizontal and fully integrated management plan that reflects the IRB's reality |
|
| Planned Spending: 18.2 | Actual Spending: 21.3 |
| Program Activity: Corporate Management and Services | |
Results:
|
|
| Type: Ongoing | Performance Status: Successfully met* |
*Note: These are ongoing, multi-year strategic priorities.
During 2006-2007 the IRB made strides in achieving its initiatives under each strategic priority, as indicated in the table above. Productivity gains were experienced by both the Immigration Appeal program activity and the Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews program activity. Efforts continue to integrate common procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities across the organization, and the IRB completed the development of ICMS. However, the IRB also faced challenges in all three program activities, especially with respect to the appointments and reappointments of members and the attrition of senior managers.
Progress was also made in implementing a fully integrated management plan by ensuring risk management is a key part of planning and management activities, and in implementing an integrated learning and professional development program for all IRB personnel.
Operating Environment
Throughout 2006-2007 the IRB continued to carry out its mandate within a complex and ever-changing environment. As is always the case, both international and domestic factors can influence the Board's working environment and context. For example, conflicts and country conditions abroad may result in refugee movements, which in turn can affect the number of refugee protection claims made in Canada. The same is true of unanticipated shifts in international patterns of migration, which can affect the number of people seeking admission to Canada.
In terms of intake and workload among the three IRB divisions, this lack of predictability was a key aspect of the operating environment in which the IRB delivered its mandate during 2006-2007. The downward trend in the number of refugee claims seen in Canada over the previous four years began to shift and referrals of claims for refugee protection showed an increase. Driven by an increase in sponsorship appeals, the number of immigration appeal cases filed with the IRB also grew. In addition, the Immigration Division experienced an increase in the volume of admissibility hearings and detention reviews.
This lack of predictability remained a key aspect of the operating environment in which the IRB delivered on its mandate over 2005-2006. The downward trend in the number of refugee claims seen in Canada and globally over recent years continued in 2005-2006. At the same time, the number of immigration appeal cases filed with the Board — particularly sponsorship appeals — increased, while the volume of admissibility hearings and detention reviews remained fairly stable.
Declining claims for asylum continue
Over the past three years the Western countries have, in general, experienced a significant and sustained decline in receiving claims for asylum. However, Canada and the United States have experienced an increase in refugee claimants: 16% more claims were referred to the IRB in the 2006 calendar year than in 2005. In terms of fiscal year 2006-2007, referrals were 12% above the 2005-2006 total and 6% above the projections in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities.
Figure 1.2: Refugee Claims for Western Countries (2004-2006)
(Click on image to enlarge)
Mexico was the top source country for refugee protection claims in Canada during 2006-2007, followed by China, Haiti and Colombia. However, the number of claims from Mexico far outpaced the other countries of origin: the number of claims from Mexico totalled more than the combined number of claims from the next three source countries.
Figure 1.3: Refugee Claims Filed (2004-2006)
(Click on image to enlarge)
Since 2004-2005 the intake from Canada and the United States has increased steadily, driven mainly by the upsurge in Mexican claims, and contrary to the trend in other Western countries of destination.
Increased family sponsorship appeals
Continuing a trend seen in recent years, the number of immigration appeals filed remained high in 2006-2007, up by 5% from 2005-2006 levels and 5% more than originally forecast in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities. Family sponsorship appeals were solely responsible for the increase.
Figure 1.4: Immigration Appeals Filed (2004-2006)
While the volume of residency obligation and removal order appeals decreased, family sponsorship appeals increased by 10% over the previous year. This can be attributed partially to the Government of Canada's commitment to family reunification and the associated efforts of CIC to process more family sponsorship applications, resulting in a greater number of appeals filed.
Detention reviews and admissibility hearings
Work volumes in the ID increased in 2006-2007, with 15,300 detention reviews finalized (versus 12,300 in 2005-2006) and 2,700 admissibility hearings finalized (versus 2,300 in 2005-2006). Detention reviews continued to be conducted within the specific time frames set out in the IRPA.
Figure 1.5: Detention Reviews and Admissibility Hearings Finalized (2004-2006)
The number of immigration cases is dependent on the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). The growth in the number of detention reviews is attributable mainly to the practice implemented in 2006-2007 to record cases resolved before opening.
Modernization and accountability
Public interest in the work of the IRB continues, along with a greater demand for accountability and transparency in government. Furthermore, the Government of Canada has made a strong commitment to accountability and brought into force the new Federal Accountability Act in December 2006. As noted in the Speech from the Throne on April 4, 2006, this Act will change the existing system of oversight and management by strengthening the rules and institutions that ensure transparency and accountability to Canadians. The IRB continues to respond to this demand by improving performance reporting, integrating best business practices and implementing innovative processes.
Government-wide initiatives
Over the course of 2006-2007 the IRB implemented government-wide initiatives aimed at improving public sector management and strengthened its management practices in order to enhance the organization's overall performance. Initiatives included the implementation of the Government of Canada's Management, Resources and Results Structure (MRRS) Policy, the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) and HR modernization initiatives, and enhanced compliance with the Government Security Policy. These measures support the efforts of the IRB to build the requisite organizational capacity to sustain a high volume of decisions by ensuring that the necessary infrastructure and best management practices are in place.
Protocol addressing member conduct issues
The IRB was the first federal administrative tribunal to institute a formal process for addressing complaints about the conduct of decision-makers appointed to the IRB by the Governor in Council. Instituted in 1999, the Protocol Addressing Member Conduct Issues recognizes that high standards of conduct are required of public officials such as IRB decision-makers, whose decisions profoundly affect people's lives.
In 2006-2007, 12 complaints were filed under the Protocol. Of these complaints, one was found not to fall within the scope of the protocol, eight were unfounded, two were founded in part and one remains active. No appeals were filed.
Merit-based GIC member selection process
Canadians expect high levels of competence and ethical conduct from those who hold public office. A merit-based approach to the appointment of public officials in government is an important way for federal institutions to demonstrate credibility.
Although candidates for appointment to the IRB had been screened through written tests and interviews for many years, in March 2004 the IRB implemented a comprehensive new merit-based selection process for IRB GIC appointees. In November 2006, the Minister of CIC commissioned the Public Appointments Commission Secretariat (PACS) to review and make recommendations for improvements to the merit-based GIC member selection process. The proposed changes will strengthen the competency focus of the IRB selection process while increasing transparency and fairness.
Following the Minister's acceptance of the recommendations of the PACS (Harrison) Report in late March 2007, the IRB began to implement a revised selection process. Under the revised process, the Chairperson of the IRB is fully accountable for the selection of qualified candidates to be recommended to the Minister.
The selection process will continue to be an independent, transparent and merit-based process that will ensure that only qualified candidates are considered for appointment. The qualifications of candidates will be measured against a high standard of competence to ensure that skills, abilities and personal suitability are the basis for the appointment. All current members have been and will continue to be appraised against the competency standards.
Portfolio management
The IRB, the CBSA and CIC continued to collaborate on operational and portfolio matters throughout 2006-2007, while respecting each other's distinct mandates and the independence of the IRB's adjudicative functions.
Areas of collaboration included, but were not limited to:
- Drafting a trilateral Memorandum of Understanding between CIC, the CBSA and the IRB which, when finalized, will clearly define the administrative relationship between the three organizations while underlining the institutional independence of the IRB and its decision-makers;
- Ongoing work on the Simplified Information Gathering pilot project. Begun in the IRB's Eastern Region, the objective of this pilot project is to simplify the information gathering process, avoid duplication and improve the quality of the information gathered by portfolio organizations during the initial stages of making a claim for refugee protection in Canada; and
- Ongoing work on IAD Innovation regarding the earlier receipt of the appeal records from CIC overseas and the participation of the Minister's counsel in early informal efforts to resolve immigration appeals.
Figure 1.6: The IRB, CBSA and CIC Portfolio
(Click on image to enlarge)
Partners and agencies
The IRB continued to work closely with central agencies, including the Privy Council Office on GIC appointments of IRB members and on regulatory initiatives, and the TBS on program management and accountability. The IRB also works with Public Works and Government Services Canada on procurement and accommodation issues and with the Public Service Commission, the Canada Public Service Agency and the Canada School of Public Service on HR management issues. In addition, the IRB contributed to the 2006 and 2007 conferences of the CCAT. These meetings provide an opportunity for all Canadian administrative tribunals to learn about and share best practices and new approaches to emerging issues.
Stakeholders
The IRB's Consultative Committee on Practices and Procedures (CCPP) encourages systematic contact between the IRB and non-governmental stakeholders at the national level. The Committee is composed of representatives from the Canadian Council for Refugees, the Canadian Bar Association, the Refugee Lawyers Association, L'Association québécoise des avocats et des avocates en droit de l'immigration and the UNHCR. The CCPP provides a forum for consultation, advice, information sharing and the discussion of issues of mutual concern regarding procedures and practices.
