2011-12 Departmental Performance Report - Part III

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada

The original version was signed by
The Honourable Jason Kenney
Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Message from the Chairperson

Section I: Organizational Overview

Section II: Analysis of Program Activities

Section III: Supplementary Information

Section IV: Other Items of Interest


Message from the Chairperson

Brian Goodman, Chairperson

I am pleased to present the 2011-12 Performance Report for the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB). This report is a balanced and comprehensive review of the IRB's performance and accomplishments as set against stated plans and priorities for 2011-12.

The IRB is an independent and accountable tribunal entrusted by Parliament with resolving immigration and refugee cases efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law. Through the work of its three divisions, namely the Refugee Protection Division (RPD), 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.

Results for Canadians

Throughout the year, the IRB strived to maximize productivity while ensuring fairness for those with proceedings before it. In this regard, I am proud of what the Board's decision-makers and adjudicative support personnel have accomplished during the reporting period. Thanks to their dedication and hard work, as well as internal efficiency measures, all three divisions exceeded expectations for finalizations in 2011-12.

In the RPD in particular, the appointment and reappointment of Governor in Council (GIC) decision-makers, combined with innovative case management strategies, allowed the RPD to make substantial inroads into its backlog of unprocessed refugee protection claims, despite a rise in intake. From a high of 62,000 pending claims in October 2009, the RPD ended the reporting period with 39,400 claims remaining in its backlog.

Reform implementation

In 2011-12, the IRB continued to prepare for the implementation of the Balanced Refugee Reform Act (BRRA). Notwithstanding the tabling of new legislation in February 2012, resulting in further changes to the manner in which it processes refugee protection claims, the IRB is on track to implement the new legislation when it comes into force. Over the past year, we made significant progress towards implementation readiness, in areas ranging from organizational design and information technology to rules development and the preparation of training programs.

The road ahead

Although further reductions in the RPD inventory are anticipated in 2012-13, it is expected that a substantial backlog of legacy claims will remain when the new legislation comes into force. In this regard, the Board continues to work with the Minister's office, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, the Treasury Board Secretariat and the Privy Council Office on options to address this backlog.

Given the far-reaching changes to be implemented in coming months, 2012-13 promises to be a watershed year for the IRB. All the Board's resources and personnel will be mobilized to ensure the successful launch of the new system, while maintaining productivity to the degree possible during the transition period.

I feel fortunate as Chairperson to lead a tribunal whose personnel, whether public servants or GIC appointees, are so committed to the fulfillment of its mission and strategic priorities, and I know that I can count on them to overcome the challenges ahead.



The original version was signed by
Brian Goodman
Chairperson


Section I: Organizational Overview

Raison d'être and Responsibilities

Mission

Our mission, on behalf of Canadians, is to resolve immigration and refugee cases efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law.

The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) is an independent administrative tribunal that was created on January 1, 1989, by an amendment to the Immigration Act. In 2002, the Immigration Act was replaced by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), which was amended by the Balanced Refugee Reform Act (BRRA) in 2010 and will be further amended by the Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act (PCISA). While the IRB's mandate will expand when these amendments come into force, the existing IRB divisions received their mandate from the IRPA during the 2011-12 reporting period.

IRB Division MandatesNote 1

Division Mandates
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 (PRRA)Note 2
Refugee Appeal Division (RAD)Note 2
  • Hears appeals from some 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)
  • Hears appeals of family sponsorship applications refused by Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC)
  • Hears appeals from certain removal orders made against permanent residents, Convention refugees and other protected persons, and holders of permanent resident visas
  • Hears appeals by permanent residents against whom a CIC officer outside Canada has decided that they have not fulfilled their residency obligation
  • Hears appeals by the Minister of Public Safety of ID decisions at admissibility hearings

Notes

Note 1

An overview of the IRB.

Return to note 1 referrer

Note 2

On August 19, 2011, the Government announced that the refugee reform provisions of the BRRA would not come into force during fiscal year 2011-12. Activities associated with PRRA and the RAD will begin in future reporting periods; see Refugee Protection program activity and Refugee Appeal program activity for more details.

Return to first note 2 referrer

Return to second note 2 referrer

Return to third note 2 referrer

Regional Operations

The IRB carries out its work in three regional offices located in Toronto, Montréal and Vancouver. The Central Region is responsible for Ontario, except for Ottawa; the Eastern Region for Quebec, Ottawa and the Atlantic provinces; and the Western Region for the Western provinces and the Northern territories. All three divisions hold hearings in these regions and are assisted by adjudicative and corporate support. The IRB also has offices in Calgary and Ottawa in which hearings are held. Internal and support services are managed at IRB National Headquarters, 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. The Board respects the dignity and diversity of the individuals who appear before it and their unique and sometimes extremely 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 hearing of refugee protection claims, 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, ensures the maintenance of the balance between individual rights and 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, helps to ensure Canadians' safety and security, and safeguards the integrity of Canada's immigration system.

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 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 Activity Architecture

The IRB Program Activity Architecture (PAA) was amended in the second half of 2010-11 in anticipation of the coming into force of the BRRA during fiscal year 2011-12. On August 19, 2011, the Government of Canada announced that implementation of the refugee reform provisions of the BRRA would be delayed. Activities associated with PRRA and the RAD will begin in future reporting periods. As directed by the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS), this 2011-12 Performance Report (DPR) is based on the PAA approved for the 2011-12 reporting period. As illustrated in the diagram below, the IRB has a single strategic outcome and four program activities that include responsibility for all tribunal decisions and resolutions. The fifth program activity, Internal Services, supports the first four.

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada's Program Activity Architecture
[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a flow chart.

There are six boxes that illustrate how the five IRB program activities support the achievement of its strategic outcome.

The five boxes flow into the first box.

The first box at the top stretches the width of the diagram and describes the following:

Strategic Outcome
Resolve immigration and refugee cases before the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law.

These boxes below describe the program activities, and are arranged as four wide boxes on the left, and one narrow box on the right.

The first box on the left describes the following:

Refugee Protection Program Activity

Renders quality decisions and otherwise resolves cases in a timely manner regarding:

  • Refugee protection claims made by persons in Canada
  • PRRA of persons subject to a removal order (On August 19, 2011, the Government announced that the refugee reform provisions of the BRRA would not come into force during fiscal year 2011-12. Activities associated with PRRA and the RAD will begin in future reporting periods; see Refugee Protection program activity and Refugee Appeal program activity for more details.).

Below that is the second box describing the following:

Refugee Appeal Program ActivityNote 2

Renders quality decisions and otherwise resolves cases in a timely manner regarding:

  • Appeals from RPD decisions concerning refugee protection claims.

