Printable version (PDF 1.67 MB)
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
The original version was signed by
The Honourable John McCallum
Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, represented by the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, 2016
ISSN 2368-2752
This document is available in alternative formats upon request.
Institutional head’s message
The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) is an independent administrative tribunal entrusted by Parliament with resolving immigration and refugee cases efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. The IRB discharges its duties at arm’s length from the Government of Canada, but is fully accountable to Parliament and to all Canadians.
The IRB carries out its work in an ever-changing environment in which shifting migration patterns, domestic legislative changes and other factors have an impact on the number of cases received and their complexity. Through the decisions and resolutions made by its four divisions, namely the Refugee Protection Division (RPD), the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD), the Immigration Division (ID) and the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD), the Board contributes directly to Canada’s humanitarian traditions, the security of Canada and the quality of life of Canadians, as well as to the fulfillment of our international obligations. The Board achieved a high level of productivity in 2015–16, finalizing approximately 41,100 decisions. The Board also ensured a high level of quality and fairness in all its decisions and proceedings.
The Board continued to innovate and grow as it gained experience with the reformed refugee determination system. Innovative strategies were developed to reduce the average processing time for immigration appeals. The IRB worked with central agencies and portfolio organizations to ensure that the Board’s operational context and critical needs were fully understood.
All divisions finalized more cases this year than in 2014–15. At the RPD, there were just under 15,400 finalizations and the median time to finalize these cases was 2.9 months, well below the four-month target. Despite these results, the RPD inventory grew to 12,400 as a result of a near 25-percent increase in intake over the year. The IRB reallocated more than $3 million internally to hire additional decision-makers and to help address this inventory and the gap between the RPD’s capacity and intake levels. Work is also ongoing to secure additional funding to help resolve the remaining 5,800 legacy cases.
The RAD has matured throughout the year and its productivity grew. The Division resolved approximately 2,900 appeals, virtually matching intake. The Federal Court of Appeal recognized the quality of RAD decisions and the RAD continued to develop a robust adjudication strategy, fulfilling its important dual mandate to both correct errors at the RPD and develop consistent refugee jurisprudence in Canada.
The ID maintained a fast pace, meeting its targets to hear detention reviews (more than 14,000) within the legislated time limits and conducting admissibility hearings within six months in 93 percent of cases (target of 86 percent).
For the IAD, the contribution of innovative approaches made it possible to reduce its inventory by more than 1,100 appeals. The output to intake ratio for 2015–16 was above 120 percent.
The key to success in all four divisions is ensuring that we have sufficient numbers of decision-makers and staff in place in a timely fashion. Near-continuous recruitment is required in most of our divisions and a Governor in Council (GIC) decision-maker recruitment campaign launched in mid-2015 allowed the Minister to appoint 15 new decision-makers in early 2016.
Following the results of the 2014 Public Service Employee Survey, the IRB developed an action plan to address concerns raised by employees. The Quality Workplace Commitment initiative was put in place with the goal of redoubling efforts to ensure that each IRB employee and decision-maker benefits from a respectful and productive work environment that is free from harassment. The Office of Integrity, which I put in place more than a year ago, continued to play an important role in this respect; it reached out to employees across the country to promote the services offered by this office.
The IRB places a great deal of significance on its outreach and engagement program as a key element in its approach to consultation with the public and stakeholders. In 2015–16, it provided consistent and timely information to internal and external audiences and strengthened its engagement with key partners, stakeholders and the public, including bringing stakeholders together for consultations at meetings of the IRB’s Consultative Committee on Practices and Procedures.
The Board continues to maintain a strong relationship with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees both in Canada and at its headquarters in Geneva, sharing information and best practices. The IRB also pursues an ongoing productive dialogue with numerous international partners on such issues as cooperation on asylum and international capacity building. In this way, the Board plays an important role in promoting Canada’s values and humanitarian traditions both here in Canada and around the world.
I am proud of the work the IRB accomplished this past year and of the contribution made by our personnel across all internal services and divisions. I will keep promoting constructive teamwork as the Board responds to existing and new challenges in the coming year.
The original version was signed by
Mario Dion
Chairperson
Results highlights
[Alternate format]
The image illustrates a diagram depicting the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) Results Highlights.
There are three circles on top of each other merging into a text box below them.
The first circle on the top describes the following:
- 41,100 Decisions Rendered
The second circle on the middle describes the following:
The third circle on the bottom describes the following:
The box under the third circle describes the following IRB's Results Highlights:
- The Organization Focused On:
- The success of the refugee determination process
- An effective response to intake and workload pressures across the divisions
- The three-year evaluation of the refugee determination system
- The implementation of several initiatives to ensure a healthier workplace (creation of the Office of Integrity, a management plan on the recommendations from the 2014 Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) and organization-wide training on values and ethics and creating a respectful and harassment-free workplace)
- 2015–16 at a Glance
- A total of 41,100 cases were resolved
- 18,500 refugee protection claims were referred and 15,400 were decided
- 3,100 refugee appeals were filed and 2,900 refugee appeals were finalized
- 2,000 admissibility hearings were finalized
- 14,000 detention reviews were finalized
- 5,300 immigration appeals were filed and 6,800 immigration appeals were finalized or stayed
Section I: Organizational overview
Organizational profile
-
Appropriate Minister: The Honourable John McCallum
-
Institutional Head: Mario Dion, Chairperson
-
Ministerial Portfolio: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
-
Enabling Instrument:
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA)
-
Year of Incorporation/Commencement: 1989
Organizational context
Raison d'être and Responsabilities
Mission
The mission of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB), on behalf of Canadians, is to resolve immigration and refugee cases efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law.