The IRB convened two full CCPP meetings in addition to holding issue-specific teleconferences. Stakeholders were consulted on IRB initiatives, and regional offices held local meetings with immigration consultants and lawyers, bar associations, refugee and refugee law associations and non-governmental organizations.
International context
The IRB participated in various international events in 2006-2007, which enabled the Board to learn from its partners' best practices and to showcase IRB expertise. These included EXCOM, IGC, IARLJ and the European Union Network for Asylum Practitioners.
This year's highlights also include the delivery of information sessions on the IRB's activities to a number of foreign delegations, including government delegations from the United Kingdom, Mexico, the Netherlands and Russia. In addition, the IRB participated in bilateral information exchanges with counterparts in Argentina, Denmark, Sweden and the United States.
In response to a need identified by the UNHCR, the IRB also organized assignments to UNHCR field offices abroad in the context of the IRB/UNHCR International Assignment Program. This initiative was an opportunity for IRB employees to train UNHCR staff on refugee status determination issues. In 2006-2007 the IRB and the UNHCR organized four assignments in Ankara, Turkey; New Delhi, India; Moscow, Russia; and Nairobi, Kenya. The training delivered during these assignments focused on interview techniques, the assessment of credibility, inclusion/exclusion analysis, the drafting of interview notes, the drafting of refugee status determination assessment reports and the use of country of origin information.
Link to Government of Canada outcome areas
Canada's federal organizations play an important role in contributing to the quality of life of Canadians. All government policies, outcomes, departmental mandates and programs are directed at fulfilling this role. The IRB makes important contributions to the Government of Canada's outcome areas, which are presented in the following diagram.
Table 1.7: IRB Program Activity Links to Government of Canada Outcome Areas
| CONTRIBUTING TO THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF CANADIANS |
| IRB STRATEGIC OUTCOME Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. |
| GOVERNMENT OF CANADA OUTCOME AREAS |
| International A Safe and Secure World through International Cooperation |
| Through the work of the Refugee Protection Program Activity, Canada accepts those in need of protection. Canada provides a safe haven to persons with a well-founded fear of persecution, as well as to those who face a danger of torture or risk to their life or risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. |
| Social Safe and Secure Communities |
| Through the work of the Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity, the IRB recognizes the consequences of the decisions it makes with respect to enhancing public safety and protecting Canadian citizens. It is with this sense of responsibility that the IRB maintains the balance between individual rights and the security of Canadians. |
| Social A Diverse Society that Promotes Linguistic Duality and Social Inclusion |
| Through the sponsorship appeals work of the Immigration Appeal Program Activity, the IRB recognizes the contributions of immigrants to the strength and vitality of Canadian society and culture, as well as the Government of Canada's commitment to family reunification. Canada is a country enriched by the many different origins of its population. |
Section 2: Analysis of Program Activities by Strategic Outcome
This section provides detailed performance information on the stated plans and expected results presented in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities. The detailed information is based on the IRB's TBS-approved PAA and MRRS.
In 2006-2007 the IRB refined the performance measurement framework associated with its PAA. The framework is supporting the IRB in its efforts to develop common tribunal performance standards and selected performance indicators, which are presented in this section for the IRB's strategic outcome as well as for the IRB's three decision-making program activities.
The 2006-2007 IRB Departmental Performance Report marks the first time that the IRB uses the complete performance measurement framework to report on its outcomes. The IRB ensures it is focused on results, delivers value for money, is consistent with federal priorities, and continues to serve the purpose and mandate for which it was created.
In 2007-2008 the IRB will update its PAA and corresponding performance management framework by rolling up the current sub-program and sub sub-program activities into its program activities. This will produce a streamlined and efficient MRRS/PAA for the IRB that will more fully comply with TBS requirements.
Common Elements
The IRB Departmental Performance Report and the IRB Report on Plans and Priorities are based on the plans and expected results presented in an annually developed IRB Integrated Business Plan. A key part of both reports is the identification of the plans and expected results of the initiatives that are common to all three decision-making program activities, which contribute primarily to the achievement of the IRB's first two strategic priorities. These plans and results are presented in the table below.
Performance Highlights and Results
Key highlights of the common activities for 2006-2007 include completion and release of major policies and/or guidelines, reporting of key performance measures, development of competency profiles for tribunal support personnel, redeployment of decision-makers, including cross-training, and an integrated international program.
Table 2.1: Common Elements Plans and Results
| Common Elements: Plans and Results for 2006-2007 |
|
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. | |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Integrate common procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities in all divisions to further promote quality, consistency and efficiency measures |
|
| Plans | Results |
| Policy Instruments and Procedures | |
| Develop policies and procedures on dealing with Vulnerable Persons |
|
| Develop a standardized approach to how the IRB deals with cases involving non-disclosure of information (Section 86 cases) |
|
| Develop an IRB detention/security framework and implement selected elements across the divisions |
|
| Initiate the development of a common/shared policy on the use of videoconferencing |
|
| Performance Measures | |
| Initiate a standardized approach to present IRB performance indicators, including meaningful cross-divisional indicators, both quantitative and qualitative |
|
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Continue to build an organizational culture that supports its people, and is flexible and innovative |
|
| Plans | Results |
| Adjudicative Culture | |
| Develop and implement IRB common guidelines and procedures on how to interface and deal with counsel conduct |
|
| Continue to implement a competency-based HR management strategy across the IRB, including developing competency profiles for functional groups and tools to support their use |
|
| Implement a policy on redeployment between the RPD and the IAD allowing increased mobility between divisions |
|
| Introduce cross-training between divisions and joint training and professional development where appropriate |
|
| Provide strategic communications advice and information that reflect changes to procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities |
|
| International | |
| Within the International Program, divisions and Operations, define respective international priorities |
|
| Coordinate international conference participation |
|
The IRB Integrated Business Plan also identifies the plans, expected results and operations that are distinct to each program activity and that contribute to achieving the IRB's strategic priorities for 2006-2007. These are highlighted in the following detailed analyses of the IRB's three decision-making program activities. The detailed analysis for the Corporate Management and Services program activity is presented in Section 4.
Refugee Protection Program Activity
|
The Refugee Protection Division delivers the IRB's Refugee Protection program activity and plays a pivotal role in enabling the Board to achieve its strategic priorities and strategic outcome. A major share of IRB resources is committed to this program activity, which is focused on rendering quality decisions in a consistent, timely manner on refugee protection claims made in Canada. |
Performance Measurements and Indicators
Table 2.2: Refugee Protection Program Activity Total Financial and Human Resources
| Financial Resources ($ millions) | ||
| Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
| 86.4 | 86.3 | 81.4 |
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||
| Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 825 | 706 | (119) |
Performance Highlights and Results
In its ongoing quest for quality and consistency in decision-making, the rpd focused on training its members on country conditions and legal issues prevailing in its top producing countries while strengthening its streamlining directions to better respond to changing claim type trends. Throughout 2006-2007, the RPD continued to render well-reasoned decisions on refugee matters despite the loss of a very large number of experienced members.
Table 2.3: Refugee Protection Program Activity Plans and Results
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. | |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Integrate common procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities in all divisions to further promote quality, consistency and efficiency measures |
|
| Plans | Results |
| Distinct Elements and Tribunal Values | |
| Further monitor the RPD Action Plan in order to ensure implementation |
|
| Pursue measures to further streamline RPD processes |
|
| Further reduce pending inventory, processing times and cost by claim by monitoring and expanding the Fast Track Initiative, by reducing adjournments and postponements and through more sophisticated streamlining |
|
| Continue to implement and monitor the strategic approach to quality decision-making through quality issue sessions, discussion groups, additional National Documentation Packages (NDPs), Jurisprudential Guides and Persuasive Decisions, as needed, and Guideline 8 |
|
| Facilitate the process for making appointments and reappointments in a timely way |
|
| Develop and deliver training on various topics including state protection, delivery of reasons, exclusion and Guideline 8 |
|
| Review and deliver new member training and deliver focused training for experienced members in all areas identified by the RPD |
|
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Improve case management processes through the successful implementation of ICMS |
|
| Plans | Results |
| ICMS Operations | |
| Development and implementation of Release 4 |
|
| Delivery of required training and simulation exercise |
|
| Post-implementation evaluation focusing on "lessons learned" carried out |
|
Quality Decisions
The 2006-2007 performance indicators for the Refugee Protection program activity are presented in the following table.