Below that is the third box describing the following:

Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity

Renders quality decisions and otherwise resolves cases in a timely manner regarding:

  • Admissibility of foreign nationals or permanent residents who are alleged to be inadmissible to Canada under the IRPA.
  • Detention reviews for foreign nationals or permanent residents who are detained under the IRPA.

Below that is the fourth box describing the following:

Immigration Appeal Program Activity

Renders quality decisions and otherwise resolves cases in a timely manner regarding:

  • Family sponsorship applications refused by CIC.
  • Certain removal orders made against permanent residents, Convention 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.
  • Appeals by the Minister of Public Safety against a decision of the ID on admissibility.

The fifth narrow box on the right stretches the length of the other four program activity boxes, and flows back into them. It describes the following:

Internal Services Program Activity

Management and Oversight
Communications
Legal
Human Resources Management
Financial Management
Information Management
Information Technology
Procurement and Assets Management
Internal Audit and Evaluation

Organizational Priorities

The IRB's strategic priorities for 2011-12 are expected to remain through 2012-13. They all support the same single strategic outcome and are summarized in the following table.

2011-12 Strategic Priorities

Strategic Outcome: Resolve immigration and refugee cases before the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law

2011-12 Strategic Priorities
Priorities Type Summary of Progress
Prepare for and implement the BRRA Previously committed to

Since the BRRA received Royal Assent in 2010-11, the IRB has been fully occupied with preparing for the implementation of the new legislation. The Reform Office continued to plan and coordinate reform implementation activities for the new RPD and the RAD in the reporting period, and the IRB was prepared and on track to implement the BRRA in December 2011. With the delay in the projected December 2011 coming-into-force date of the BRRA, the IRB updated its project plan and continued to prepare for implementation, with an emphasis on testing and business process improvement.

With the tabling of Bill C-31 (which became the PCISA upon Royal Assent) in February 2012, significant changes to processes in the Refugee Protection and Refugee Appeal program activities were identified, and a revised project plan was created to implement the new procedures and processes. Planning and development were carried out in coordination with portfolio partners while minimizing the impact on daily operations and maintaining case resolution productivity levels.

Continue to maximize case resolutions while ensuring quality and fairness Ongoing The IRB focused its decision-making capacity on the maximization of case resolutions during 2011-12. A special backlog reduction initiative also yielded a significant number of additional case resolutions in the RPD. Case management processes were improved, and learning and training programs were further enhanced, providing the Board with a greater capacity to meet its caseload expectations and increase completions. Despite these efforts, a substantial backlog of refugee protection claims will remain pending by the time the new system begins; the details will be discussed later in this report.
Continue to promote an adaptive, integrated and flexible organization that values its people Ongoing The IRB continued to ensure the consistent delivery of high-quality administrative justice within a changing environment. During 2011-12, the IRB had to demonstrate its flexibility by preparing to adapt to changes brought about by the reform to the refugee determination system. The Board placed additional emphasis on internal communications with employees and on human resources management practices.

Risk Analysis

Operating Environment

The IRB carries out its mandate within a complex and ever-changing environment. Both international and domestic factors influence the IRB's operating environment. Conflicts and country conditions abroad can affect the number of refugee protection claims made in Canada. Similarly, shifts in international migration patterns and changes to domestic policies by other receiving countries can affect the number of people seeking admission to Canada.

Refugee populations. The report Asylum Levels and Trends in Industrialized Countries 2011Note 3, published by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), shows that the 44 main industrialized countries received 441,300 asylum claims during 2011, representing a 20 percent increase over the total number of claims lodged in 2010 (368,000). After the United States, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Belgium and the United Kingdom, Canada was the eighth largest recipient of applications among the 44 countries, with 25,300 new claims referred during calendar year 2011. Following significant decreases during fiscal years 2009-10 and 2010-11, the number of refugee claims referred to the IRB rose in 2011-12, with 24,400 claims received. This represents a seven percent increase over the previous year. The growth in intake can be attributed largely to the increase in refugee claims from Hungary (4,400, up 95 percent from the previous year).

Immigration appeals. The Government continues to place a priority on family reunification, as expressed in the IRPA and CIC's Annual Report to Parliament on Immigration: 2011Note 4. Regulatory changes to strengthen CIC's capacity to refuse cases of suspected marriage fraud were brought into force on September 30, 2010. Accordingly, the IRB received a high, although somewhat reduced, number of family sponsorship appeals throughout 2011-12. It is expected that family sponsorship appeals will remain at high levels similar to those seen over the past five years.

Notes

Note 3

Report available on the UNHCR Web site: http://www.unhcr.org.

Return to note 3 referrer

Note 4

Report available at http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/pub/annual-report-2011.pdf (PDF, 1.98 MB).

Return to note 4 referrer

Challenges

Reform to Canada's refugee system. The BRRA received Royal Assent on June 29, 2010. Since its tabling, the IRB has worked diligently with its portfolio partners, stakeholders and other organizations to ensure the successful and timely implementation of the new legislation. As described in the previous report, the BRRA provides for significant changes to the structure and the manner in which the IRB processes refugee protection claims. On February 16, 2012, the Government introduced Bill C-31, which further amends the IRPA and the BRRA and which received Royal Assent in June 2012 as the PCISA. In response, the Board developed a robust project plan, based on the initial implementation planning for the BRRA. During 2011-12, the Board dedicated a significant amount of time and effort to planning and implementing refugee reform, which will continue into 2012-13 as the IRB prepares to implement the PCISA. Information contained in this report is based on the IRPA, the BRRA and the PAA approved for the IRB for the 2011-12 reporting period.

Appointment and reappointment of decision-makers. During 2011-12, the IRB depended on decision makers who are appointed by the GIC following a rigorous merit-based selection process to resolve refugee protection claims and immigration appeals. In order to facilitate the implementation of the new refugee determination system, the IRB received additional funding; additional decision makers were appointed by the GIC to the IRB and assigned to the RPD in order to reduce the pending case inventory. The IRB also benefited from the reappointment of many experienced decision-makers, who helped the RPD and IAD maintain their high level of productivity throughout the year. With the reform of the refugee determination system, RPD decision-makers will be appointed in accordance with the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA). Decision-makers in the newly created RAD and in the IAD will be appointed by the GIC.

Pending case inventory. There were approximately 48,400 refugee protection claims and 11,400 immigration appeals pending at the beginning of 2011-12. As explained in previous reports, this backlog had accumulated because of shortfalls in the number of GIC decision-maker appointments and reappointments as well as an intake of new cases that exceeded the IRB's funded capacity. During 2011-12, the additional funding for decision-makers and adjudicative support staff for backlog reduction, combined with more efficient case processing and a moderate claim intake, has allowed the IRB to reduce the number of pending refugee protection claims. The IRB's performance in this regard is further detailed in the second part of this report. At the end of the 2011-12 reporting period, there were 39,400 refugee protection claims and 11,400 immigration appeals pending. The IRB will continue to make every effort, within existing resource levels, to further reduce the inventory during the next reporting period. However, it is expected that a substantial number of legacy cases will remain when the new refugee determination system comes into force.