Mandate
Refugee Protection Division (RPD)
- Decides claims for refugee protection
- Decides applications for vacation of refugee protection
- Decides applications for cessation of refugee protection
- Decides pre-removal risk assessments (PRRAs) (not yet in force; to come into force on a day or days fixed by order of the Governor in Council [GIC])
Refugee Appeal Division (RAD)
- Where the right of appeal is exercised, decides appeals from decisions of the RPD allowing or rejecting claims for refugee protection
Immigration Division (ID)
- Conducts admissibility hearings for foreign nationals or permanent residents who seek entry into Canada, or who are already in Canada and are alleged to be inadmissible
- Conducts detention reviews for foreign nationals or permanent residents who are detained for immigration reasons
Immigration Appeal Division (IAD)
- Decides appeals of family sponsorship applications refused by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC)
- Decides appeals from certain removal orders made against permanent residents, Convention refugees and other protected persons, and holders of permanent resident visas
- Decides appeals by permanent residents in which an IRCC officer outside Canada has decided that they have not fulfilled their residency obligation
- Decides appeals by the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness of ID decisions at admissibility hearings
Regional Operations
The IRB carries out its work in three regional offices located in Toronto (Central Region), Montréal (Eastern Region) and Vancouver (Western Region). The Central Region is responsible for Ontario, excluding Ottawa; the Eastern Region for Quebec, Ottawa and the Atlantic provinces; and the Western Region for the Western provinces and Northern territories. All four divisions hold hearings in these regions and are assisted by registry services and corporate support. The IRB also conducts hearings from its Calgary office. Hearings are also held in a small number of itinerant locations. The IRB’s National Headquarters are located in Ottawa.
Administrative Justice
Through the work of each division, the IRB strives to deliver a simpler, more accessible and expeditious form of justice than that provided by the courts. The IRB applies the principles of administrative law, including those of natural justice, in its proceedings. Its decisions are rendered in accordance with the law, including the
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The IRB is committed to fairness in all aspects of its work. Each case is decided on its own merits by independent decision-makers. The Board respects the dignity and diversity of the individuals who appear before it and their unique and sometimes traumatic experiences.
Benefits for Canadians
Immigrants and refugees have always contributed significantly to Canada's growth and development. The IRB ensures continued benefits to Canadians in three important ways:
- In the resolution of refugee protection claims and refugee protection appeals, it ensures that Canada accepts those in need of protection in accordance with international obligations and Canadian law.
- Through admissibility hearings and detention reviews, it contributes to the integrity of our immigration system, balances the individual rights of foreign nationals and permanent residents against the safety and security of Canadians, and upholds Canada’s reputation for justice and fairness.
- As an independent tribunal responsible for resolving sponsorship, removal order and residency obligation appeals, it helps to promote family reunification, ensures Canadians’ safety and security, and safeguards the integrity of Canada’s immigration system.
The IRB also contributes more broadly to the quality of life in Canada’s communities by strengthening our country’s social fabric and by reflecting and reinforcing the core values that are important to Canadians. These include respect for human rights, peace, security and the rule of law.
Strategic Outcome and Program Alignment Architecture
Based on its legislated mandate and approved Program Alignment Architecture for the 2015–16 reporting period, the IRB has a single strategic outcome and four core programs that include responsibility for all tribunal decisions and resolutions. The fifth program, Internal Services, supports the first four and the strategic outcome.
-
1. Strategic Outcome: Resolve immigration and refugee cases before the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law
-
1.1 Program: Refugee Protection
-
1.2 Program: Refugee Appeal
-
1.3 Program: Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews
-
1.4 Program: Immigration Appeal
-
Internal Services
Operating Environment and Risk Analysis
Key Risks
| Risk | Risk Response Strategy | Link to the Organization's Programs |
|---|
| Meeting regulatory time limits | The RPD launched a number of initiatives in an effort to increase RPD finalizations, including staffing actions, efficiency pilots, expedited processing, and a refocused performance management strategy. | 1.1 Refugee Protection |
| The RAD pursued efficiencies through the transcript pilot project, redistributed workload between regions, and enhanced support services to decision-makers. | 1.2 Refugee Appeal |
| Impact of centralization of common services on tribunal functions | Significant strides were made in the centralization of common services while particular attention was paid to maintaining tribunal quality. This modernization effort is ongoing but results support the downgrading of this risk. | - 1.1 Refugee Protection
- 1.2 Refugee Appeal
- 1.3 Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews
- 1.4 Immigration Appeal
- Internal Services
|
Meeting regulatory time limits. Over the last year, the RPD increased its decision-maker capacity in order to ensure that hearings continue to be held within the legislated time limits. A selection process for RPD decision-makers was launched in September 2015 and resulted in over 30 additional decision-maker appointments made nationally. On other fronts, the RPD launched an expedited process for manifestly well-founded claims and applied it successfully to Syrian claims. Moreover, based on over two years of experience with the current system, the RPD refined its performance management framework to more closely align decision-maker capacity with workload pressures.
By the end of the fiscal year, the Federal Court of Appeal issued its decision clarifying the scope of the appeal before the RAD. Prior to this decision, the unsettled jurisprudence had posed operational challenges for the RAD in meeting its legislated time limit. The RAD’s capacity was helped with two reappointments by the Government, but further appointments to bring the RAD to full complement are pending. A number of efficiency and quality measures were also implemented.
External service providers. The IRB made significant progress in implementing the Government’s change agenda with respect to the centralization of common services while maintaining the quality and responsiveness of its tribunal functions. Implementation, so far, includes the migration to the new pay centre and pay system, the new financial system, new information technology and information management processes and software, and Web renewal. There remains more to be done in this modernization effort, but the IRB is confident in a successful outcome and has downgraded this risk.
Organizational Priorities
Priority 1: Resolve cases in a timely manner while ensuring quality and fairness
Description
Public service staffing and GIC decision-maker recruitment were enhanced to increase our capacity to resolve cases in general and innovative strategies were developed to reduce the average processing time for immigration appeal cases.
Priority Type
Ongoing
Key Supporting Initiatives
| Planned Initiatives | Start Date | End Date | Status | Link to the Organization's Programs |
|---|
| Development and implementation of a human resources strategy to increase decision-maker capacity and the timely resolution of cases and appeals (public service staffing and GIC decision-maker recruitment) | April 1, 2015 | March 31, 2016 | Ongoing | - 1.1 Refugee Protection
- 1.2 Refugee Appeal
- 1.4 Immigration Appeal
|
| The IAD introduced case management changes to resolve more appeals earlier in its process | April 1, 2015 | March 31, 2016 | Ongoing | 1.4 Immigration Appeal |
| Progress Toward the Priority |
|---|
- The Board strove to achieve a high level of productivity and to render decisions within established performance targets.