Table 2.4: Refugee Protection Program Activity Performance Indicators
| Results | Indicators | Target | Actual Value |
| Decisions are rendered in accordance with the law | Number and nature of complaints made and determined to be founded or founded in part | Stability or downward trend as % of total decisions rendered | 7 filed and 0 founded |
| Number of leaves to seek judicial review granted by the court | <1% of total decisions rendered | <1% | |
| Fair and quality decisions | Competency of decision makers | Competency of all new members assessed | All new members assessed |
| Consistency variance rate at the IRB by types of cases in top countries | <30% variance rate | <30% | |
| Consistency variance rate by country for each IRB region | <30% variance rate | <30% |
Key Outputs
The outputs for the Refugee Protection program activity are as follows:
- Claims referred
- Claims finalized
- Claims waiting
- Average processing time
- Average cost per claim finalized
Claims referred
Figure 2.1: Refugee Protection Claims Referred
(Click on image to enlarge)
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
*"2006-2007 RPP" refers to the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities.
Mexico was the top source country in 2006-2007 with 5,490 claims referred; China was second, far behind Mexico, with 1,700 claims; and Colombia was third with 1,450 claims. Mexico accounted for 23% of all claims referred in 2006-2007, 43% above the number of claims referred in 2005-2006; this source country is the principal reason for the overall increase in referrals.
Claims finalized
Figure 2.2: Refugee Protection Claims Finalized
(Click on image to enlarge)
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
The shortfall in finalizations is attributed to the fact that fewer decision-makers were appointed and reappointed than originally anticipated.
Claims waiting
Figure 2.3: Refugee Protection Claims Waiting
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
The shortfall in finalizations and associated growth in the RPD's pending inventory is attributed to the lower number of decision-makers than originally anticipated. Sixty-six percent of claims waiting were nine months old or less by year end.
Average processing time
The average processing time was 11.9 months, down slightly from 12.1 months in 2005-2006 and 13.6 months in 2004-2005, but more than the forecast of 11.0 months in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities. The higher than expected average processing time was due primarily to the lower number of decision-makers than originally anticipated.
Average cost per claim finalized
The average cost per claim for 2006-2007 was $4,117 compared with $3,175 in 2005-2006. Unit costs per claim ranged from $1,600 for an expedited case to $5,700 for complex cases.
The increase in the average cost per claim is attributable to several factors including a higher share of fixed costs per unit caused by a drop in the overall IRB volume, transition costs associated with adjusting staffing levels in line with reduced business volumes, increased salary costs as a result of collective agreements and a slightly larger share of claims finalized with written decisions.
The actual cost per claim is higher than the forecasted average cost of $3,500 as reported in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities because of the factors noted above. The forecasted average cost of $3,500 was based on 22,500 projected claim finalizations while actual claims finalized were 17,300.
The cost per claim includes the decision-making costs and the costs of related activities such as case preparation, research, scheduling of hearings, legal services, foreign-language interpretation, technological support, translation services and administrative support, but it excludes extraordinary costs such as the ICMS project development costs. It also includes a share of the costs from the Corporate Management and Services program activity, which is allocated to the three decision making program activities, based on expenditure trends.
(Click on image to enlarge)
Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity
|
The Immigration Division, whose members are public servants, delivers the IRB's Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews program activity. Admissibility hearings are held for foreign nationals or permanent residents who are alleged to be inadmissible to Canada pursuant to the provisions of the IRPA. Detention reviews are held concerning permanent residents and foreign nationals who are detained under the IRPA authority. Detainees must be seen by the Division within 48 hours and subsequent reviews must be conducted within specific timeframes set out in the IRPA. Decision-makers must balance the rights of individuals to liberty with the security interests of Canadians and persons in Canada. The number of admissibility hearings and detention reviews conducted by the IRB depends on the number of cases referred to it by the CBSA and CIC. |
Performance Measurements and Indicators
Table 2.5: Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity Financial and Human Resources
| Financial Resources ($ millions) | ||
| Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
| 15.2 | 15.5 | 12.2 |
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||
| Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 90 | 92 | 2 |
Performance Highlights and Results
Over the course of 2006-2007 the admissibility hearings and detention reviews program activity coped with an increase in referrals for both admissibility hearings and detention reviews. The members of the division concluded 17% more admissibility hearings and 24% more detention reviews than in 2005-2006.
Table 2.6: Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity Plans and Results
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. | |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Integrate common procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities in all divisions to further promote quality, consistency and efficiency measures |
|
| Plans | Results |
| Distinct Elements and Tribunal Values | |
| Develop harmonized and informal processes to help meet the legislative timeframes and operational requirements to achieve finalization of all cases referred by the CBSA and CIC |
|
| Building on the best business practices of the IRB, introduce and implement in the ID innovative approaches to its processes |
|
| Further develop, maintain and promote tools that will support quality, consistency and efficiency in decision-making in the areas of ethics, communications, quality control and service delivery |
|
| Continue to monitor retirements in order to identify staffing requirements |
|
| Deliver focused and quality training on an ongoing basis in order to meet ID members' specific training needs and address emerging issues (including terrorism, organized crime, etc.) |
|
| Continue to implement learning culture and develop training tools |
|
Quality Decisions
The 2006-2007 performance indicators for the Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews program activity are presented in the following table.
Table 2.7: Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity Performance Indicators
| Results | Indicators | Target | Actual Value |
| Decisions are rendered in accordance with the law | Extent to which independent internal reviewers determine that decisions made are in accordance with related legislation and jurisprudence | Develop and pilot | Not available |
| Number of leaves for judicial review granted | <1% of total decisions rendered | <1% | |
| Fair and quality decisions | Extent to which independent internal reviewers report that decisions are coherent | Develop and pilot | Not available |
| Competency of decision makers | Competency of all new members assessed upon appointment; yearly thereafter | 100% of new hires meet minimum requirements and benchmarks established (five new members) |
Key Outputs
The outputs for the Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews program activity are as follows
- Admissibility hearings finalized
- Detention reviews finalized
- Average cost per admissibility hearing finalized
- Average cost per detention review finalized
Admissiblity Hearings finalized
Figure 2.5: Admissibility Hearings Finalized
(Click on image to enlarge)
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
Outcome of decisions:
- 71% resulted in a removal order being issued because the person was determined inadmissible
- 2% resulted in permission to enter or to remain in Canada
- 7% were subject to the withdrawal of the inadmissibility allegation by the CBSA at the hearing
- 20% of persons who received a notice to appear at their hearing failed to appear and the case was closed
Detention Reviews finalized
Figure 2.6: Detention Reviews Finalized
(Click on image to enlarge)
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
The 33% variance between the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities forecast and the actual number of detention reviews that were finalized is attributable mainly to changes in the case management process. These changes resulted in the inclusion of cases resolved without a decision in the total number of actual detention review finalizations.
3,634 detention reviews were finalized without a decision because the case was rescheduled or the person had been removed, released or detained by the courts prior to a scheduled review. 11,626 detention reviews were finalized with a decision.
Outcome of detention reviews finalized with a decision:
- 74% resulted in continued detention
- 18% resulted in an order for release on terms and conditions subject to bond*
- 5% resulted in an order for release on terms and conditions not subject to bond*
- 3% resulted in other decisions (e.g., change in conditions)
* Note: In 2006-2007 the ID began reporting on two types of orders for release on terms and conditions.
Average cost per admissibility hearing and detention review finalized
The average cost per admissibility hearing finalized was $1,133 and the average cost per detention review finalized was $751. These costs are slightly higher than the 2005-2006 average costs of $1,015 for an admissibility hearing and $710 for a detention review. The increase in average costs is mainly attributable to higher salary costs and a higher share of fixed costs per unit caused by a drop in the overall IRB volume. In the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities, the forecasted cost per admissibility hearing was $1,100 and $800 per detention review.
The cost per admissibility hearing and detention review includes the decision making costs and the costs of related activities such as case preparation, scheduling of hearings, legal services, foreign-language interpretation, technological support, translation services, transcribing services and administrative support. It also includes a share of the costs from the Corporate Management and Services program activity, which is allocated to the three decision-making program activities, based on expenditure trends.
Figure 2.7: Admissibility Hearings Master Graph
(Click on image to enlarge)
Figure 2.8: Detention Review Master Graph
(Click on image to enlarge)
Immigration Appeal Program Activity
|
The Immigration Appeal Division delivers the IRB's Immigration Appeal program activity. It hears immigration appeals from Canadian citizens and permanent residents whose applications to sponsor close family members to Canada have been refused. Other key functions include hearing appeals from permanent residents, foreign nationals with a permanent resident visa, protected persons who have been ordered removed from Canada and permanent residents outside of Canada who have not fulfilled their residency obligation. |
Performance Measurements and Indicators
Table 2.8: Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity Financial and Human Resources
| Financial Resources ($ millions) | ||
| Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual Spending |
| 15.2 | 17.5 | 16.8 |
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||
| Planned | Actual | Difference |
| 135 | 144 | 9 |
Performance Highlights and Results
2006-2007 was a year of transformation for the IAD. Improvements in case management and adjudicative support were achieved through the continued implementation of the iad innovation initiative, which included expanded streaming of appeals into the appropriate case processes and the transition of the alternative dispute resolution program to tribunal officers who are public service employees. These changes increased the capacity of IAD members to focus on hearing and deciding more appeals. As a result, the division achieved a record-high number of appeal finalizations despite a shortfall in members.