Replacement of STAR by NOVA. Prior to 2011-12, the IRB relied on a case tracking system known as STAR, which had inherent risks related to the integrity of the system's data and security controls. Since 2011-12, the IRB has invested resources and worked with the TBS to update this system and replace it with a modern case tracking and reporting system called NOVA. The first phase of the project, the migration of the application from an outdated legacy system to a modern platform, was completed in August 2011, under budget and six weeks ahead of schedule. Further development of NOVA will continue to support the business models and requirements of the new refugee determination system.

Budget 2010. As part of the Government's plan to return to a balanced budget, Budget 2010 announced several significant spending control measures for departments and agencies. During 2011-12, the IRB's existing budget continued to absorb pay increases and inflation of operating costs. This absorption was accomplished mainly through attrition and efficiency improvements and will continue in the next reporting period.

Shared services. On August 4, 2011, Shared Services Canada (SSC) was established by an order in council (OIC) to lead the transformation and streamlining of email, data centre and network services across the Government. The IRB is one of 44 departments and agencies from which information technology (IT) assets, personnel and financial resources were transferred to SSC to improve the efficiency of IT services. As a result of the OIC, $0.6 million of the IRB budget was transferred to SSC during 2011-12, and $2.1 million will be transferred in subsequent years. A business continuity framework defined the transition period between August 2011 and March 31, 2012. Following the transfer of budgetary and other resources, the IRB and SSC continue to work together to effect the related changes in functions, processes and assets.

Opportunities

Portfolio and stakeholders. As immigration and refugee portfolio organizations, the IRB, CIC and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) collaborate on operational matters while respecting each other's distinct mandates and the IRB's institutional and adjudicative independence. Portfolio organizations are party to a trilateral memorandum of understanding (MOU) that provides a framework under which organizational priorities are discussed and information is shared as appropriate. This collaborative approach provides for improved communication and operational coordination. The diagram below outlines the distinct functions and roles of the portfolio organizations as well as the overarching goals they share. During 2011-12, this institutional coordination remained invaluable as the IRB continued to work to prepare for the implementation of the new legislation.

Immigration and refugee portfolio organizations and their responsibilities  

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a three-set Venn diagram.

The diagram is composed of three overlapping rectangular shapes that illustrate the distinct functions and roles of the portfolio organizations as well as the overarching goals they share.

The first rectangle shape represents CIC with the following:

  • Overall responsibility for immigration and refugee policies
  • Determines claims for refugee protection abroad at Canadian embassies
  • Consults, selects immigrants, issues visitor visas, grants citizenship
  • Resettles, protects and provides a safe haven for refugees

The second rectangle shape represents CBSA with the following:

  • Provides integrated border services that support national security priorities and facilitates the free flow of persons and goods, including animals and plants, that meet all requirements under program legislation
  • Carries out enforcement and intelligence functions related to immigration and refugee matters

The third rectangle shape represents IRB with the following:

  • Independent administrative tribunal
  • Resolves immigration and refugee cases efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law

The intersection area of the three rectangles describes the following:

  • Security of Canadians
  • Integrity of Canada's immigration and refugee system
  • Strength and diversity of Canada
  • Results and benefits for Canadians

Summary of Performance

Financial and Human Resources
2011-12 Financial Resources ($ Millions)
Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
153.0 165.9 140.8

2011-12 Human Resources (Full-time Equivalents [FTEs])
Planned Actual Difference
1,186 1,092 -94
Summary of Performance Tables

Resolve immigration and refugee cases before the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law

Progress Toward Strategic Outcome
Performance Indicator Target 2011-12 Performance
Percentage of IRB decisions overturned by the Federal Court (This quality indicator is used in addition to the indicators described in the program activities; see Section II for more details.) Less than 1% The IRB met its performance target, with less than 0.6% of its decisions overturned by the Federal Court. This is an indication of the fairness and high quality of the decisions rendered by the Board.

Performance Summary
Program Activity 2010-11 Actual Spending
($ Millions)
2011-12 ($ Millions) Alignment to Government Outcomes AreasNote 5
Main Estimates Planned Spending Total Authorities Actual Spending
Refugee Protection 63.4 75.0 75.0 93.9Note 6 72.4 A safe and secure world through international engagement
Refugee Appeal n/aNote 7 14.0 14.0 2.0Note 6 1.8 A safe and secure world through international engagement
Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews 11.0 13.6 13.6 12.4 11.5 A safe and secure Canada
Immigration Appeal 16.4 14.7 14.7 18.7 16.5 A safe and secure Canada
Subtotal 90.8 117.3 117.3 127.0 102.2 -
Internal Services 34.8 35.7 35.7 38.9Note 8 38.6 -
TOTAL 125.6 153.0 153.0 165.9 140.8 -

Notes

Note 5

More information on Government outcome areas is available at http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/ppg-cpr/frame-cadre-eng.aspx.

Return to note 5 referrer

Note 6

$17.0 million from Refugee Protection and Refugee Appeal Total Authorities were re-profiled to future years due to the delay in the implementation of the BRRA until 2012-13.

Return to first note 6 referrer

Return to second note 6 referrer

Note 7

This program activity was not scheduled to begin until the next reporting period.

Return to note 7 referrer

Note 8

Excludes amount appropriated to SSC.

Return to note 8 referrer

Expenditure Profile

Spending Trend 2008-09 to 2011-12

Expenditure Profile - Spending Trend Graph  

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a line graph.

For each of the last four fiscal years, it shows the following:

Estimated Spending
Planned Spending
Authorized Spending
Actual Spending

The following are the numbers by fiscal year (in millions of dollars):

For the fiscal year 2008–09 the amount for Estimated Spending is 113.4, for Planned Spending 113.4, for Authorized Spending 124.4 and for Actual Spending 114.7.

For the fiscal year 2009–10 the amount for Estimated Spending is 113.4, for Planned Spending 113.4, for Authorized Spending 123.7 and for Actual Spending 114.1.

For the fiscal year 2010–11 the amount for Estimated Spending is 117.1, for Planned Spending 117.1, for Authorized Spending 130.8 and for Actual Spending 125.6.

For the fiscal year 2011–12 the amount for Estimated Spending is 153.0, for Planned Spending 153.0, for Authorized Spending 165.9 and for Actual Spending 140.8.

The increase in Main Estimates and Planned Spending for 2011-12 is mainly due to additional funding received to implement the BRRA.

The difference between Planned Spending and Authorized Spending is primarily due to funding received for the reimbursement of eligible expenditures (primarily immediate payment for severance pay and termination benefits due to revisions to specific collective agreements) and funding carried forward from the previous year.

