ARCHIVED - National Parole Board - Supplementary Tables
This page has been archived.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.
2009-10
Departmental Performance Report
National Parole Board
Supplementary Information (Tables)
Table of Contents
- Sources of Respendable and Non-respendable Revenue
- User Fees/External Fees
- Horizontal Initiatives
- Green Procurement
- Internal Audits and Evaluations
Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue
Respendable Revenue
The Board does not have any Respendable Revenue.
Non-Respendable Revenue
The Board has the authority to recover costs related to pardons. There is a $50 user fee for the processing of pardon applications which generated revenues of $1,263 in 2009-10. Of the $50, the Board can only access $35 (or 70%) of every fee. This translates to $884K for the Board for 2009-10.
($ thousands)
| Program Activity | Actual 2007-08 | Actual 2008-09 | 2009-10 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Estimates | Planned Revenue | Total Authorities | Actual | |||
| Pardon Decisions / Clemency Recommendations | ||||||
| Pardon user fees | 1,438 | 1,336 | N/A | 1,286 | N/A | 1,263 |
| Total Non-rependable Revenue | 1,438 | 1,336 | N/A | 1,286 | N/A | 1,263 |
User Fees Reporting
User Fee Act
| User Fee: | Pardons User fee ($50.00) |
|---|---|
| Fee Type: | Other Products and Services |
| Fee-Setting Authority: | Treasury Board Decision #822475 (1995) #826954 (1999) |
| Date Last Modified: | Fee introduced 1995, modified in 1999 |
| Performance Standards: | Under development |
| Performance Standards: | To be determined (TBD) |
| 2009-10 | Planning Years | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated |
| 1,286 | 1,263 | TBD | 2010-11 | TBD | TBD |
| 2011-12 | TBD | TBD | |||
| 2012-13 | TBD | TBD | |||
| User Fee: | Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act (ATIA) |
|---|---|
| Fee Type: | Regulatory Service |
| Fee-Setting Authority: | Access to Information Act |
| Date Last Modified: | 1992 |
| Performance Standards: | Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request. The Access to Information Act provides fuller details: http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/A-1/. |
| Performance Standards: | Response times 100% within Performance Standard: Access to Information Act Total 19 requests: within 30 days = 14 requests; 31-60 days = 5 requests; 61-120 days = 0 request; over 121 days = 0 request. Privacy Act Total 479 requests: within 30 days = 361 requests; 31-60 days = 97 requests; 61-120 days = 21 requests; over 121 days = 0 request. |
| 2009-10 | Planning Years | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated |
| 0 | 0* | 310 | 2010-11 | 0 | 310 |
| 2011-12 | 0 | 310 | |||
| 2012-13 | 0 | 310 | |||
| Other Information: * Total user fees collected during the fiscal year was $80.00 | |||||
| 2009-10 | Planning Years | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecast Revenue | Actual Revenue | Full Cost | Fiscal Year | Forecast Revenue | Estimated | |
| Sub-Total | 1,286 | 1,263 | TBD | 2010-11 | TBD | TBD |
| 2011-12 | TBD | TBD | ||||
| 2012-13 | TBD | TBD | ||||
| Sub-Total | 0 | 0* | 310 | 2010-11 | 0 | 310 |
| 2011-12 | 0 | 310 | ||||
| 2012-13 | 0 | 310 | ||||
| Total | 1,286 | 1,263 | TBD | 2010-11 | 0 | 310 |
| 2011-12 | 0 | 310 | ||||
| 2012-13 | 0 | 310 | ||||
External Fees
Policy on Service Standards for External Fees
| External Fee | Service Standard | Performance Result | Stakeholder Consultation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pardons User fee ($50.00) | Under development | Nil | Nil |
| Fees charged for the processing of access requests filed under the Access to Information Act (ATIA) | Response provided within 30 days following receipt of request; the response time may be extended pursuant to section 9 of the ATIA. Notice of extension to be sent within 30 days after receipt of request. The Access to Information Act provides fuller details: http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/A-1/. |
Response times 100% within Performance Standard. Access to Information Act Privacy Act |
The service standard is established by the Access to Information Act and the Access to Information Regulations. Consultations with stakeholders were undertaken by the Department of Justice and the Treasury Board Secretariat for amendments done in 1986 and 1992. |
Horizontal Initiatives
The National Parole Board (NPB)became involved as a partner in the ongoing implementation of Firearms legislation in 1999-2000. Introduction of the Firearms legislation and related changes to the Criminal Code created longer sentences for offences involving the use of a firearm or an imitation firearm. Longer sentences generate the need for more conditional release reviews which, in turn, increase NPB's program delivery costs (salary and non-salary).