Table 2.9: Immigration Appeal Program Activity Plans and Results
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. | |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Integrate common procedural, administrative and adjudicative activities in all divisions to further promote quality, consistency and efficiency measures |
|
| Plans | Results |
| Distinct Elements and Tribunal Values | |
| Ensure the implementation of major transformation through IAD Innovation; this initiative is ongoing and is expected to lead to significant changes to IAD's case processes and hearings |
|
| Review ADR practices and procedures and case selection |
|
| Expand and improve early review process |
|
| Facilitate the process for making appointments and reappointments in a timely way |
|
| Develop innovative approach to obtain more information from both parties earlier to support earlier screening, streaming and resolution |
|
| Ensure that members take more proactive control of the hearing process |
|
| Analyze nature and scope of adjournments and postponements and develop action plans to reduce the postponement/adjournment rate |
|
| Review ADR in-house training |
|
| Develop customized training plan for new members (if necessary) |
|
Quality Decisions
The 2006-2007 performance indicators for the Immigration Appeal program activity are presented in the following table.
Table 2.10: Immigration Appeal Program Activity Performance Indicators
| Results | Indicators | Target | Actual Value |
| Decisions are rendered in accordance with the law | Extent to which independent internal reviewers determine that decisions made are in accordance with related legislation and jurisprudence | Decline in number of decisions that raise legal concerns | Unknown |
| Number of leaves for judicial review granted by the Federal Court; and number of IAD decisions overturned | <1% | <1% | |
| Fair and quality decisions | Extent to which internal independent reviewers determine that decisions and reasons meet quality standards (well-reasoned, well-written and understandable) | Decline in number of decisions and reasons that fail to meet quality standards | Unknown (quality standards not yet established) |
| Competency levels and appraisals of decision makers | All members are assessed as competent; increase in performance appraisal ratings | Unknown | |
| Extent to which external feedback indicates the processes are fair, accessible, transparent and efficient | Increase in positive external feedback | Unknown |
Key Outputs
The outputs for the Immigration Appeal program activity are as follows
- Appeals filed
- Appeals finalized
- Appeals waiting
- Average processing time
- Average cost per appeal finalized
Appeals filed
Figure 2.9: Immigration Appeals Filed
(Click on image to enlarge)
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
The number of filed appeals remained high because of an increase in sponsorship appeals, which comprise an increasing proportion of the IAD caseload.
Appeals finalized
Figure 2.10: Immigration Appeals Finalized
(Click on image to enlarge)
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
The 6,300 appeals finalized in 2006-2007 is the highest number of immigration appeals finalized in a given year in the history of the IAD. Contributing to this increased level of performance was the continued high productivity of members and the transition of the ADR program to the public service. The latter activity, which saw public service employee Dispute Resolution Officers in place in most regions by the final quarter of the year, enabled available members to focus solely on deciding those appeals that must proceed to a hearing for resolution.
The increased and successful use of the ADR program (20% more appeals were resolved through ADR in 2006-2007 than in 2005-2006), early review processes and increased focus on the screening and streaming of cases were key mechanisms by which the IRB managed its immigration appeals caseload-all of which had a positive impact on productivity.
Although the IAD successfully increased its productivity-9% over the previous fiscal year-the IAD fell short by 3% of the finalization forecast in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities. This shortfall was due largely to the fact that the IAD did not see an increase in its member complement, an assumption on which the forecast was initially based. Delays in appointments and reappointments in all regions contributed to the shortfall in finalizations. The forecasts in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities were based on a member complement for the IAD of more than 37 members, but the Division's complement declined from 32 members early in the fiscal year to 26 by March 2007.
Outcome of decisions:
- 43% were allowed and 31% were dismissed
- 26% were withdrawn by the appellant or declared abandoned by the IRB
Appeals waiting
Figure 2.11: Immigration Appeals Waiting
(Click on image to enlarge)
Note: The numbers have been rounded off to the nearest hundred.
The increase is a direct result of the number of appeals filed exceeding the number of appeals finalized for a fifth consecutive year; however, the proportion of appeals finalized to appeals filed increased to 93% in 2006-2007 from 86% in 2005-2006.
Average processing time
The average processing time increased by 8% to 9.9 months in 2006-2007 compared to 9.2 months in 2005-2006. The increase is due primarily to the fact that the high number of appeals filed continues to exceed the capacity of the IAD to hear and finalize them.
Average cost per appeal finalized
The average cost per finalized appeal for 2006-2007 of $2,260 is slightly higher than the 2005-2006 adjusted actual average cost of $2,130 primarily as a result of a higher share of fixed costs per unit caused by a drop in the overall IRB volume and higher translation costs. Average unit costs per appeal ranged from $2,200 for sponsorship appeals to $2,500 for removal orders and residency obligation appeals.
The average cost per finalized appeal is slightly higher than the forecasted cost of $2,100 as reported in the 2006-2007 IRB Report on Plans and Priorities as a result of higher translation costs and an increased share of infrastructure costs.
The cost per appeal includes decision-making costs and the costs of related activities such as case preparation, research, scheduling of hearings, legal services, foreign language interpretation, technological support, translation services and administrative support, but it excludes extraordinary items such as the IAD Innovation initiative costs. It also includes a share of the costs of the Corporate Management and Services program activity, which is allocated to the three decision making program activities, based on expenditure trends.
Figure 2.12: Immigration Appeal Master Graph
(Click on image to enlarge)
Section 3: Supplementary Information
Organizational Information
Chairperson
The Chairperson is the IRB's Chief Executive Officer, senior decision-maker and spokesperson. Providing overall leadership and direction to the Board's three decision-making divisions, the Chairperson is responsible for creating and promoting a vision of the IRB that unifies all IRB personnel around the common purpose of providing resolutions, including well-reasoned decisions on immigration and refugee matters, as early as possible in the process, while maintaining fairness and quality.
In addition to the broad responsibility of the management of GIC appointees, the Chairperson has a range of statutory powers at his disposal to provide assistance to decision-makers in order to enhance the quality, consistency and efficiency of decision-making. The Chairperson is accountable to Parliament and reports to it through the Minister of CIC.
Executive Director
The Executive Director is the IRB's Chief Operating Officer and reports to the IRB Chairperson. The Executive Director is responsible for IRB operations and the administration of the Board's three decision-making divisions.
The Executive Director is responsible for the complement of public service employees, including those who provide direct support to the decision-making activities at the IRB. This position is currently vacant pending decisions on IRB governance.
Senior Management
Two Deputy Chairpersons (appointed by the Governor in Council) and one Director General (appointed under the Public Service Employment Act) oversee decision-making in the three divisions. Four Directors General and a Senior General Counsel (all appointed under the Public Service Employment Act) are responsible for the operations, legal services and corporate management and services functions of the IRB.
Organization Chart
Figure 3.1: IRB Organizational Chart
(Click on image to enlarge)
Overview of Financial Performance
The IRB's total authorities of $119.3 million increased by $2.5 million from its planned spending of $116.8 million. This increase was attributable mainly to:
- An additional amount of $4.4 million in funding carried forward from 2005-2006;
- An additional amount of $1.0 million in compensation for collective agreements; and
- A reduction of $2.9 million associated with the employee benefit plans.
The net overall increase of $2.5 million was allocated primarily to cover requirements relating to the Immigration Appeal program activity.
Actual spending for 2006-2007 was $110.4 million, $8.9 million less than the total authorities. Unused resources were attributable mainly to:
- A surplus of $6.9 million in the special purpose allotment for the translation of decisions primarily as a result of a lower volume of finalizations; and
- A surplus of approximately $2.0 million as a result of delays in staffing (specifically, fewer decision-maker appointments than initially planned).
Comparison of Planned to Actual Spending (incl. FTEs)*
This table offers a comparison of the Main Estimates, Planned Spending, Total Authorities, Actual Spending for 2006-2007 and historical figures for Actual Spending.