The difference between Authorized Spending and Actual Spending for 2011-12 is $25.1 million, of which $17.0 million was re-profiled to future years to enable the completion of remaining implementation activities associated with the BRRA.

Most of the increase in Actual Spending in 2011-12 over the previous year is due to expenditures for the implementation of the BRRA and the reimbursement of eligible paylist expenditures.

Estimates by Vote

For information on the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada's organizational votes and/or statutory expenditures, please see the Public Accounts of Canada 2012 (Volume II). An electronic version of the Public Accounts 2012 is available on the Public Works and Government Services Canada Web site.Note 9


Section II: Analysis of Program Activities

Strategic Outcome and Program Activities

Strategic Outcome and Program Activities  

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a flow chart.

There are six boxes that illustrate how the five IRB program activities support the achievement of its strategic outcome.

The five boxes flow into the first box.

The first box at the top stretches the width of the diagram and describes the

Strategic Outcome
Resolve immigration and refugee cases before the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada efficiently, fairly and in accordance with the law.

These boxes below describe the program activities, and are arranged as four wide boxes on the left, and one narrow box on the right.

The first box on the left identifies the
Refugee Protection Program Activity

Below that is the second box identifying the
Refugee Appeal Program Activity

Below that is the third box identifying the
Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Program Activity

Below that is the fourth box identifying the
Immigration Appeal Program Activity

The fifth narrow box on the right flows back into the other four program activity boxes. It identifies the
Internal Services Program Activity

2011-12 Highlights
  • Strategic outcome successfully achieved
  • Exceeded funded case resolutions in all program activities; over 61,400 cases heard
  • Fewer than 0.6% of decisions overturned by the Federal Court

As discussed in Section I, based on the IRB's legislated mandate and approved PAA, the IRB has a single strategic outcome. Each of its four core program activities is focused on the efficient and fair resolution of the different types of immigration and refugee cases. These activities, which are supported by Internal Services, are responsible for all tribunal decisions and case resolutions, and for a successful strategic outcome.

To achieve its strategic outcome, the IRB must resolve the cases before it in a timely manner while ensuring quality and fairness.

The following sections provide a performance summary and information on overall financial and human resources for the IRB's five program activities during the 2011-12 reporting period.

Program Activity 1: Refugee Protection

Description

The Refugee Protection Division (RPD) delivers the IRB's Refugee Protection program activity. It determines claims for refugee protection made in Canada. Processing of refugee protection claims is the largest of the IRB's activities and commands the majority of its resources. Through the work of the RPD, Canada fulfills its obligations as a signatory to a number of international human rights conventions.

Additional information on the RPD is available at http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/RefClaDem/Pages/RpdSpr.aspx.

2011-12 Highlights
  • 24,400 new refugee protection claims filed, 7% more than last year
  • 33,400 refugee protection claims resolved, 8,400 more than forecast
  • Case inventory reduced from 48,400 to 39,400 claims
Refugee Protection Performance Summary
Refugee Protection Performance Summary
2011-12 Financial Resources ($ Millions) 2011-12 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned
Spending
Total
Authorities
Actual
Spending
Planned Actual Difference
75.0 93.9 72.4 582 602 20
Expected Result: Quality decisions rendered and cases resolved in a timely manner
regarding refugee protection claims made in Canada
Performance Indicators Targets
(from 2011-12 RPP)
Actual Results
Clarity, completeness, conciseness and timeliness for decisions Develop a measurement scale and validate it during the first quarter of the new refugee determination system. Target development ongoing. Validation and reporting to begin in the new refugee determination system in future reporting periods.
Percentage of cases finalized without a hearing It was expected that 5% of cases would be finalized without a hearing (expedited process). 7%
Ratio of finalized cases to referred cases During 2011-12, approximately 23,500 refugee protection claim referrals were expected and the RPD anticipated finalizing 25,000 claims, resulting in a ratio of 106%. 24,400 claims were referred and 33,400 claims were finalized, resulting in a ratio of 137%.
Average cost per claim finalized $3,000 $2,400
Average processing time (APT) from case referral to finalization The APT was expected to stabilize at 22.0 months. Decreased from 21.9 to 20.0 months.
Performance Summary and Analysis

Reform timelines. In August 2011, the Government delayed the implementation of the BRRA to 2012-13. As a result, the IRB did not implement a new Refugee Protection program in the reporting period. Cases continued to be heard under the IRPA throughout 2011-12.

Preparation for implementation. Despite the delay in the implementation of the BRRA and the subsequent tabling of Bill C-31, the Reform Office and the RPD continued to undertake major efforts to prepare for the timely and successful implementation of both the BRRA and Bill C-31. For instance, new proposed rules were developed, training manuals were prepared and staffing efforts continued throughout the reporting period. Project plans were updated and revised in light of the changes proposed in Bill C-31 in February 2012.

Case inventory. As in 2010-11, the RPD finalized approximately 33,400 claims. Despite an increase of seven percent in cases referred to the Division, the inventory was reduced from 48,400 to 39,400 claims during the reporting period due to a high number of claims finalized. As a result, the inventory of cases has diminished by an average of 800 claims per month for the past two years. A significant increase in referrals from Hungary and other Central European countries was recorded. The RPD also saw a high number of referrals from countries that had not produced significant volumes in the past 20 years, such as North Korea, Namibia and Croatia. In the past four years, between 14 and 22 percent of finalized cases were either withdrawn or abandoned. Consequently, the RPD established pre-hearing conferences to ensure that claimants were able and willing to proceed with their claims. Despite the RPD's strong performance throughout the year, a substantial number of claims will remain pending when the new legislation comes into force.

Pre-removal risk assessment. Bill C-31 provides that the PRRA function will be transferred to the RPD two years after the coming into force of the legislation (under the BRRA, this transfer was to occur one year sooner). Although PRRA activities did not begin in this reporting period, planning for the transfer did occur, and the Board began early work on draft PRRA rules.

Lessons Learned

Over the years, the RPD has adopted a range of mechanisms to reduce its backlog and APT. A particular effort was made in the past year to finalize older cases. Counsel who have a very large number of cases were approached with a view to scheduling their cases. Particular attention was also paid to speeding up the assessment of files likely to be concluded by means of a withdrawal or abandonment. Decision-makers rendering more oral decisions and the temporary appointment of additional experienced GIC decision-makers helped to reduce the inventory.

Refugee Protection 

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a bar chart.

