Quality performance in the Refugee Appeal Division 2025: Summary report

Methodology

70 cases reviewed | 17 indicators across 2 themes

The study aims to assess the quality of decision making to identify strengths and areas for improvement, as well as to inform performance reporting to the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS).

A third-party reviewer was hired to conduct the assessment. Anne Levesque is an associate professor in the French Common Law Program at the Faculty of Law at the University of Ottawa. She currently holds the Gorden F. Henderson Chair in Human Rights at the Human Rights Research and Education Centre of the University of Ottawa. She was supported by the IRB Audit and Evaluation team.

The cases in the sample were proportionally representative of the overall case composition for language and outcomes.

Considerations

To ensure quality and consistency in the assessment, a reviewer was selected based on their in-depth knowledge of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, refugee and immigration matters, and administrative law. Their observations do not lend themselves to firm conclusions on legal matters such as the correct application of the law, the weighing of the evidence, or the fairness of the proceedings from a natural justice perspective. Only a court reviewing the case can arrive at such conclusions.

Sometimes the sample size is too small for ‘if applicable’ indicators to make inferences about the broader caseload. Where sample sizes are too small, observations or recommendations may still have been provided but these are not based on representative findings.

Overall performance

Percentage of cases that met or exceeded expectations

Performance by theme

Reasons are complete

Reasons are transparent and intelligible

What we did well

The RAD showed notable proficiency in producing reasons for decisions that are justifiable, intelligible and transparent. The RAD performed particularly well in:

• Applying legal frameworks
• Conducting clear and comprehensive factual analysis
• Implementing best practices in administrative decision-writing such as plain, clear, concise and accessible language, point-first writing, and logical structure and organisation of reasons

Recommendations

The RAD’s overall performance relating to most indicators was excellent. The following measures, which have been listed in order of suggested priority, are recommended to sustain this high standard and ensure greater consistency of high results across all areas.

1. Application of Guidelines: Explore different ways to leverage the expertise of members who excel in applying the Guidelines, in order to foster greater consistency in their interpretation and implementation.
   
2. Trauma-informed adjudication: Consider different ways to help members draft reasons that are sensitive to the experiences of individuals affected by trauma.
   
3. Issues-​based analysis: Remind members to conduct issues-based analysis and structure their reasons accordingly.​
   

Management Response

The RAD has accepted all three recommendations in full.

The division will leverage its experienced members to establish a peer coaching group on the application of Guidelines 4, 8, and 9. It will also leverage its members with Federal Court litigation experience to provide their colleagues with best practices and tips on how to structure reasons. It will circulate exemplary decisions in Guidelines application and integrate them in its training materials. It will organize and deliver training on trauma-informed adjudication. Finally, the division will integrate issues-based analysis practices in its writing workshops for members.

For more information

For more information, please see the full report: Quality Performance in the Refugee Appeal Division 2025 .