- The Board reallocated resources to ensure the timely resolution of cases and appeals.
- The IRB worked to rebuild capacity in the IAD to address growing processing times and the inventory of appeals in that division.
- The Board continued to ensure that the quality and fairness of its proceedings were maintained.
|
Priority 2: Foster an adaptive and flexible organization that effectively manages its intake and workload
Description
The IRB demonstrated a commitment to remain an adaptive and flexible organization by fine-tuning its processes and by responding to evolving jurisprudence and fluctuating intake to help fulfill its mandate.
Priority Type
New
Key Supporting Initiatives
| Planned Initiatives | Start Date | End Date | Status | Link to the Organization's Programs |
|---|
| The RAD continued to adapt to the Federal Court’s guidance on application criteria and on the scope of appeals, which significantly impacted decision-makers’ workload | April 1, 2015 | Ongoing | On track | 1.2 Refugee Appeal |
| The IRB commissioned a program evaluation of its refugee determination system as part of ongoing efforts to monitor and improve its delivery of the new system | April 1, 2015 | March 31, 2016 | Completed | - 1.1 Refugee Protection
- 1.2 Refugee Appeal
|
| Progress Toward the Priority |
|---|
- Adaptability and flexibility were critical to the IRB's success in fine-tuning its processes as it continued to gain experience with the reformed refugee determination system.
- The IRB sought to strengthen collaboration with portfolio organizations to enhance productivity and efficiency while safeguarding the Board’s institutional independence.
|
Priority 3: Continue to build an organization that values its people and promotes management excellence
Description
This priority supports the IRB’s organizational commitment to ensure that IRB employees and decision-makers continue to have the opportunity to work in a respectful and productive work environment that is free from harassment.
Priority Type
Ongoing
Key Supporting Initiatives
| Planned Initiatives | Start Date | End Date | Status | Link to the Organization's Programs |
|---|
| The creation of the Office of Integrity | April 1, 2015 | March 31, 2016 | Completed | Internal Services |
| Comprehensive training on values and ethics and on creating a harassment-free workplace for all personnel | April 1, 2015 | March 31, 2017 | On track | Internal Services |
| The establishment and implementation of the Management Action Plan in response to the 2014 PSES recommendations | April 1, 2015 | March 31, 2016 | Completed | Internal Services |
| The Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS) funding policy changes made it possible to re start the clock for term positions, thus increasing workforce stability | April 1, 2015 | March 31, 2016 | Completed | Internal Services |
| Progress Toward the Priority |
|---|
- The IRB ensured the promotion of a supportive and healthy workplace and a productive and resilient workforce by continuing to put in place and operationalizing policies and procedures that support effective management of human resources and forward-thinking business planning.
|
Section II: Expenditure overview
Actual expenditures
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
2015–16
Main Estimates | 2015–16
Planned Spending | 2015–16
Total Authorities
Available for Use | 2015–16
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2015–16
Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 112,709,491 | 112,709,491 | 119,302,866 | 112,397,173 |
less (312,318) |
Human Resources (Full-Time Equivalents [FTEs])
2015–16
Planned | 2015–16
Actual | 2015–16 Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 975 | 934 |
less (41) |
Budgetary performance summary
Budgetary Performance Summary for Programs and Internal Services (dollars)
| Programs and Internal Services | 2015–16
Main Estimates | 2015–16
Planned
Spending | 2016–17
Planned
Spending | 2017–18
Planned
Spending | 2015–16
Total Authorities
Available for Use | 2015–16
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2014–15
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2013–14
Actual Spending
(authorities used) |
|---|
| Refugee Protection | 46,343,210 | 46,343,210 | 42,860,946 | 46,939,822 | 45,608,416 | 41,540,255 | 49,291,278 | 55,762,477 |
| Refugee Appeal | 13,725,196 | 13,725,196 | 16,219,236 | 16,219,236 | 13,669,953 | 11,907,468 | 10,865,389 | 7,504,740 |
| Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews | 8,827,134 | 8,827,134 | 11,100,604 | 11,100,604 | 11,783,319 | 11,465,244 | 11,316,805 | 12,366,193 |
| Immigration Appeal | 15,099,168 | 15,099,168 | 15,718,195 | 15,718,195 | 16,321,443 | 15,889,895 | 14,863,181 | 12,516,921 |
| Internal Services | 28,714,783 | 28,714,783 | 28,603,685 | 28,603,685 | 31,919,735 | 31,594,311 | 33,413,380 | 33,769,989 |
|
Total |
112,709,491 |
112,709,491 |
114,502,666 |
118,581,542 |
119,302,866 |
112,397,173 |
119,750,033 |
121,920,320 |
Actual spending for the current year is in line with the 2015–16 Main Estimates. The large decrease in actual spending in comparison to last year is due to the fact that significant expenditures were made during 2014–15 for the revitalization of headquarters office space, preparatory work in anticipation of the transfer of the PRRA function and a one-time transition payment for implementing salary payments in arrears for the Government. Planned spending for 2017–18 includes funding associated with the transfer of the PRRA function to the IRB, which is to come at a day (or days) to be fixed by order of the GIC.
Organizational spending trend
[Alternate format]
The image illustrates a bar chart depicting the actual and projected spending by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) from 2013–14 to 2018–19.
- The Y axis (vertical) represents the dollars in increments of 20,000,000 ranging from 0 to 140,000,000.
- The X axis (horizontal) represents six fiscal years from 2013–14 to 2018–19
Each fiscal year consists of three bars:
- the first represents the number for sunset programs - anticipated funding;
- the second represents the number for statutory funding; and
- the third represents the number for voted spending.