For each of the last four fiscal years, it shows the following:

Cost per Claim
Average Processing Time
Claims Referred
Claims Finalized
Claims Waiting

Claims that were finalized fall into the following three categories:

Accepted
Withdrawn/Abandoned
Rejected

Claims waiting are broken down into the following time periods:

0-6 months
7-12 months
13-24 months
more than 2 years

The following are the numbers by fiscal year (Note: The totals may not be exactly 100% due to rounding):

For the fiscal year 2008–09 the cost per claim is $4,100 and the average processing time is 16.4 months. 36,300 claims were referred, 20,300 claims were finalized and 58,000 claims were waiting.

Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 43% were accepted, 20% were withdrawn/abandoned and 37% were rejected.

Claims waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 35% for 0 to 6 months, 25% for 7 to12 months, 34% for 13 to 24 months and 6% for more than 2 years.

For the fiscal year 2009–10 the cost per claim is $2,850 and the average processing time is 19.2 months. 29,900 claims were referred, 28,500 claims were finalized and 59,000 claims were waiting.

Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 40% were accepted, 22% were withdrawn/abandoned and 38% were rejected.

Claims waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 23% for 0 to 6 months, 25% for 7 to12 months, 39% for 13 to 24 months and 13% for more than 2 years.

For the fiscal year 2010–11 the cost per claim is $2,500 and the average processing time is 21.9 months. 22,700 claims were referred, 33,400 claims were finalized and 48,300 claims were waiting.

Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 37% were accepted, 20% were withdrawn/abandoned and 43% were rejected.

Claims waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 26% for 0 to 6 months, 19% for 7 to12 months, 36% for 13 to 24 months and 19% for more than 2 years.

For the fiscal year 2011–12 the cost per claim is $2,400 and the average processing time is 20.0 months. 24,400 claims were referred, 33,400 claims were finalized and 39,400 claims were waiting.

Finalized claims are broken down into the following percentages: 38% were accepted, 14% were withdrawn/abandoned and 48% were rejected.

Claims waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 34% for 0 to 6 months, 22% for 7 to12 months, 26% for 13 to 24 months and 18% for more than 2 years.

Program Activity 2: Refugee Appeal

Description

The Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) will deliver the IRB's Refugee Appeal program activity. It will hear appeals from decisions of the Refugee Protection Division (RPD). The claimant or the Minister may lodge an appeal on a question of law, of fact or of mixed law and fact. The RAD will normally proceed without an oral hearing on the basis of the RPD record. The RAD may accept documentary evidence and written submissions from the Minister and the person who is the subject of the appeal, and in the case of a matter conducted before a panel of three members, written submissions from a representative of the UNHCR and any other person provided for in the RAD Rules. Under narrowly defined circumstances, the RAD may hold an oral hearing.

2011-12 Highlights
  • Beginning of program activity delayed to next reporting period
  • Implementation planning continued
Refugee Appeal Performance Summary
Refugee Appeal Performance Summary
2011-12 Financial Resources ($ Millions) 2011-12 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned
Spending
Total
Authorities
Actual
SpendingNote 10
Planned Actual Difference
14.0 2.0 1.8 96 14 -82
Expected Result: Quality decisions rendered and cases resolved in a timely manner regarding refugee protection appeals
Performance Indicators Targets
(from 2011-12 RPP)
Actual Results
At the time the 2011-12 RPP was published, the BRRA was to come into force and this program activity was scheduled to begin in December 2011. Performance indicators and targets for this new program activity were to be developed during the first three quarters of 2011-12 and validated in the last quarter of the same year. The beginning of this program activity has been postponed to the next reporting period (see next page for more details). The development of performance indicators and associated targets continued during 2011-12. Validation will be completed once the program activity is in place.

Notes

Note 10

The beginning of this program activity was delayed to 2012-13. Actual expenditures were for implementation planning activities conducted during 2011-12.

Return to note 10 referrer

Performance Summary and Analysis

Reform timelines. At the time the 2011-12 RPP was written, core activities for the Refugee Appeal program activity were expected to begin in the fourth quarter of the 2011-12 reporting period, after the coming into force of the new refugee determination system. On August 19, 2011, the Government announced that the BRRA would come into force on June 29, 2012, pushing the beginning of this program activity into the next reporting period.

Preparation for implementation. During 2011-12, the majority of activities were focused on planning for the development and creation of the new RAD. These included the following:

  • Human resources activities continued and focused on both the GIC member complement and the staffing of adjudicative support positions with public servants. While persons appointed by the GIC who are already on strength when the BRRA comes into force can be assigned to the RAD, the Board anticipated that the list of qualified candidates would be depleted by the end of 2012. Therefore, the IRB launched a recruitment campaign in order to recommend qualified candidates to the Minister. In addition, the IRB continued to develop selection criteria to recruit and select personnel in accordance with the PSEA for the public servants supporting the RAD.
  • Draft rules for the conduct of refugee appeal hearings were prepared and submitted for approval by the GIC, and communicated to stakeholders; work began on revisions to the draft rules following the tabling of Bill C-31.
  • Policies, procedures and processes for the conduct of refugee appeal hearings were developed; RAD process maps were completed.
  • Work on RAD training manuals continued.
  • Several internal and external RAD simulations were carried out in the reporting period.
  • The RAD project plan was revised with the tabling of Bill C-31 in February 2012.

Program Activity 3: Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews

Description

The Immigration Division (ID) delivers the Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews program activity. It holds hearings for foreign nationals or permanent residents who, under the provisions of the IRPA, are alleged to be inadmissible to Canada or are detained. Detainees must be seen by the ID within 48 hours after their detention or without delay thereafter, and subsequent reviews must be conducted within specific statutory time frames. Decision-makers must balance the right to individual liberty with the security interests of Canadians.

Additional information on the ID is available at http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/detention/Pages/idsi.aspx.

2011-12 Highlights
  • 2,900 admissibility hearings finalized
  • 17,800 detention reviews carried out
  • Referrals remained high in comparison with historical levels
Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Performance Summary
Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews Performance Summary
2011-12 Financial Resources ($ Millions) 2011-12 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned
Spending
Total
Authorities
Actual
Spending
Planned Actual Difference
13.6 12.4 11.5 82 78 -4
Expected Result: Quality decisions rendered and cases resolved in a timely manner regarding admissibility hearings and detention reviews
Performance Indicators Targets
(from 2011-12 RPP)
Actual Results
Clarity, completeness, conciseness and timeliness for decisions "Meet Expectations" on a scale under development. Scale development completed. Decisions met quality expectations.
Percentage of admissibility hearing cases concluded to referred cases 95-98%Note 11 98%
Percentage of concluded detention review cases within statutory time frame 96-98%Note 12 98%
Average cost of admissibility hearing $1,000 $900
Average cost of detention review $800 $800
Percentage of admissibility hearings concluded with a hearing within six months from referral 86-90%Note 11 94%

Notes

Note 11

Detention reviews take priority over admissibility hearings due to legislative time requirements. The number of referrals from the CBSA affects the capacity of the ID to conduct admissibility hearings.