Table 3.1: Comparison of Planned to Actual Spending (incl. FTEs)
| ($ millions) | 2004-2005 | 2005-2006 | 2006-2007 | |||
| Actual | Actual | Main Estimates |
Planned Spending |
Total Authorities |
Actual | |
| Refugee Protection | 104.4 | 90.6 | 86.8 | 86.4 | 86.3 | 81.4 |
| Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews | 10.9 | 10.4 | 15.3 | 15.2 | 15.5 | 12.2 |
| Immigration Appeal | 10.6 | 11.7 | 15.2 | 15.2 | 17.5 | 16.8 |
| Total | 125.9 | 112.7 | 117.4 | 116.8 | 119.3 | 110.4 |
| Less: Non respendable revenue | ||||||
| Plus: Cost of services received without charge | 19.3 | 20.3 | 19.5 | 19.5 | ||
| Total Departmental Spending | 145.2 | 133.0 | 136.3 | 129.9 | ||
| Full-time Equivalents (FTEs) | 1,170 | 1,035 | 1,050 | 942 | ||
*Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Resources by Program Activity
The following table outlines how resources were utilized by program activity for the 2006-2007 fiscal year.
Table 3.2: Resources by Program Activity
| 2006-2007 | ||||
| ($ millions) | Budgetary | |||
| Program Activity | Operating | Total: Gross Budgetary Expenditures | Total: Net Budgetary Expenditures | Total |
| Refugee Protection | ||||
| Main Estimates | 86.8 | 86.8 | 86.8 | 86.8 |
| Planned Spending | 86.4 | 86.4 | 86.4 | 86.4 |
| Total Authorities | 86.3 | 86.3 | 86.3 | 86.3 |
| Actual Spending | 81.4 | 81.4 | 81.4 | 81.4 |
| Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews | ||||
| Main Estimates | 15.3 | 15.3 | 15.3 | 15.3 |
| Planned Spending | 15.2 | 15.2 | 15.2 | 15.2 |
| Total Authorities | 15.5 | 15.5 | 15.5 | 15.5 |
| Actual Spending | 12.2 | 12.2 | 12.2 | 12.2 |
| Immigration Appeal | ||||
| Main Estimates | 15.2 | 15.2 | 15.2 | 15.2 |
| Planned Spending | 15.2 | 15.2 | 15.2 | 15.2 |
| Total Authorities | 17.5 | 17.5 | 17.5 | 17.5 |
| Actual Spending | 16.8 | 16.8 | 16.8 | 16.8 |
Voted and Statutory Items
The table below shows how Parliament votes resources to the IRB, and largely replicates the summary table listed in the Main Estimates. Resources are presented to Parliament in this format. Parliament approves the voted funding and the statutory information is provided for information purposes.
Table 3.3: Voted and Statutory Items
| 2006-2007 | |||||
| Voted or Statutory Items ($ millions) |
Truncated Vote of Statutory Wording | Main Estimates | Planned Spending | Total Authorities | Actual |
| 10 | Operating expenditures | 103.3 | 102.7 | 108.1 | 99.2 |
| (S) | Contributions to employee benefit plans | 14.1 | 14.1 | 11.2 | 11.2 |
| Total | 117.4 | 116.8 | 119.3 | 110.4 | |
Services Received Without Charge
The following table provides information on services received without charge for the IRB.
Table 3.4: Services Received Without Charge
| ($ millions) | 2006-2007 |
| Accommodation provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada | 14.0 |
| Contributions covering employers' share of employees' insurance premiums and expenditures paid by TBS (excluding revolving funds). Employer's contribution to employees' insured benefits plans and associated expenditures paid by TBS | 5.5 |
| Salary and associated expenditures of legal services provided by the Department of Justice Canada | 0.0 |
| Total 2006-2007 Services received without charge | 19.5 |
Resource Requirements by Branch or Sector
The table below shows the distribution of funding to the IRB at the organizational level.
Table 3.5: Resource Requirements by Branch or Sector
| 2006-2007 | ($ millions) | |||
| Organization | Refugee Protection | Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews | Immigration Appeal | Total |
| Chairperson, Executive Director and Secretariat (including GIC salaries) | ||||
| Planned Spending | 24.6 | 0.2 | 4.6 | 29.4 |
| Actual Spending | 16.4 | 0.2 | 4.8 | 21.4 |
| Refugee Protection Division | ||||
| Planned Spending | 1.2 | 1.2 | ||
| Actual Spending | 1.0 | 1.0 | ||
| Immigration Appeal Division | ||||
| Planned Spending | 0.9 | 0.9 | ||
| Actual Spending | 0.9 | 0.9 | ||
| Immigration Division | ||||
| Planned Spending | 4.0 | 4.0 | ||
| Actual Spending | 5.6 | 5.6 | ||
| Strategic Communications and Partnerships (including special purpose account for translation of decisions) | ||||
| Planned Spending | 6.0 | 5.4 | 2.8 | 14.2 |
| Actual Spending | 3.9 | 0.7 | 3.3 | 7.9 |
| Human Resources and Professional Development | ||||
| Planned Spending | 3.3 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 4.1 |
| Actual Spending | 3.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 4.5 |
| Legal Services | ||||
| Planned Spending | 4.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 4.7 |
| Actual Spending | 4.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 4.6 |
| Corporate Planning and Services | ||||
| Planned Spending | 6.9 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 9.3 |
| Actual Spending | 12.4 | 1.6 | 1.5 | 15.5 |
| Operations (including regions and ICMS) | ||||
| Planned Spending | 40.1 | 3.8 | 5.1 | 49.0 |
| Actual Spending | 40.0 | 3.4 | 5.6 | 49.0 |
Details on Project Spending (ICMS)*
This table identifies IRB projects, information technology and major crown projects underway or completed during the reporting period.
The scope of this multi-year project is to improve case management by streamlining and automating business processes within the IRB and to implement an integrated case management system that will support IRB operations. When fully implemented, ICMS will provide IRB employees with access to all information required to manage or work with IRB cases and provide the IRB with the capacity to automate its case processing improvements. It will also:
- Improve processing time;
- Promote a consistency in decisions that will enhance predictability for claimants and counsel;
- Increase security and integrity of the data; and
- Improve the current IT infrastructure.
Table 3.6: Details on Project Spending (ICMS)
| Current Estimated Total Cost ($ millions) | Cumulative Spending to March 31, 2007 ($ millions) |
| 40.0 | 39.6 |
| Plans | Results |
| Stage 1 | |
| Release 1: Replace the current Claim Type Management System and automate screening and streamlining activities | More robust system that improves the IRB's case management - Implemented June 2004 |
| Release 2: Automate research processes | Increases the effectiveness of the research processes by automating the research requests - Implemented April 2005 |
| Release 3: Create Electronic Personal Information Form (e-PIF) | Enhances client services by allowing counsel to send PIFs electronically - Implemented May 2005 |
| Release 4: Automate RPD processes | Delivers the program through the automation of RPD functions and improves decision-making by providing timely, integrated, comprehensive and accurate information on cases - Implemented April 2007 |
| Stage 2 | |
| Automate IAD processes | Building on Stage 1, development of the various ICMS elements required to provide case processing and scheduling for the IAD (under review pending business rationalization of IAD processes) |
| Stage 3 | |
| Automate ID processes | Building on Stage 2, development of the various ICMS elements required to provide case processing and scheduling for the ID (under review pending business rationalization of ID processes) |
*Although ICMS does not meet the TBS definition of a major project for reporting purposes, it represents a significant investment for the IRB.
Financial Statements of Departmental Corporations and Agencies (including Agents of Parliament) and Revolving Funds Financial Statements
The following financial statements are prepared in accordance with accrual accounting principles. The unaudited supplementary information presented in the financial tables in the IRB Departmental Performance Report is prepared on a modified cash basis of accounting in order to be consistent with appropriation-based reporting. Note 3 of the financial statements reconciles these two accounting methods.
Statement of Management Responsibility
Responsibility for the integrity and objectivity of the accompanying financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2007, and all information contained in these statements rests with the management of the IRB. These financial statements have been prepared by management in accordance with TBS accounting policies, which are consistent with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector.
Some information in the financial statements is based on management's best estimates and judgment and gives due consideration to materiality. To fulfil its accounting and reporting responsibilities, management maintains a set of accounts that provides a centralized record of the IRB's financial transactions. Financial information submitted to the Public Accounts of Canada and included in the IRB Departmental Performance Report is consistent with these financial statements.
Management maintains a system of financial management and internal controls designed to provide reasonable assurance that financial information is reliable, that assets are safeguarded and that transactions are in accordance with the Financial Administration Act and prescribed regulations, are within Parliamentary authorities, and are properly recorded to maintain accountability of Government funds. Management also seeks to ensure the objectivity and integrity of data in its financial statements by careful selection, training and development of qualified staff, by organizational arrangements that provide appropriate divisions of responsibility, and by communication programs aimed at ensuring that regulations, policies, standards and managerial authorities are understood throughout the IRB.