For fiscal year 2013–14, the total amount for spending was $121,920,320:
- the amount for sunset programs - anticipated funding was $1,169,986;
- the amount for statutory funding was $13,868,350; and
- the amount for voted spending was $106,881,984.
For fiscal year 2014–15, the total amount for spending was $119,750,033:
- the amount for sunset programs - anticipated funding was $1,178,258;
- the amount for statutory funding was $12,685,148; and
- the amount for voted spending was $105,886,627
For fiscal year 2015–16, the total amount for spending is forecasted to be $112,397,173:
- the amount for sunset programs - anticipated funding is forecasted to be $1,193,148;
- the amount for statutory funding is forecasted to be $11,966,103; and
- the amount for voted spending is forecasted to be $99,237,922.
For fiscal year 2016–17, the total amount for spending is planned to be $114,502,666:
- the amount for sunset programs - anticipated funding is planned to be $1,485,620;
- the amount for statutory funding is planned to be $13,668,619; and
- the amount for voted spending is planned to be $99,348,427.
For fiscal year 2017–18, the total amount for spending is planned to be $118,581,542:
- the amount for sunset programs - anticipated funding is planned to be $1,485,620;
- the amount for statutory funding is planned to be $14,164,495; and
- the amount for voted spending is planned to be $102,931,427.
For fiscal year 2018–19, the total amount for spending is planned to be $116,909,130:
- the amount for sunset programs - anticipated funding is planned to be $0;
- the amount for statutory funding is planned to be $13,977,703; and
- the amount for voted spending is planned to be $102,931,427.
Sunset Program spending relates to the processing of cases involving an application for the protection of information pursuant to section 86 of the IRPA; this funding is scheduled to end in 2017–18.
Alignment of spending with the whole-of-government framework
| Programs | Spending Area | Government of Canada Outcome | 2015–16 Actual Spending |
|---|
| 1.1 Refugee Protection | International Affairs | A safe and secure world through international engagement | 41,540,255 |
| 1.2 Refugee Appeal | International Affairs | A safe and secure world through international engagement | 11,907,468 |
| 1.3 Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews | Social Affairs | A safe and secure Canada | 11,465,244 |
| 1.4 Immigration Appeal | Social Affairs | A safe and secure Canada | 15,889,895 |
Total Spending by Spending Area (dollars)
| Spending Area | Total Planned Spending | Total Actual Spending |
|---|
| Economic Affairs | 0 | 0 |
| Social Affairs | 23,926,302 | 27,355,139 |
| International Affairs | 60,068,406 | 53,447,723 |
| Government Affairs | 0 | 0 |
Financial statements and financial statements highlights
Financial Statements
The
financial statements can be found on the IRB’s website.
Financial Statement Highlights
Condensed Statement of Operations (unaudited)
For the year ending March 31, 2016 (dollars)
| Financial Information | 2015‑16 Planned Results | 2015‑16 Actual | 2014‑15 Actual | Difference (2015‑16 actual minus 2015‑16 planned) | Difference (2015‑16 actual minus 2014‑15 actual) |
|---|
| Total expenses | 139,800,000 | 136,906,675 | 146,741,951 |
less (2,893,325) |
less (9,835,276) |
| Total revenues | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Net cost of operations before government funding and transfers | 139,800,000 | 136,906,675 | 146,741,951 |
less (2,893,325) |
less (9,835,276) |
The actual total expenses of $136.9 million reflect a decrease of $9.8 million as compared with 2014–15. This is in part due to lower personnel costs (a decrease of $5.7 million), which correspond to a lower number of FTEs, the mix of positions staffed and the impact of a reduced liability for future severance benefits. The balance of decreased expenses reflects costs in 2014–15, largely for professional services, that were not incurred in 2015–16; they included resources for the revitalization of headquarters office space and preparatory work in anticipation of the transfer of the PRRA. The actual total expenses were lower than planned by $2.9 million as a result of lower personnel costs.
Condensed Statement of Financial Position (unaudited)
As of March 31, 2016 (dollars)
| Financial Information | 2015‑16 | 2014‑15 | Difference (2015‑16 minus 2014‑15) |
|---|
| Total net liabilities | 18,705,316 | 20,187,883 |
less (1,482,567) |
| Total net financial assets | 10,288,767 | 9,485,529 | 803,238 |
| Organizational net debt | 8,416,549 | 10,702,354 |
less (2,285,805) |
| Total non-financial assets | 7,394,954 | 10,573,533 |
less (3,178,579) |
| Organizational net financial position |
less (1,021,595) |
less (128,821) |
less (892,774) |
The total liabilities, as at the end of the year, were $18.7 million and were made up of accounts payable, accrued salaries, employees’ future severance benefits and vacation pay liabilities. The decrease in liabilities is largely as a result of a reduced obligation for future severance benefits. The total financial assets as at the end of the year were $10.3 million and reflect amounts due from the Consolidated Revenue Fund and amounts in accounts receivable. The increase in financial assets reflects outstanding salary recoveries from other government departments arising from the movement of staff. Organizational net debt, of $8.4 million, is calculated as the difference between total net liabilities less net financial assets. The net debt indicator represents future funding requirements to pay for past transactions and events, and is one indicator of a department's financial position. The total non-financial assets reflect the net book value of capital assets as at March 31 and have decreased as the assets are being amortized over their expected useful life and minimal new investments in capital were made in 2015–16.
Section III: Analysis of programs and internal services
Program 1.1: Refugee protection
Description
The Refugee Protection Division (RPD) delivers the IRB's
Refugee Protection program. It renders quality decisions and resolves cases in a timely manner regarding refugee protection claims made by persons in Canada, and pre-removal risk assessments of persons subject to a removal order.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
With the reformed refugee determination system entering its third year of operation, the RPD continued to implement further operational adjustments to better align divisional resources to the procedural requirements introduced with legislated time limits to refugee protection hearings. Additionally, adjustments to assumptions made during the IRB’s operational planning for refugee reform and a thorough assessment of the impacts of peak intake months on RPD timelines revealed a clear need for additional decision-makers. In response to the new evidence and analysis, the RPD hired over 30 new decisions-makers. Despite the increase in RPD capacity, higher-than-projected intake, alongside resource constraints, resulted in intake exceeding output.