Return to first note 11 referrer

Return to second note 11 referrer

Note 12

Factors outside the IRB's control, such as prison lockdowns, impede the achievement of 100 percent compliance.

Return to note 12 referrer

Performance Summary and Analysis

Sustained and more complex workload. The number of cases concluded by the ID depends largely on the number of cases referred by the CBSA. In comparison with 2010-11, referrals for admissibility hearings increased by seven percent while referrals for detention reviews decreased by four percent. Referrals decreased significantly in the Western Region following the release of the majority of the migrants who arrived aboard the MV Sun Sea. However, referrals increased moderately in the Eastern Region and substantially in the Central Region, where they rose by 19 percent for detention reviews and 33 percent for admissibility hearings.

Over the year, the ID finalized three percent more admissibility hearings than in the previous year but four percent fewer detention reviews. The decrease in completed detention reviews reflects the decrease in referrals, although work levels remained high in comparison with historical volumes. The Division completed most of the admissibility hearings arising from the MV Sun Sea marine arrival, which involved complex and novel legal issues. Through continued efficiencies, the ID continued to match its output with the intake and continued to respect its legislated time frames for detention reviews in almost all cases.

Effective case management. Over the year, the ID continuously monitored all scheduling activities, including postponements and adjournments, rescheduling activities and processing times. Postponements and adjournments were analyzed with a view to identifying root causes. Admissibility hearings were monitored throughout their cycle to ensure that at least 90 percent were finalized within the Division's stated objective of six months; the Division actually finalized 94 percent within this time frame. Increased communication between ID staff and registry personnel was key in helping the Division surpass all of its performance objectives. Although there was a 10 percent increase in the number of pending admissibility hearings at the end of the reporting period, 89 percent of them have been pending for less than three months. In addition, a review of a sample of decisions showed that the Division met key quality and efficiency measures.

Lessons Learned

The ID is a high volume tribunal that faces not only daily fluctuations in its workload, but also unplanned and sometimes sharp spikes in volume. To meet the challenge of added referrals, the Division relies on a flexible and highly adaptive workforce. The reason for the Division's success is its complement of highly professional and innovative personnel. The Division needs to maintain these prized resources, without which it could not succeed.

Detention Reviews 

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a bar chart.

For each of the last four fiscal years, it shows the following:

Cost per Detention Review
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 2008–09 the cost per Detention Review is $790. 18,350 Detention Reviews were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 2% were released (change of conditions), 6% were ordered released (no terms and conditions), 19% were released (on terms and conditions) and 74% were detained.

For the fiscal year 2009–10 the cost per Detention Review is $800. 16,500 Detention Reviews were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 3% were released (change of conditions), 4% were ordered released (no terms and conditions), 15% were released (on terms and conditions) and 78% were detained.

For the fiscal year 2010–11 the cost per Detention Review is $800. 18,500 Detention Reviews were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 1% were released (change of conditions), 5% were ordered released (no terms and conditions), 13% were released (on terms and conditions) and 80% were detained.

For the fiscal year 2011–12 the cost per Detention Review is $800. 17,800 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), 12% were released (on terms and conditions) and 81% were detained.

Admissibility Hearings 

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a bar chart.

For each of the last four fiscal years, it shows the following:

Cost per Admissibility Hearing
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 2008–09 the cost per Admissibility Hearing is $1,150. 3,200 Admissibility Hearings were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 3% for Permission to enter/remain, 7% for Withdrawn, 14% for Failed to appear and 74% for Removal order.

For the fiscal year 2009–10 the cost per Admissibility Hearing is $1,035. 3,150 Admissibility Hearings were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 3% for Permission to enter/remain, 7% for Withdrawn, 18% for Failed to appear and 71% for Removal order.

For the fiscal year 2010–11 the cost per Admissibility Hearing is $1,000. 2,800 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 73% for Removal order.

For the fiscal year 2011–12 the cost per Admissibility Hearing is $900. 2,900 Admissibility Hearings were finalized. They are broken down into the following percentages: 4% for Permission to enter/remain, 7% for Withdrawn, 16% for Failed to appear and 71% for Removal order.

Program Activity 4: Immigration Appeal

Description

The Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) delivers the 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 Canada who are alleged to have not fulfilled their residency obligation.

Additional information on the IAD is available at http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/ImmApp/Pages/IadSai.aspx.

2011-12 Highlights
  • 6,700 new immigration appeals filed
  • 6,700 immigration appeals finalized and 660 stays issued
  • Case inventory remained stable at 11,400
  • Average processing time reduced from 11.4 to 11.3 months
Immigration Appeal Performance Summary
Immigration Appeal Performance Summary
2011-12 Financial Resources ($ Millions) 2011-12 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned
Spending
Total
Authorities
Actual
Spending
Planned Actual Difference
14.7 18.7 16.5 124 124 0
Expected Result: Quality decisions rendered and cases resolved in a timely manner regarding immigration appeals
Performance Indicators Targets
(from 2011-12 RPP)
Actual Results
Clarity, completeness, conciseness and timeliness for decisions "Meet Expectations" on a scale under development. Scale development completed. Decisions met quality expectations.
Percentage of appeals finalized without a hearing It was expected that 38% of appeals would be finalized without a hearing. 43%
Ratio of finalized appeals to filed appeals It was anticipated that 7,000 appeals would be filed and 6,500 appeals would be finalized, resulting in a ratio of 93%. 6,700 appeals were filed and 6,700 were finalized, resulting in a ratio of 100%.
Average cost per appeal finalized $3,100 $3,100
Average processing time (APT) per appeal When the 2011-12 RPP was prepared, the APT was projected to be 12.2 months in 2010-11 and to increase to 12.6 months by the end of 2011-12. The actual APT was 11.4 months in 2010-11 and decreased to 11.3 months by the end of 2011-12.
Performance Summary and Analysis

Decision-makers. In 2011-12, IAD decision-makers resolved appeals by way of hearings and various other processes, including mediation. The IAD remained committed to an effective management model in which clear expectations and established performance measures for quality and quantity of decisions were communicated to decision-makers and monitored by management.

Preparation for reform implementation. The IAD shared its experience and technical knowledge in operating an appellate division for the planning of the new RAD. In addition, the IAD undertook a review of its own programs, including its mediation program (Alternative Dispute Resolution [ADR]), with a view to ensuring continued effective delivery in the context of reform implementation.

Inventory. The inventory of appeals awaiting finalization remained stable at 11,400 at the end of 2011-12. Close to 1,900 stayed removal order appeals (appeals requiring no immediate adjudicative action) are included in that pending inventory. There was a decrease in APT attributable, in part, to the somewhat reduced level of family class sponsorship appeals filed. Residency obligation appeals decreased by nine percent compared to the previous fiscal year.