| Federal Partner: National Parole Board (NPB)of Canada | ||
|---|---|---|
| Name of Horizontal Initiative: Firearms | Name of Lead Department(s): Canada Firearms Center | |
| Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 1995 | End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: Ongoing | NPB Funding: $858,000 per year |
| Description of the Horizontal Initiative: Reduce firearms tragedies, including accidental injuries or death and the criminal use of firearms | ||
| Shared Outcome(s): Safe and secure Canada | ||
| Governance Structure(s): Roles/responsibilities set out in legislation (e.g. Firearms Act.) | ||
| Federal Partners | Program Activity | Total Allocation | Forecasted Spending 2009-10 | Actual Spending 2009-10 | Planned Results for 2009-10 | Achieved Results 2009-10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National Parole Board. | Conditional release decisions | N/A[1] | $858,000 | $858,000 | Planned spending in 2009-2010 was intended to provide NPB with the capacity to manage workloads related to changes in the Criminal Code which support the Firearms initiative. These changes provided longer sentences for firearms convictions and created the need for more conditional release reviews. | Since 1999/00, the Board has completed over 15,000 reviews involving offenders with firearms convictions |
The Board will also become involved in the National Anti-Drug Strategy following Royal Assent for legislative proposals calling for introduction of mandatory minimum penalties for serious drug offences. Current plans call for provision of $7.2 million for NPB over four years, including $2.2 million in 2009-10 to manage increased numbers of conditional release reviews as a result of mandatory minimum sentences.
| Federal Partner: National Parole Board (NPB)of Canada | |
|---|---|
| Name of Horizontal Initiative: National Anti-Drug Strategy | Name of Lead Department(s): Department of Justice |
| Start Date of the Horizontal Initiative: 2007-08 | End Date of the Horizontal Initiative: Ongoing |
| Description of the Horizontal Initiative: Provides a focused approach to deliver on priorities aimed at reducing the supply of and demand for illicit drugs, as well as addressing the crime associated with illegal drugs | |
| Shared Outcome(s): Safe and secure Canada | |
| Governance Structure(s): Consisting of an ADM Committee and four Director General working groups | |
| Federal Partner: National Parole Board (NPB)of Canada | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Program Activity | Names of Programs | Total Allocation (from Start to End Date) | Planned Spending for 2009-10 | Expected Results for 2009-10 |
| Conditional Release Decisions | Conditional Release Decisions | $4.4 M | $1.3 M | Note [2] |
| Conditional Release Decisions Openness and Accountability | Conditional Release Decisions Openness and Accountability | $1.8 M | $0.5M | Note [3] |
| Internal Services | Internal Services | $1.3 M | $0.4M | Support programs |
| Total: | $7.5 M [1] | $2.2 M [1] | ||
[1] The Board received a permanent increase to its funding base. The increase was incremental, rising from $437,000 in 1999-2000 to $858,000 per year in 2004-2005 and future years, consistent with projected workload growth.
Note [2]: Proposed legislation did not receive Royal Assent in 2009-10 - funding remains frozen. Should the proposed legislation receive Royal Assent this funding will provide the NPB the capacity for effective management of its legislated responsibilities for parole decision-making for offenders in relation to the requirements of the new legislation. NPB will collect information and report on workloads and outcomes of parole for provincial offenders incarcerated as a result of new legislative provisions (e.g., the number and proportion of offenders who successfully complete their parole).
Note [3]: Proposed legislation did not receive Royal Assent in 2009-10 - funding remains frozen. Should the proposed legislation receive Royal Assent this funding will provide the NPB the capacity for provision of information and assistance to victims of crime, observers at hearings and individuals who seek access to decision registry in relation to the requirements of the new legislation. In a similar manner, NPB will report on the extent of involvement of victims, and observers in conditional release processes and the level of satisfaction of these individuals with the information and assistance provided by NPB.
Effective management of both these responsibilities will contribute to public safety and reinforce public confidence in the justice system.
Green Procurement
Meeting Policy Requirements
1. Has the department incorporated environmental performance considerations in its procurement decision-making processes?
Yes, however, because of the small size of the Board and the limited amount of procurement, these considerations are largely irrelevant.
2. Summary of initiatives to incorporate environmental performance considerations in procurement decision-making processes:
As part of the fleet vehicle procurement process, the Board abides by the Alternative Fuels Act and reports yearly.
3. Results achieved:
Vehicles adhere to Alternative Fuels Act.
4. Contributions to facilitate government-wide implementation of green procurement:
Not applicable
Green Procurement Targets
5. Has the department established green procurement targets?
No
6. Summary of green procurement targets:
Not applicable
7. Results achieved:
Not applicable
Internal Audits and Evaluations
| Name of Evaluation | Program Activity | Evaluation Type | Status | Completion Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Review to assess the impact of processes to improve the pardon application process | Pardon Decisions / Clemency Recommendations | An impact evaluation was not completed in 2009-2010 due to a lack of resources | As 2009-2010 saw legislative changes to the pardons program, the division undergoing reorganization and re-engineering of its processes, it would be premature to conduct an impact evaluation at this time | To be determined |