The RPD also processed claims referred for re-determination from the Federal Court and from the RAD, as well as applications brought forward by the Minister to cease or vacate refugee protection. However, due to higher intake of new referrals, which are prioritized by the RPD in order to meet legislated time limits, as well as the resource constraints noted above, the ability to finalize other types of intake was limited during 2015–16.
Transitional provisions of the
Balanced Refugee Reform Act, as amended by the
Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act, permitted GIC-appointed RPD decision-makers who were still in mandate at the date of coming into force of the refugee reform provisions of those acts (i.e., December 15, 2012) to remain assigned to the RPD for the duration of their mandate. The transitional provisions also provided that they only had jurisdiction to hear and decide cases referred to the Division prior to December 15, 2012 (i.e., legacy cases). The mandates of those transitional decision-makers have now expired.
Reducing the inventory of pending legacy claims (those referred to the RPD prior to December 15, 2012) remains a key commitment of the IRB. However, the RPD focused its capacity on new referrals, which are subject to legislated time limits. As a result, minimal capacity was available to process legacy cases. Despite these constraints, the RPD finalized 2,000 legacy claims in 2015–16. The RPD will continue to reduce the inventory of remaining legacy cases to the extent of its capacity.
The impartiality and adjudicative independence of the Division’s decision-makers and considerations of natural justice and fairness remain paramount. Throughout 2015–16, the quality of RPD proceedings and decisions were supported by up-to-date country-of-origin information, ongoing professional development and a new performance management framework, as well as through the jurisprudence established by the RAD and the Federal Court.
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
2015–16
Main Estimates | 2015–16
Planned Spending | 2015–16
Total Authorities
Available for Use | 2015–16
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2015–16
Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 46,343,210 | 46,343,210 | 45,608,416 | 41,540,255 |
less (4,802,955) |
Human Resources (FTEs)
2015–16
Planned | 2015–16
Actual | 2015–16 Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 440 | 402 |
less (38) |
Performance Results
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|
| Cases are resolved through proceedings that are focused and respectful and decisions that are transparent and intelligible | The average score of proceedings measured on a 1-to-3 scale for being respectful and focused, and of decisions that are clear, concise and complete | 2.0 | Data collection to resume in 2016–17 |
| Timely decisions rendered | Median time to finalize a claim | 4 months | 2.9 months |
| Percentage of claims finalized within 90 days of being expected to proceed | 80% | 72% |
Refugee Protection Performance
[Alternate format]
The image illustrates a graphic containing a bar chart representing the actual numbers of refugee protection claims received by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
- The Y axis (vertical) represents the claims in increments of 10,000 ranging from 0 to 40,000.
- The X axis (horizontal) represents four fiscal years from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
Each fiscal year consists of two columns:
- the first represents the number of claims referred; and
- the second represents the number of claims finalized.
Claims that were finalized fall into the following three categories:
- Accepted
- Withdrawn/Abandoned
- Rejected
The following are the numbers by fiscal year (Note: The totals may not be exactly 100% due to rounding):
For the fiscal year 2012–13, 16,900 claims were referred and 26,600 claims were finalized.
Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 34% were accepted, 17% were withdrawn/abandoned and 50% were rejected.
For the fiscal year 2013–14, 11,600 claims were referred and 21,300 claims were finalized.
Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 42% were accepted, 14% were withdrawn/abandoned and 44% were rejected.
For the fiscal year 2014–15, 14,900 claims were referred and 19,800 claims were finalized.
Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 51% were accepted, 12% were withdrawn/abandoned and 37% were rejected.
For the fiscal year 2015–16, 17,000 claims were referred and 15,400 claims were finalized.
Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 61% were accepted, 8% were withdrawn/abandoned and 31% were rejected.
Program 1.2: Refugee appeal
Description
The Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) delivers the IRB's
Refugee Appeal program. It renders quality decisions and resolves cases in a timely manner regarding appeals against a decision made on a refugee protection claim of the Refugee Protection Division.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
In its third year of operation, the RAD continued to establish best practices for the efficiency of its operations and the quality of its decisions. The number of appeals made to the RAD in 2015–16 increased by 23 percent compared to the previous fiscal year and finalizations increased by 42 percent over the same period. This was accomplished despite a decrease of decision-makers in the Division during the year. Strategic allocation of resources resulted in only 27 of its 49 positions filled in 2015–16. A considerable effort was made in 2015–16 to recruit new decision-makers and it is expected that some new decision-makers will be appointed in the new fiscal year. In anticipation of the appointments, the RAD reviewed and revamped its new decision-maker training in conjunction with the IRB’s Internal Services. Given the short history of the RAD, a new training curriculum was also needed to meet the needs of decision-makers.
Other significant achievements included the launching of the RAD Adjudication Strategy Committee, which is expected to play a major role in focusing RAD initiatives for greater productivity and decision-making consistency. The RAD continued to engage the stakeholder community in conducting regular information sessions to shape processes and tools and to help provide counsel and self-represented appellants with the means to file appeals that comply more closely with the
Refugee Appeal Division Rules and the applicable time limits. The Division also worked on introducing the Appellant’s Record form to improve accessibility and bring about consistency in appeals.
The RAD held regular professional development sessions and offered Federal Court jurisprudence updates for decision-makers and staff. Finally, the RAD worked closely with the stakeholders both regionally and nationally. The RAD participated in and presented information at annual professional developmental meetings. Regular meetings were held with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees with respect to their role of monitoring the refugee determination system.
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
2015–16
Main Estimates | 2015–16
Planned Spending | 2015–16
Total Authorities
Available for Use | 2015–16
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2015–16
Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 13,725,196 | 13,725,196 | 13,669,953 | 11,907,468 |
less (1,817,728) |
Human Resources (FTEs)
2015–16
Planned | 2015–16
Actual | 2015–16 Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 100 | 84 |
less (16) |
Performance Results
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|
| Cases are resolved through proceedings that are focused and respectful and decisions that are transparent and intelligible | The average score of proceedings measured on a 1-to-3 scale for being respectful and focused, and of decisions that are clear, concise and complete | 2.0 | Data not collectible for 2015–16; will start in 2016–17 |
| Timely decisions rendered | Percentage of decisions made within 90 days of the filing and perfecting of an appeal when there is no oral hearing | 80% | 53% |
Refugee Appeal Performance
[Alternate format]
The image illustrates a graphic containing a bar chart representing the actual numbers of refugee appeals received by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
- The Y axis (vertical) represents the appeals in increments of 1,000 ranging from 0 to 5,000.
- The X axis (horizontal) represents four fiscal years from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
The fiscal year 2012–13 does't have any data. The data is replaced by a large rectangle with the following text "Activities in the Refugee Appeal Division started in the fourth quarter of 2012–13."
The last three fiscal years consist of two columns:
- the first represents the number of appeals filed; and
- the second represents the number of appeals finalized.
Appeals that were finalized fall into the following three categories:
- Withdrawn/Administrative/Abandoned
- Allowed
- Dismissed
The following are the numbers by fiscal year (Note: The totals may not be exactly 100% due to rounding):
For the fiscal year 2013–14, 1,700 appeals were filled and 1,100 appeals were finalized.
Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 4% were withdrawn/administrative/abandoned, 17% were allowed and 79% were dismissed.
For the fiscal year 2014–15, 2,500 appeals were filled and 2,100 appeals were finalized.
Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 3% were withdrawn/administrative/abandoned, 22% were allowed and 76% were dismissed.
For the fiscal year 2015–16, 3,100 appeals were filled and 2,900 appeals were finalized.
Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 3% were withdrawn/administrative/abandoned, 26% were allowed and 71% were dismissed.
Program 1.3: Admissibility hearings and detention reviews
Description
The Immigration Division (ID) delivers the
Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews program. It renders quality decisions and resolves cases in a timely manner regarding foreign nationals or permanent residents who are alleged to be inadmissible to Canada pursuant to the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) and foreign nationals or permanent residents who are detained under IRPA authority.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
During 2015–16, the ID continued to prioritize detention reviews to ensure that legislative requirements and fundamental rights were respected. At the same time, the Division processed an increased number of admissibility hearings in an efficient manner and finalized 93 percent of them within six months of their referral.
The Division continued to monitor its scheduling standards to ensure that predetermined productivity targets were being met. The proactive monitoring of case management practices allowed the ID to maintain reduced processing times and to minimize changes of date and time of proceedings, while continuing to resolve cases in a timely fashion. The Division continued to promote consistency in decision-making by identifying emerging issues, promoting open discussion among ID decision-makers on varying interpretations of the law, developing adjudicative tools and sustaining a learning environment for its decision-makers.
Through ongoing communication and effective management, the Division continued to promote a respectful work environment that builds on the individual skills and talents of its people.
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
2015–16
Main Estimates | 2015–16
Planned Spending | 2015–16
Total Authorities
Available for Use | 2015–16
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2015–16
Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 8,827,134 | 8,827,134 | 11,783,319 | 11,465,244 | 2,638,110 |
A significant portion of the variance between total authorities and Main Estimates relates to funding received during the year for cases requiring the protection of information pursuant to Division 9 of the IRPA.
Human Resources (FTEs)
2015–16
Planned | 2015–16
Actual | 2015–16 Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 75 | 86 | 11 |
Performance Results
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|
| Cases are resolved through proceedings that are focused and respectful and decisions that are transparent and intelligible | The average score of proceedings measured on a 1-to-3 scale for being respectful and focused, and of decisions that are clear, concise and complete | 2.0 | 2.3 |
| Timely decisions rendered | Percentage of detention review cases concluded within statutory time limits | 96%Note 1 | 98% |
| Percentage of admissibility hearings finalized within six months | 86%Note 2 | 93% |
Notes
- Note 1
Factors outside the IRB's control, such as prison lockdowns, impede the achievement of 100-percent compliance.
Return to note 1 referrer
- Note 2
Detention reviews take priority over admissibility hearings due to legislative time requirements. The number of referrals from the Canada Border Services Agency affects the capacity of the ID to conduct admissibility hearings.
Return to note 2 referrer
Detention Reviews Performance
[Alternate format]
The image illustrates a graphic containing a bar chart representing the actual numbers of detention reviews received by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
- The Y axis (vertical) represents the detention reviews in increments of 5,000 ranging from 0 to 25,000.
- The X axis (horizontal) represents four fiscal years from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
For each of the last four fiscal years, it shows the following:
- Released (change of conditions)
- Ordered released (no terms and conditions)
- Released (on terms and conditions)
- Detained
The following are the numbers by fiscal year (Note: The totals may not be exactly 100% due to rounding):
For the fiscal year 2012–13, 18,300 detention reviews were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 1% were released (change of conditions), 6% were ordered released (no terms and conditions), 11% were released (on terms and conditions) and 82% were detained.
For the fiscal year 2013–14, 16,700 detention reviews were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 0% were released (change of conditions), 5% were ordered released (no terms and conditions), 10% were released (on terms and conditions) and 85% were detained.
For the fiscal year 2014–15, 14,600 detention reviews were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 0% were released (change of conditions), 6% were ordered released (no terms and conditions), 10% were released (on terms and conditions) and 83% were detained.
For the fiscal year 2015–16, 14,000 detention reviews were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 0% were released (change of conditions), 8% were ordered released (no terms and conditions), 13% were released (on terms and conditions) and 79% were detained.
Admissibility Hearings Performance
[Alternate format]
The image illustrates a graphic containing a bar chart representing the actual numbers of admissibility hearings received by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
- The Y axis (vertical) represents the admissibility hearings in increments of 1,000 ranging from 0 to 4,000.
- The X axis (horizontal) represents four fiscal years from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
For each of the last four fiscal years, it shows the following:
- Permission to enter/remain
- Withdrawn
- Failed to appear
- Removal order
The following are the numbers by fiscal year (Note: The totals may not be exactly 100% due to rounding):
For the fiscal year 2012–13, 2,600 admissibility hearings were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 4% for permission to enter/remain, 6% for withdrawn, 15% for failed to appear and 75% for removal order.
For the fiscal year 2013–14, 1,900 admissibility hearings were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 4% for permission to enter/remain, 11% for withdrawn, 7% for failed to appear and 78% for removal order.
For the fiscal year 2014–15, 1,900 admissibility hearings were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 6% for permission to enter/remain, 2% for withdrawn, 4% for failed to appear and 87% for removal order.
For the fiscal year 2015–16, 2,000 admissibility hearings were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 4% for permission to enter/remain, 9% for withdrawn, 12% for failed to appear and 74% for removal order.
Program 1.4: Immigration appeal
Description
The Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) delivers the
Immigration Appeal program. It renders quality decisions and resolves cases in a timely manner regarding sponsorship applications refused by the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship; certain removal orders made against permanent residents, refugees and other protected persons and holders of permanent resident visas; permanent residents outside of Canada who have been found not to have fulfilled their residency obligation; and appeals by the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness against a decision of the Immigration Division on admissibility.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
In 2015–16, the IAD focused on the early resolution of appeals and continued to target a 50-percent resolution rate of appeals without a hearing, through alternative dispute resolution, early informal resolution and paper hearings. The Division continued to find administrative efficiencies that helped reduce the average processing time through proactive case management by standardizing its business process and the use of scheduling strategies for similar case types. The IAD continued to respond in a flexible manner to match resources with regional caseloads by sharing decision-makers among regions and holding hearings by way of videoconference where appropriate.
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
2015–16
Main Estimates | 2015–16
Planned Spending | 2015–16
Total Authorities
Available for Use | 2015–16
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2015–16
Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 15,099,168 | 15,099,168 | 16,321,443 | 15,889,895 | 790,727 |
Human Resources (FTEs)
2015–16
Planned | 2015–16
Actual | 2015–16 Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 120 | 120 | 0 |
Performance Results
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Date to be Achieved |
|---|
| Cases are resolved through proceedings that are focused and respectful and decisions that are transparent and intelligible | The average score of proceedings measured on a 1-to-3 scale for being respectful and focused, and of decisions that are clear, concise and complete | 2.0 | 2.8 |
| Timely decisions rendered | Percentage of appeals finalized compared to appeals filed | 80% | 121% |
Immigration Appeal Performance
[Alternate format]
The image illustrates a graphic containing a bar chart representing the actual numbers of immigration appeals received by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
- The Y axis (vertical) represents the appeals in increments of 2,000 ranging from 0 to 10,000.
- The X axis (horizontal) represents four fiscal years from 2012–13 to 2015–16.
Each fiscal year consists of two columns:
- the first represents the number of appeals filed; and
- the second represents the number of appeals finalized.
Appeals that were finalized fall into the following four categories:
- Stayed
- Allowed
- Withdrawn/Abandoned
- Dismissed
The following are the numbers by fiscal year (Note: The totals may not be exactly 100% due to rounding):
For the fiscal year 2012–13, 6,200 appeals were filed, 5,900 appeals were finalized and 600 appeals were stayed.
Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 34% were allowed, 30% were withdrawn/abandoned and 36% were dismissed.
For the fiscal year 2013–14, 5,800 appeals were filed, 5,600 appeals were finalized and 500 appeals were stayed.
Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 32% were allowed, 33% were withdrawn/abandoned and 35% were dismissed.
For the fiscal year 2014–15, 5,500 appeals were filed, 5,800 appeals were finalized and 400 appeals were stayed.
Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 32% were allowed, 33% were withdrawn/abandoned and 35% were dismissed.
For the fiscal year 2015–16, 5,300 appeals were filed, 6,400 appeals were finalized and 400 appeals were stayed.
Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 32% were allowed, 37% were withdrawn/abandoned and 31% were dismissed.
Internal services
Description
Internal Services are groups of related activities and resources that are administered to support the needs of programs and other corporate obligations of an organization. Internal Services include only those activities and resources that apply across an organization, and not those provided to a specific program. The groups of activities are Management and Oversight Services; Communications Services; Legal Services; Human Resources Management Services; Financial Management Services; Information Management Services; Information Technology Services; Real Property Services; Materiel Services; and Acquisition Services.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Internal Services contributes to and supports the achievement of the IRB’s strategic outcome. In 2015–16, the IRB ensured that appropriate human and financial resources as well as technological, information management and training tools were in place to support the IRB’s strategic and ongoing priorities. The Board continued to ensure that information technology and information management practices were aligned with TBS policies, to the extent practicable and appropriate given the IRB’s status as a quasi judicial tribunal.
The Board developed innovative and legally sound adjudicative strategies, facilitated training and provided support to decision-makers, which allowed the IRB to finalize cases in a timely manner while ensuring quality and fairness. The IRB also modernized and implemented a focused, experiential training program for new decision-makers to support improvement in the quality and efficiency of decision-making. It provided legal advice and support to all four of the IRB’s divisions in an effort to contribute to the quality of decisions, fairness and efficiencies, as well as to provide full legal support to all corporate internal services.
To manage performance, the IRB completed or was in the process of completing evaluations of its delivery of the refugee determination system as well as other initiatives such as the evaluation of a pilot to provide transcripts of RPD hearings in RAD proceedings. In addition, a methodology was developed to measure quality in RAD proceedings that will be tested in the coming year.
The IRB provided relevant and timely access to information to internal and external audiences and, as a result, continued to engage its key partners, stakeholders and the public.
As part of its commitment to build an organization that values its people and promotes management excellence, the IRB continued to prioritize human resources management. In particular, it reinforced the Board’s ethical practices and culture by providing mandatory training to most personnel on values and ethics and on creating a respectful and harassment-free workplace. The Board launched the Quality Workplace Commitment initiative as its response to the findings of the 2014 PSES and to other IRB employee consultation mechanisms. This action plan aims to build a healthier, more inclusive and supportive work environment for all IRB personnel. Additionally, the Board continued its implementation of ongoing public service-wide modernization initiatives such as those focusing on human resources systems, financial systems, and information and technology management initiatives. The Board stayed on course and completed the third year of a multi-year classification cyclical review to ensure work description accuracy. The Board continued to capitalize on efficiencies, ongoing improvement activities and costs savings resulting from the implementation of business process transformation initiatives.
The IRB completed new Threat and Risk Assessments for all IRB-controlled premises and introduced comprehensive security policies to improve safety and security for personnel and the public at those locations.
Budgetary Financial Resources (dollars)
2015–16
Main Estimates | 2015–16
Planned Spending | 2015–16
Total Authorities
Available for Use | 2015–16
Actual Spending
(authorities used) | 2015–16
Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 28,714,783 | 28,714,783 | 31,919,735 | 31,594,311 | 2,879,528 |
Human Resources (FTEs)
2015–16
Planned | 2015–16
Actual | 2015–16 Difference
(actual minus planned) |
|---|
| 240 | 242 | 2 |
Section IV: Supplementary information
Supplementary information table
The following supplementary information table is available on the
IRB’s website.
Federal tax expenditures
The tax system can be used to achieve public policy objectives through the application of special measures such as low tax rates, exemptions, deductions, deferrals and credits. The Department of Finance Canada publishes cost estimates and projections for these measures annually in the
Report on Federal Tax Expenditures. This report also provides detailed background information on tax expenditures, including descriptions, objectives, historical information and references to related federal spending programs. The tax measures presented in this report are the responsibility of the Minister of Finance.
Organizational contact information
For more information, visit the
IRB website, or contact the IRB through either the
Contact Us webpage, Twitter: @IRB_Canada or at the address indicated below.
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
Minto Place—Canada Building
344 Slater Street, 12th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0K1
Appendix: Definitions
appropriation (crédit): Any authority of Parliament to pay money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.
budgetary expenditures (dépenses budgétaires): Include operating and capital expenditures; transfer payments to other levels of government, organizations or individuals; and payments to Crown corporations.
Departmental Performance Report (rapport ministériel sur le rendement): Reports on an appropriated organization’s actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Report on Plans and Priorities. These reports are tabled in Parliament in the fall.
full-time equivalent (équivalent temps plein): Is a measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person-year charge against a departmental budget. Full-time equivalents are calculated as a ratio of assigned hours of work to scheduled hours of work. Scheduled hours of work are set out in collective agreements.
Government of Canada outcomes (résultats du gouvernement du Canada): A set of 16 high-level objectives defined for the government as a whole, grouped in four spending areas: economic affairs, social affairs, international affairs and government affairs.
Management, Resources and Results Structure (Structure de la gestion, des ressources et des résultats): A comprehensive framework that consists of an organization’s inventory of programs, resources, results, performance indicators and governance information. Programs and results are depicted in their hierarchical relationship to each other and to the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute. The Management, Resources and Results Structure is developed from the Program Alignment Architecture.
non-budgetary expenditures (dépenses non budgétaires): Include net outlays and receipts related to loans, investments and advances, which change the composition of the financial assets of the Government of Canada.
performance (rendement): What an organization did with its resources to achieve its results, how well those results compare with what the organization intended to achieve and how well lessons learned have been identified.
performance indicator (indicateur de rendement): A qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging the performance of an organization, program, policy or initiative respecting expected results.
performance reporting (production de rapports sur le rendement): The process of communicating evidence-based performance information. Performance reporting supports decision-making, accountability and transparency.
planned spending (dépenses prévues): For Reports on Plans and Priorities (RPPs) and Departmental Performance Reports (DPRs), planned spending refers to those amounts that receive Treasury Board approval by February 1. Therefore, planned spending may include amounts incremental to planned expenditures presented in the Main Estimates.
A department is expected to be aware of the authorities that it has sought and received. The determination of planned spending is a departmental responsibility, and departments must be able to defend the expenditure and accrual numbers presented in their RPPs and DPRs.
plans (plan): The articulation of strategic choices, which provides information on how an organization intends to achieve its priorities and associated results. Generally a plan will explain the logic behind the strategies chosen and tend to focus on actions that lead up to the expected result.
priorities (priorité): Plans or projects that an organization has chosen to focus and report on during the planning period. Priorities represent the things that are most important or what must be done first to support the achievement of the desired Strategic Outcome(s).
program (programme): A group of related resource inputs and activities that are managed to meet specific needs and to achieve intended results and that are treated as a budgetary unit.
Program Alignment Architecture (architecture d’alignement des programmes): A structured inventory of an organization’s programs depicting the hierarchical relationship between programs and the Strategic Outcome(s) to which they contribute.
Report on Plans and Priorities (rapport sur les plans et les priorités): Provides information on the plans and expected performance of appropriated organizations over a three-year period. These reports are tabled in Parliament each spring.
result (résultat): An external consequence attributed, in part, to an organization, policy, program or initiative. Results are not within the control of a single organization, policy, program or initiative; instead they are within the area of the organization’s influence.
statutory expenditures (dépenses législatives): Expenditures that Parliament has approved through legislation other than appropriation acts. The legislation sets out the purpose of the expenditures and the terms and conditions under which they may be made.
Strategic Outcome (résultat stratégique): A long-term and enduring benefit to Canadians that is linked to the organization’s mandate, vision and core functions.
sunset program (programme temporisé): A time-limited program that does not have an ongoing funding and policy authority. When the program is set to expire, a decision must be made whether to continue the program. In the case of a renewal, the decision specifies the scope, funding level and duration.
target (cible): A measurable performance or success level that an organization, program or initiative plans to achieve within a specified time period. Targets can be either quantitative or qualitative.
voted expenditures (dépenses votées): Expenditures that Parliament approves annually through an Appropriation Act. The Vote wording becomes the governing conditions under which these expenditures may be made.
Whole-of-Government Framework (cadre pangouvernemental): Maps the financial contributions of federal organizations receiving appropriations by aligning their Programs to a set of 16 government-wide, high-level outcome areas, grouped under four spending areas.