Case management. The IAD continued to respond in a flexible manner to match resources with regional caseloads by sharing decision-makers among regions and by conducting hearings via videoconference where appropriate. Case management strategies continued to focus on increasing the early resolution of appeals without a hearing, enhancing hearing readiness activities, scheduling appeals strategically to increase efficiencies, and monitoring reasons for postponements and adjournments. The IAD remained committed to maintaining a high level of productivity and to rendering quality decisions in a timely manner.

Portfolio linkages. The IAD continued to work with the CBSA to finalize appeals screened for early resolution and encouraged CBSA's continued participation and engagement in the ADR program. The IAD continued to facilitate the hearing of appeals in which counsel for the Minister elected to participate by way of written submissions only. It also continued to work with the CBSA with a view to implementing strategies to achieve desired productivity levels, while ensuring the adjudicative independence of IAD decision-makers.

Lessons Learned

The IAD remains committed to the further development and refinement of a flexible hearing model that can accommodate CBSA resource challenges while ensuring that natural justice and a fair adjudicative process are provided to all parties. It is imperative that regular consultative meetings attended by representatives of the IAD, counsel and the CBSA continue in all regions to promote creative problem-solving that will lead to optimized resource allocation and the further development of innovative adjudicative strategies.

Immigration Appeal 

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a bar chart.

For each of the last four fiscal years, it shows the following:

Cost per Appeal
Average Processing Time
Appeals Filed
Appeals Finalized
Appeals Waiting

Appeals that were finalized fall into the following four categories:

Stayed
Allowed
Withdrawn/Abandoned
Dismissed

Appeals waiting are broken down into the following time periods:

0-6 months
7-12 months
13-24 months
more than 2 years

The following are the numbers by fiscal year (Note: The totals may not be exactly 100% due to rounding):

For the fiscal year 2008–09 the cost per appeal is $2,800 and the average processing time is 11.1 months. 7,500 appeals were filed, 6,500 appeals were finalized, 600 appeals were stayed and 10,500 were waiting.

Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 39% were allowed, 28% were withdrawn/abandoned and 34% were dismissed.

Appeals waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 38% for 0 to 6 months, 25 % for 7 to 12 months, 22% for 13 to 24 months and 15% for more than 2 years.

For the fiscal year 2009–10 the cost per appeal is $3,075 and the average processing time is 11.6 months. 6,900 appeals were filed, 6,400 appeals were finalized, 800 appeals were stayed and 11,000 were waiting.

Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 39% were allowed, 33% were withdrawn/abandoned and 28% were dismissed.

Appeals waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 31% for 0 to 6 months, 26% for 7 to 12 months, 27% for 13 to 24 months and 15% for more than 2 years.

For the fiscal year 2010–11 the cost per appeal is $3,100 and the average processing time is 11.4 months. 7,600 appeals were filed, 7,100 appeals were finalized, 660 appeals were stayed and 11,400 were waiting.

Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 35% were allowed, 32% were withdrawn/abandoned and 33% were dismissed.

Appeals waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 33% for 0 to 6 months, 25% for 7 to 12 months, 26% for 13 to 24 months and 16% for more than 2 years.

For the fiscal year 2011–12 the cost per appeal is $3,100 and the average processing time is 11.3 months. 6,700 appeals were filed, 6,700 appeals were finalized, 660 appeals were stayed and 11,400 were waiting.

Finalized appeals are broken down into the following percentages: 34% were allowed, 31% were withdrawn/abandoned and 34% were dismissed.

Appeals waiting are broken down into the following percentages: 26% for 0 to 6 months, 25% for 7 to 12 months, 29% for 13 to 24 months and 20% for more than 2 years.

Program Activity 5: Internal Services

Description

Internal Services are groups of related activities and resources required to support the needs of all four tribunal programs and other corporate obligations of the IRB. These services are: Management and Oversight; Communications; Legal; Human Resources Management; Financial Management; Information Management; Information Technology; Procurement and Assets Management; Internal Audit and Evaluation; and other administrative services. Internal Services include only those activities and resources that apply across the organization and not those provided to a specific program.

2011-12 Highlights
  • Reform implementation planning supported
  • RPD backlog reduction audit completed
  • Measures for the quality of decisions implemented in two divisions
Financial and Human Resources
Financial and Human Resources
2011-12 Financial Resources ($ Millions) 2011-12 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned
Spending
Total
AuthoritiesNote 13
Actual
SpendingNote 13
Planned Actual Difference
35.7 38.9 38.6 302 274 -28

Notes

Note 13

Excludes amount appropriated to SSC.

Return to first note 13 referrer

Return to second note 13 referrer

Performance Summary and Analysis

Management and oversight. During 2011-12, the Board continued to focus on improving staffing activities. The IRB has completed the implementation of the recommendations of the 2009 report of the Public Service Commission (PSC) staffing audit. The Board conducted its staffing activities in accordance with the PSEA and the PSC's core values, as demonstrated by the PSC's report on the results of the continuing audit of staffing processes. Furthermore, the IRB implemented a monitoring framework for staffing actions that complies with the PSC Staffing Management Accountability Framework.

Communications. During 2011-12, the IRB continued to engage its key partners, stakeholders and the public through outreach events, international activities and strategic communications planning and initiatives. The Board continued to foster a better understanding of its mandate through the development of key internal and external products and activities related to refugee reform and the new legislation.

Legal. Legal Services played a key role in the development and drafting of the proposed new rules for both the RPD and the RAD, which were pre-published in Part I of the Canada Gazette in July 2011. It continued to provide ongoing advice, support and guidance on all aspects related to the implementation of the BRRA and the PCISA. It also provided legal advice on all new aspects of operations, service delivery, policy development, corporate direction and management decisions in order to achieve compliance with all relevant legal requirements. Legal Services provided training and support to newly appointed decision-makers and provided legal support to experienced decision-makers working to reduce the pending inventory. Throughout this period of change, it continued to provide legal support and advice on complex cases involving classified information related to national security or criminal intelligence.

Human resources management. The second year of the IRB's three-year human resources plan focused on preparation for the implementation of reform. Key human resources activities included the following: establishing the structure to support the new RPD and RAD; developing generic work descriptions and working conditions for new positions; conducting complex collective staffing processes; designing new training materials; and preparing to deliver large-scale training initiatives. As well, the capacity of the Workplace Well-Being Unit has been strengthened, and the profile of the unit and of its health and safety programs has been enhanced. Additionally, the Board is affected by the transformative changes under way in the public service. As a result of these and other changes, the Board found it necessary to invoke the Work Force Adjustment Directive for some IRB employees in April 2012.

Financial management. During 2011-12, the IRB began implementing the Policy on Internal Control and met the new reporting requirements for the Quarterly Financial Reports produced within 60 days of the end of each quarter. Annual Future-Oriented Financial Statements were also produced. In addition, the IRB began the process to modernize its financial systems and move to the standard Government platform.