The Chairperson's Management Board (CMB) is the senior management body responsible for setting organizational priorities and objectives and providing overall direction to the IRB. The CMB oversees major initiatives that cut across the organization to ensure a comprehensive and integrated approach.
Management is supported and assisted by an Audit and Evaluation Committee (AEC), a sub committee of the CMB. The primary role of the AEC is to provide functional guidance over internal audit and evaluation.
The Senior Financial Officer is a full member of both the CMB and the AEC.
The financial statements of the IRB have not been audited.
| Brian Goodman Chairperson |
Jean Bélanger Senior Financial Officer |
Ottawa, Canada
August 2nd, 2007
Statement of Operations (Unaudited) For the Year Ended March 31
(in thousands of dollars)
| 2007 | 2006 | ||||
| Refugee Protection | Immigration Appeal | Admissibility Hearings & Detention Reviews | Total | Total | |
| Operating Expenses | |||||
| Salaries and employee benefits | 63,265 | 12,528 | 10,042 | 85,835 | 88,734 |
| Rentals | 11,017 | 1,881 | 2,138 | 15,036 | 15,462 |
| Professional and special services | 10,359 | 3,899 | 1,697 | 15,955 | 11,747 |
| Amortization | 4,595 | 37 | 41 | 4,673 | 2,333 |
| Transpor- tation and telecom munications |
3,272 | 764 | 522 | 4,558 | 4,396 |
| Acquisition of equipment (less than $10K) | 1,428 | 212 | 208 | 1,848 | 2,791 |
| Repair and mainte- nance |
992 | 135 | 132 | 1,259 | 1,635 |
| Utilities, materials and supplies | 578 | 74 | 70 | 722 | 762 |
| Information | 194 | 16 | 17 | 227 | 246 |
| Other | 37 | (2) | (3) | 32 | 95 |
| Total Operating Expenses | 95,737 | 19,544 | 14,864 | 130,145 | 128,201 |
| Total Revenues | 7 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 4 |
| Net Cost of Operations | 95,730 | 19,543 | 14,863 | 130,136 | 128,197 |
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.
Statement of Financial Position (Unaudited) at March 31
(in thousands of dollars)
| 2007 | 2006 | ||
| ASSETS | |||
| Financial assets | |||
| Accounts receivables and advances (Note 4) | 3,576 | 2,717 | |
| Non-financial assets | |||
| Prepaid expenses | 129 | 23 | |
| Tangible capital assets (Note 5) | 23,307 | 22,798 | |
| Total non-financial assets | 23,435 | 22,821 | |
| TOTAL | 27,011 | 25,538 | |
| LIABILITIES | |||
| Accounts payable and accrued liabilities | 9,723 | 8,299 | |
| Vacation pay and compensatory leave | 3,445 | 3,778 | |
| Employee severance benefits (Note 6) | 15,239 | 14,086 | |
| Total liabilities | 28,407 | 26,163 | |
| EQUITY OF CANADA | (1,396) | (625) | |
| TOTAL | 27,011 | 25,538 | |
| Contingent liabilities (Note 7) | |||
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.
Statement of Equity of Canada (Unaudited) at March 31
(in thousands of dollars)
| 2007 | 2006 | |
| Equity of Canada, beginning of year | 625 | 9,367 |
| Net cost of operations | (130,136) | (128,197) |
| Current year appropriations used (Note 3) | 110,438 | 112,733 |
| Adjustments of previous years accounts payables and miscellaneous revenues not available for spending | (55) | (397) |
| Change in net position in the Consolidated Revenue Fund (Note 3) | (542) | 4,261 |
| Services received without charge from other government departments (Note 8) | 19,524 | 20,342 |
| Equity of Canada, end of year | (1,396) | (625) |
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.
Statement of Cash Flow (Unaudited) For the Year Ended March 31
(in thousands of dollars)
| 2007 | 2006 | |
| Operating activities | ||
| Net cost of operations | 130,136 | 128,197 |
| Non-cash items: | ||
| Amortization of capital assets | (4,673) | (2,333) |
| Bad debts write-off | - | (4) |
| Previous year correction | - | (444) |
| Services received without charge | (19,524) | (20,342) |
| Variations in Statement of Financial Position: | ||
| Increase in accounts receivable and advances | 859 | 243 |
| Increase in prepaid expenses | 105 | 23 |
| Decrease (increase) in liabilities | (2,244) | 4,077 |
| Cash used by operating activities | 104,659 | 109,417 |
| Capital investment activities | ||
| Acquisitions of tangible capital assets (Note 5) | 5,182 | 7,180 |
| Cash used by capital investment activities | 5,182 | 7,180 |
| Financing activities | ||
| Net cash provided by Government of Canada | (109,841) | (116,597) |
The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.
Notes to the Financial Statements (Unaudited)
1. Authority and Objectives
Created by an Act of the Canadian Parliament in 1989, the IRB is the largest Canadian administrative tribunal performing quasi-judicial functions. Its mandate is contained in Part 4 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
As an independent tribunal, the IRB's mandate is to:
- Determine claims for refugee protection made in Canada;
- Adjudicate admissibility hearings and review reasons for detention; and
- Decide appeals from sponsorship refusals, certain removal orders and residency obligation decisions, and decide appeals by the Minister of CIC from decisions made in admissibility hearings.
As an organization with three administrative divisions, the IRB provides a responsive and efficient means of delivering administrative justice for individuals and ensures that all people who come before it are treated fairly. In fulfilling its mandate, the IRB contributes directly to maintaining public confidence in the integrity of Canada's immigration and refugee determination system.
2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The financial statements have been prepared in accordance with TBS accounting policies, which are consistent with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector.
Significant accounting policies are as follows:
(a) Parliamentary Appropriations - The IRB is financed by the Government of Canada through Parliamentary appropriations. Appropriations provided to the IRB do not parallel financial reporting according to generally accepted accounting principles since appropriations are primarily based on cash flow requirements. Consequently, items recognized in the statement of operations and the statement of financial position are not necessarily the same as those provided through appropriations from Parliament. Note 3 provides a high-level reconciliation between the two reporting bases.
(b) Net Cash Provided by Government - The IRB operates within the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF), which is administered by the Receiver General for Canada. All cash received by the IRB is deposited to the CRF and all cash disbursements made by the IRB are paid from the CRF. Net cash provided by Government is the difference between all cash receipts and all cash disbursements including transactions between departments of the federal government.
(c) Change in net position in the Consolidated Revenue Fund is the difference between the net cash provided by Government and appropriations used in a year, excluding the amount of non-respendable revenue recorded by the IRB. It results from timing differences between when a transaction affects appropriations and when it is processed through the CRF.
(d) Revenues - Revenues are accounted for in the period in which the underlying transaction or event occurred that gave rise to the revenues. The IRB does not charge for its services and its only revenues stem from gains on disposals of crown assets and Access to Information and Privacy fees.
(e) Expenses - Expenses are recorded on an accrual basis:
- Vacation pay and compensatory leave are expensed as the benefits accrue to the employees under their respective terms of employment; and
- Services received without charge by other government departments for accommodation, the employer's contribution to the health and dental insurance plans and legal services are recorded as operating expenses at their estimated cost.
(f) Employee future benefits
- Pension benefits: Eligible employees participate in the Public Service Pension Plan, a multi-employer administered by the Government of Canada. The IRB contributions to the Plan are charged to expenses in the year they are incurred and represent the total obligation of the Board to the Plan. Current legislation does not require the IRB to make contributions for any actuarial deficiencies of the Plan.
- Severance benefits: Employees are entitled to severance benefits under labour contracts or conditions of employment. These benefits are accrued as employees render the services necessary to earn them. The obligation relating to the benefits earned by employees is calculated using information derived from the results of the actuarially determined liability for employee severance benefits for the Government as a whole.
(g) Accounts receivables are stated at amounts expected to be ultimately realized. A provision can be made for external parties receivables where recovery is considered uncertain.
(h) Contingent liabilities - Contingent liabilities are potential liabilities, which may become actual liabilities when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. To the extent that the future event is likely to occur or fail to occur, and a reasonable estimate of the loss can be made, an estimated liability is accrued and an expense recorded. If the likelihood is not determinable or an amount cannot be reasonably estimated, the contingency is disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.
(i) Tangible capital assets - All tangible capital assets having an initial cost of $10,000 or more are recorded at their acquisition cost. Amortization of tangible capital assets is done on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the assets as follows:
| Asset class | Amortization Period |
| Informatics hardware | 4 years |
| Informatics software | 5 years |
(j) Measurement uncertainty - The preparation of these financial statements in accordance with TBS accounting policies which are consistent with Canadian generally accepted accounting principles for the public sector requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses reported in the financial statements. At the time of preparation of these statements, management believes the estimates and assumptions to be reasonable. The most significant items where estimates are used are the liability for employee severance benefits and the useful life of tangible capital assets. Actual results could significantly differ from those estimated. Management's estimates are reviewed periodically and, as adjustments become necessary, they are recorded in the financial statements in the year they become known.
3. Parliamentary Appropriations
The IRB receives its funding through annual Parliamentary appropriations. Items recognized in the statement of operations and the statement of financial position in one year may be funded through Parliamentary appropriations in prior, current or future years. Accordingly, the IRB has different net results of operations for the year on a government funding basis than on an accrual accounting basis. The differences are reconciled in the following tables:
(a) Reconciliation of net cost of operations to current year appropriations used:
| (in thousands of dollars) | 2007 | 2006 |
| Net cost of operations | 130,136 | 128,197 |
| Adjustments for items affecting net cost of operations but not affecting appropriations: | ||
| Add (Less): | ||
| Services received without charge (Note 8) | (19,524) | (20,342) |
| Amortization of tangible capital assets | (4,673) | (2,333) |
| Previous year correction | - | (444) |
| Adjustments to previous years accounts payable | 3 | 337 |
| Vacation pay and compensatory leave | 333 | 270 |
| Contingent liability reversal | - | 150 |
| Refunds of previous year's expenditures | 49 | 56 |
| Justice Canada's expenditures | (29) | (45) |
| Prepaid expenses previously charged to appropriations | - | (5) |
| Bad debts write-off | - | (4) |
| Employee severance benefits | (1,153) | (313) |
| Revenue | 9 | 4 |
| 105,151 | 105,528 | |
| Adjustments for items affecting net cost of operations but not affecting appropriations: | ||
| Add (Less): | ||
| Acquisition of capital assets | 5,182 | 7,180 |
| Prepaid expenses | 105 | 28 |
| Temporary advances | - | (3) |
| Current year appropriations used | 110,438 | 112,733 |
(b) Appropriations provided and used
| (in thousands of dollars) | 2007 | 2006 |
| Vote 10 - Operating expenditures | 103,259 | 98,601 |
| Vote 10a - Supplementary | 3,829 | - |
| Vote 15 - Transfer from TBS | 1,049 | - |
| Governor General's special warrants | - | 6,498 |
| Statutory amounts | 11,189 | 12,520 |
| Less: | ||
| Lapsed appropriations: Operating | (8,888) | (4,886) |
| Current year appropriations used | 110,438 | 112,733 |
(c) Reconciliation of net cash provided by Government to current year appropriations used
| (in thousands of dollars) | 2007 | 2006 |
| Net cash provided by Government | 109,841 | 116,597 |
| Adjustments of previous years accounts payable and miscellaneous revenues not available for spending | 55 | 97 |
| 109,896 | 116,994 | |
| Change in net position in the Consolidated Revenue Fund | ||
| Variation in accounts receivable and advances | (859) | (243) |
| Variation in accounts payable and accrued liabilities | 1,423 | (3,969) |
| Other adjustments | (22) | (49) |
| 542 | (4,261) | |
| Current year appropriations used | 110,438 | 112,733 |
4. Accounts Receivable and Advances
The following table presents details of accounts receivable and advances:
| (in thousands of dollars) | 2007 | 2006 |
| Receivable from other Federal Government departments and agencies | 3,472 | 2,677 |
| Receivables from external parties | 100 | 36 |
| Standing advances | 4 | 4 |
| Total | 3,576 | 2,717 |
5. Tangible Capital Assets
Cost (in thousands of dollars)
| Capital asset class | Opening Balance | Acquisitions | Work in Progress Transfer | Closing balance |
| Informatics Hardware | 2,475 | 112 | - | 2,587 |
| Informatics Software | 12,300 | - | 5,125 | 17,425 |
| Software under development | 12,609 | 5,070 | (5,125) | 12,554 |
| Total | 27,384 | 5,182 | - | 32,566 |
Accumulated amortization (in thousands of dollars)
| Capital asset class | Opening Balance | Amortization | Closing balance |
| Informatics Hardware | 1,664 | 304 | 1,968 |
| Informatics Software | 2,922 | 4,369 | 7,291 |
| Software under development | - | - | - |
| Total | 4,586 | 4,673 | 9,259 |
| Capital asset class | 2007 Net book value | 2006 Net book value |
| Informatics Hardware | 619 | 811 |
| Informatics Software | 10,134 | 9,378 |
| Software under development | 12,554 | 12,609 |
| Total | 23,307 | 22,798 |
Amortization expense for the year ended March 31, 2007, is $4,673 (2006 - $2,333).
6. Employee Benefits
(a) Pension Benefits: IRB employees participate in the Public Service Pension Plan, which is sponsored and administered by the Government of Canada. Pension benefits accrue up to a maximum period of 35 years at a rate of 2 percent per year of pensionable service, times the average of the best five consecutive years of earnings. The benefits are integrated with Canada/Québec Pension Plans benefits and they are indexed to inflation.
Both employees and the IRB contribute to the cost of the Plan. The 2006-07 expense amounts to $11,183,580 ($12,517,527 in 2005-06), which represents approximately 2.2 times (2.6 in 2005-06) the contributions by employees.
The IRB's responsibility with regard to the Plan is limited to its contributions. Actuarial surpluses or deficiencies are recognized in the financial statements of the Government of Canada, as the Plan's sponsor.
(b) Severance Benefits: The IRB provides severance benefits to its employees based on eligibility, years of service and final salary. These severance benefits are not pre funded. Benefits will be paid from future appropriations. Information about the severance benefits, measured as at March 31, is as follows:
| (in thousands of dollars) | 2007 | 2006 |
| Accrued benefit obligation, beginning of the year | 14,086 | 13,773 |
| Cost for the year | 2,981 | 1,266 |
| Benefits paid during the year | (1,828) | (953) |
| Accrued benefit obligation, end of the year | 15,239 | 14,086 |
7. Contingent liabilities
(a) Claims and litigation: Claims have been made against the IRB in the normal course of operations. Legal proceedings for claims totalling approximately $5,616,000 ($5,886,000 in 2006) were still pending at March 31, 2007. Some of these potential liabilities may become actual liabilities when one or more future events occur or fail to occur. To the extent that the future event is likely to occur or fail to occur, and a reasonable estimate of the loss can be made, an estimated liability is accrued and an expense recorded in the financial statements. No liability set-up was required because no future events were likely to occur.
8. Related party transactions
The IRB is related in terms of common ownership to all Government of Canada departments and agencies and Crown corporations. The IRB enters into transactions with these entities in the normal course of business and on normal trade terms. Also, during the year, the IRB received services, which were obtained without charge from other Government departments as presented in part (a) below.
(a) Services received without charge: During the year, the IRB received without charge from other departments, accommodation, legal fees and the employer's contribution to the health and dental insurance plans. These services without charge have been recognized in the IRB Statement of Operations as follows:
| (in thousands of dollars) | 2007 | 2006 |
| Accomodation | 13,986 | 14,586 |
| Employer's contribution to the health and dental insurance plans | 5,533 | 5,753 |
| Legal services | 5 | 3 |
| Accrued benefit obligation, end of the year | 19,524 | 20,342 |
The Government has structured some of its administrative activities for efficiency and cost-effectiveness purposes so that one department performs these on behalf of all without charge. The costs of these services, which include payroll and cheque issuance services provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada, are not included as an expense in the Board's Statement of Operations.
(b) Payables and receivables outstanding at year-end with related parties:
| (in thousands of dollars) | 2007 | 2006 |
| Accounts receivable with other government departments and agencies | 3,472 | 2,676 |
| Accounts payable to other government departments and agencies | 1,308 | 517 |
Response to Parliamentary Committees, Audits and Evaluations
Table 3.7: Response to Parliamentary Committees, Audits and Evaluations
| RESPONSE TO PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES | |
| No recommendations were received | |
| RESPONSE TO THE AUDITOR GENERAL | |
| No recommendations were received | |
| EXTERNAL AUDITS | |
| No recommendations were received | |
| INTERNAL AUDITS OR EVALUATIONS | |
| Plans | Results |
| Cyclical Compliance Reviews | |
| Videoconferencing, Human Resources Strategy and Streamlining | Action plans to management response of the Videoconferencing and Streamlining Review and Evaluation were followed up. Both reviews called for the renewal of the respective policies to reflect the IRB's transition to tribunal integration. Management response to the Human Resources Strategy Review was completed and closed. |
| Logic Model and Performance Measurement Framework | |
| IAD Innovation | A logic model and a performance measurement framework were developed for this major initiative. Both instruments were further developed to respond to results of the implementation of this initiative. |
| Values and Ethics Framework | Development of the logic model and the associated performance measurement framework for this function have been deferred until the appropriate Values and Ethics Frameworks are developed in 2008-2009. |
| Internal Audit | |
| Contracting Practices | An audit of contracting practices and the management response was completed at the end of 2006-2007. The audit follow-up will be carried forward to 2007-2008. |
| Control Self-Assessment | |
| MAF Element: Stage One | A Core Management Controls self-assessment project was designed and planned in 2006-2007. Stage One included a comprehensive consultation with senior managers at the national and regional levels to assess the state of the IRB's control environment by using the TBS Core Management Controls Framework. |
These reports and the associated management responses and action plans can be found at:
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/about/transparency/evaluations/index_e.htm.
Section 4: Other Items of Interest
Corporate Management and Services Program Activity
The Corporate Management and Services program activity provides support to the three IRB decision-making program activities through a range of HR, legal services, communications, strategic planning, audit and evaluation, risk management, values and ethics, financial services, information technology, security and management activities. It also provides the IRB with efficient management processes and administrative services while promoting organizational effectiveness, and implements various government-wide initiatives. In addition, the Corporate Management and Services program activity ensures that all corporate management services are integrated into the business of the IRB.
The actual spending and FTEs for Corporate Management and Services are proportionally allocated to the three decision-making program activities.
Performance Highlights
Significant achievements in 2006-2007 included the transition of ICMS It resources from the IRB's operations branch to the corporate planning and services branch, implementation of key priorities of the people management strategy, development of the internal audit and the departmental audit committee charters and implementation of a new organization-wide contracting policy.
Table 4.1: Corporate Management and Services Program Activity Plans and Results
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME: Provide Canadians with well-reasoned, timely decisions on immigration and refugee matters, efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. | |
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Improve case management processes through the successful implementation of ICMS |
|
| Plans | Results |
| Corporate Management and Services | |
| Provide ongoing maintenance of the ICMS applications once implemented |
|
| Transition ICMS IT resources, tools, procedures and infrastructure to the IS Directorate |
|
| Implement a Change Management Strategy with respect to the ICMS project that includes comprehensive communications and training plans |
|
| STRATEGIC PRIORITY Implement a horizontal and fully integrated management plan that reflects the IRB's reality |
|
| Plans | Results |
| Corporate Planning and Accountability | |
| Update the Risk Management Plan to reflect strategic priorities and the Government Management Agenda, and implement the Legal Risk Management System |
|
| Provide effective financial planning and budgeting using ABB, A-Base Reviews and other tools to support the resourcing process within the IRB |
|
| Develop an HR planning tool to facilitate the integration of HR planning in business planning |
|
| Audit and Evaluation | |
| Update the three-year action plan to bring the IRB into compliance with the new Internal Audit Policy |
|
| People Management | |
| Implement identified priorities of the People Management Strategy, including the implementation of an integrated learning and professional development program for all IRB personnel |
|
| Implement HR Modernization measures and objectives including those related to compliance with the new Public Service Labour Relations Act and the Public Service Modernization Act |
|
| Receive and analyze the Public Service Employment Survey (PSES) results and develop an action plan to address the results |
|
| Revise the GIC recruitment process to ensure further alignment with the Member Competency Profile, including revisions to the screening test and interview guide for GIC recruitment |
|
| Examine the possibility of the development of a unique classification standard for the IRB |
|
| Financial Management | |
| Implement a formal management monitoring function and conduct readiness assessment for audited Financial Statements |
|
| Security | |
| Implement a comprehensive security program that includes a Business Continuity Plan (BCP) updated annually and implement the Management Information Technology Security (MITS) Action Plan |
|
| Procurement and Asset Management | |
| Implement a comprehensive procurement and asset management program |
|
| Develop appropriate contracting regimes and controls on the interpreter file |
|
| Information Management | |
| Implement the relevant elements of the Information Management (IM) Action Plan following the IM Capacity exercise |
|
| Using infonet, provide all employees with authoritative, comprehensive and well-structured information in support of their respective operational goals and obligations |
|
| Information Systems | |
| Support the IRB's activities with the appropriate infrastructure, desktop and network environment |
|
| Support all Systems users (external and internal) effectively and in accordance with service standards |
|
Management Accountability Framework Assessment
Late in 2006-2007 the TBS conducted Round IV of the MAF Assessments. The TBS developed the MAF to reinforce sound management practices and strengthen accountability in all public service organizations. It captures the TBS vision of sound public management in 10 expectations of Deputy Ministers and reinforces the message of the need for results-based management with better integrated management functions.
The TBS observations on the IRB's management accountability performance were generally positive. The IRB's work to improve management and its strong emphasis on the importance of accountability and modernization were recognized by the TBS. In total, for the 18 indicators against which the IRB was assessed, the IRB received one strong rating, 13 acceptable ratings, three opportunities for improvement and one attention required. The IRB was also acknowledged for the focused, relevant, concise and timely information it provided to the TBS as part of the MAF assessment process.
Notwithstanding the above, there are some areas that the TBS identified for further progress. These include completing the implementation of the ICMS project and ensuring proper maintenance, strengthening the internal audit and evaluation functions and building an infrastructure to further promote values and ethics. Furthermore, it will be important that the IRB carefully manages the stability of the organization during its time of transition.
Integrated Accountability Framework
Under the Federal Accountability Act, the Chairperson becomes the IRB's Accounting Officer. In this role, the IRB Chairperson is accountable for issues such as ensuring compliance with policies and procedures for program delivery and systems of internal control, signing the accounts and ensuring that there is adequate internal audit capacity within the IRB. In 2006-2007 the IRB initiated the development of an Integrated Accountability Framework that will, in 2008-2009, provide the IRB Chairperson with an assurance of this compliance.
Figure 4.1: IRB Management Integration Model
Public service renewal
The Fourteenth Annual Report to the Prime Minister on the Public Service of Canada was released on April 16, 2007, covering the period between April 1, 2006, and March 31, 2007. In this report, the Clerk of the Privy Council sets out the future direction of the federal Public Service and describes the path of public service renewal. The Renewal Initiative is driven by a number of factors including the aging public service workforce, the need to reflect the diversity of Canadians within the public service, the changing nature of public service work and public expectations and factors related to the competitive nature of attracting and retaining employees.
The renewal of the public service will unfold over several years. As a first step, four priorities have been established by the Clerk for the renewal agenda:
- Enhanced integration of HR and business planning
- Recruitment of new talent
- Employee development
- Establishment of systems and processes to support efficient planning, recruitment and employee development
These four priorities have translated, and will continue to translate, into new or enhanced objectives and expectations in the area of people management from all members of the HR stakeholder community across the public service. This community includes executives, managers, employees and bargaining agents.
Impact on the IRB
At the IRB, several initiatives stemming from its People Management Strategy (e.g., integrated HR and business planning, a revitalized Employment Equity program and competency-based HR management) have already been implemented and are in line with the objectives of the Renewal Initiative. Furthermore, the IRB continues to modernize and strengthen its people management practices in order to address both IRB and government-wide priorities.
Information and Contacts
Legislation Administered
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
(S.C. 2001, c. 27, as amended)
Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations
(SOR/2002-227, as amended)
Refugee Protection Division Rules
(SOR/2002-228)
Immigration Division Rules
(SOR/2002-229)
Immigration Appeal Division Rules
(SOR/2002-230)
Oath or Solemn Affirmation of Office Rules
(Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada)
(SOR/2002-231)
IRB Processes
Visit these links to find out how the IRB processes its cases:
- Process for Making a Claim for Refugee Protection
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/procedures/processes/rpd/rpdp_e.htm - Admissibility Hearing Process
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/procedures/processes/id/ahp_e.htm - Detention Review Process
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/procedures/processes/id/drp_e.htm - Sponsorship Appeal Process
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/procedures/processes/iad/sap_e.htm - Removal Order Appeal Process
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/procedures/processes/iad/roap_e.htm
Related Information
UNHCR website: http://www.unhcr.org/home.html
Contact us
For more information, visit the IRB web site at
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca
or contact the IRB Communications Directorate at (613) 947-0803 or one of the IRB offices listed below.
National Headquarters
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
Minto Place, Canada Building
344 Slater Street, 12th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K1
Tel: (613) 995-6486 Fax: (613) 943-1550
Regional Offices
Eastern Region
200 René Lévesque Boulevard West
Guy Favreau Complex
East Tower, Room 102
Montreal, Quebec H2Z 1X4
Tel: (514) 283-7733 Fax: (514) 283-0164
Central Region
74 Victoria Street, Suite 400
Toronto, Ontario M5C 3C7
Tel: (416) 954-1000 Fax: (416) 954-1165
Western Region
Library Square, Suite 1600
300 West Georgia Street
Vancouver, British Columbia V6B 6C9
Tel: (604) 666-5946 Fax: (604) 666-3043