Information management. The IRB had an ongoing MOU with Library and Archives Canada (LAC) pertaining to the storage of files and records. That MOU will remain in effect during 2012-13. As LAC is in the process of reviewing its service delivery model, the IRB will continue to investigate alternative records storage options.

Information technology. IT at the IRB is shaped by new and emerging business priorities and the need to continue to maintain and upgrade current systems and infrastructure. In 2011-12, IT efforts focused on the modernization of existing legacy applications, such as the replacement of STAR by NOVA. This was done to support the successful implementation of the BRRA by improving the scheduling, tracking and management of cases.

Procurement and assets management. The IRB's procurement activities focused on strengthening the Board's ability to procure in a manner that is effective, flexible and provides the best value to Canada. The Contract Review Committee worked on updating its terms of reference and the organizational policy on procurement. The Board also continued to improve its disposal of surplus assets while ensuring compliance with Government initiatives and policies.

Internal audit. In 2011-12, the IRB performed audit and review engagements originating from its three year (2010-11 to 2012-13) risk-based audit plan. The plan is modified annually based on the significance of emerging risks. The Departmental Audit Committee, along with Internal Audit personnel, continued to add value to the IRB's operations and help senior management accomplish its objectives by providing assurance and recommendations related to risk management, control, and governance processes. The internal audits completed in 2011-12 are described in the supplementary information tables.

Evaluation. The IRB implemented a new performance measurement system to assess the quality of proceedings and decision-making. Through the use of an innovative tool to test a sample of finalized cases, the IRB concluded that the quality of proceedings and decisions in the ID and the IAD met or exceeded expectations in relation to key quality measures. Once the RPD and the RAD complete cases under the new system, all four IRB divisions will undergo quality assessment on a regular basis. This will inform management decisions on improvement strategies when necessary. At the same time, the IRB is coordinating, with portfolio partners, the development of appropriate measurement methodologies to assess the performance of the new refugee determination system.

Changes to Government Structure
Impacts on Financial and Human Resources Resulting from the Establishment of SSC
2011-12 Financial Resources ($ Millions)
Planned Spending Total AuthoritiesNote 14
Net transfer post-OICNote 15 to SSC 0.6 0.6
2011-12 Human Resources (FTEs)
Planned Actual
Deemed to SSC 2 2

Notes

Note 14

Total Authorities, as presented in the "2011-12 Financial Resources" table (and other relevant tables) in the "Summary of Performance" section, is the net of any transfers to SSC. Actual spending does not include expenditures incurred on behalf of SSC as of the OIC date.

Return to note 14 referrer

Note 15

Pursuant to section 31.1 of the Financial Administration Act and orders in council P.C. 2011-0881, P.C. 2011-0877 and P.C. 2011-1297, $0.6 million is deemed to have been appropriated to SSC, which results in a reduction in the appropriation to the IRB.

Return to note 15 referrer


Section III: Supplementary Information

Financial Highlights

Condensed Statement of Financial Position (Unaudited) for the period ending March 31, 2012 ($ Millions

Condensed Statement of Financial Position (Unaudited)
Change % 2011-12 2010-11
Total net liabilities -38.1% 22.9 37.0
Total net financial assets -37.3% 7.9 12.6
Departmental net debt -38.5% 15.0 24.4
Total non-financial assets 34.5% 14.8 11.0
Departmental net financial position 98.5% -0.2 -13.4

Condensed Statement of Operation and Net Financial Position (Unaudited) for the period ending March 31, 2012 ($ Millions)

Condensed Statement of Operation and Net Financial Position (Unaudited)
Change % 2011-12 2010-11
Total expenses 4.1% 150.8 144.8
Total revenues 0.0% 0.0 0.0
Net cost of operations before Government funding and transfers 4.1% 150.8 144.8
Departmental net financial position 98.5% -0.2 -13.4

The $4.7-million (37-percent) decrease in net financial assets is caused by a reduction in the amount due from the Consolidated Revenue Fund. The $3.8-million (35-percent) increase in non financial assets is due to capitalizing software.

The $14.1-million (38-percent) decrease in total liabilities is due to a decrease in the year-end accounts payable and accrued liabilities, as well as employee future benefits.

Financial Highlights Chart

During 2011-12, the IRB's total actual expenditures amounted to $140.8 million. A large majority of these resources were allocated to deliver efficient administrative justice in accordance with the law for cases referred to the Board. A smaller allocation was dedicated to the planning of the implementation of new legislation, to support services and to compliance with Government policies and regulations in order to ensure responsible stewardship of the program activities.

Actual Spending by Program Activity

Actual spending by program activity 

[Alternate format]

The image illustrates a pie chart.

It shows actual spending for the following five program activities:

The first Program Activity is Refugee Protection for $72.4 million (51.4%) with 33,400 refugee protection claims finalized, the second Program Activity is Refugee Appeal for $1.8 million (1.3%), the third Program Activity is Admissibility Hearings and Detention Reviews for $11.5 million (8.2%) with 2,900 admissibility hearings and 17,800 detention reviews finalized, the fourth Program Activity is Immigration Appeal for $16.5 million (11.7%) with 7,360 appeals resolved: 6,700 finalized and 660 stayed, and the fifth Program Activity is Internal Services for $38.6 million (27.4%).

With the resources available, the IRB resolved more than 61,400 cases during 2011-12. Further details are outlined in the diagram above.

Financial Statements

The financial statements can be found on the IRB's Web site at: http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/BoaCom/pubs/Pages/EtaFinSta1112.aspx.

Supplementary Information Tables

As part of the IRB's 2011-12 DPR, the following supplementary information tables are provided in electronic format only:

  • Greening Government Operations
  • Internal Audits and Evaluations
  • Status Report on Projects Operating with Specific Treasury Board Approval

These electronic supplementary information tables can be found on the IRB's Web site.Note 16


Section IV: Other Items of Interest

Organizational Contact Information

For more information, visit the IRB Web site at http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca, email the IRB's Communications Directorate at contact@irb-cisr.gc.ca, or contact 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

Eastern Region
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
Guy-Favreau Complex
200 René-Lévesque Boulevard West
East Tower, Room 102
Montréal, Québec H2Z 1X4
Tel: 514-283-7733  Fax: 514-283-0164

Central Region
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
74 Victoria Street, Suite 400
Toronto, Ontario M5C 3C7
Tel: 416-954-1000  Fax: 416-954-1165

Western Region
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
Library Square, Suite 1600
300 West Georgia Street
Vancouver, British Columbia V6B 6C9
Tel: 604-666-5946  Fax: 604-666-3043

Additional Information

IRB Processes

Visit these links to find out how the IRB processes its cases: