ARCHIVED - Courts Administration Service - Report

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Chief Administrator’s Message

The Departmental Performance Report for 2010-11 summarizes the accomplishments of the Courts Administration Service (CAS). It presents our ongoing work to provide responsive and modern administrativeservices to four separate federal superior courts of law while safeguarding the independence of the judiciary from the government. We ensure that the public has timely and fair access to the litigation processes, and enable the courts to deliver results that matter to Canadians through their decisions in the areas of economic, social, international and government affairs.

Since my arrival in February 2011, I have worked with the CAS senior management team on various strategies and mechanisms to stabilize our financial situation, and improve our ability to deliver on our mandate. Our efforts have focused on security, information technology, resources, governance, and communications, as well as on our ability to meet policy and reporting requirements.

I am pleased with the progress made in 2010-11 and impressed by the dedicated efforts of our employees. CAS has been operating with limited resources and under heavy workload pressures for many years while rigorously pursuing innovation and improvements to meet the needs and expectations of the judiciary, the legal profession, litigants and the public. The challenges ahead of us are clear, and we are determined to continue to address them collaboratively and strategically. In this endeavour, I am working closely with the four Chief Justices, who have indicated their support for the approach we are taking. I will continue to seek their guidance in identifying our priorities and developing our strategies.

Through a multi-year plan to strengthen our information technology and business systems, CAS is working to lay the foundation for a wide range of service improvement initiatives and security enhancements. We can also point pride to the significant progress achieved in our people management strategy, and our ongoing commitment to strengthen planning and enhance accountability for use of public money in support of court administration.

In closing, I wish to commend the professionalism and commitment of our employees for their ongoing contributions. I would also like to express my thanks to the Chief Justices and all members of the judiciary for their support.

 

 

Section I – Organizational Overview

Raison d’être

Responsibilities

The role of CAS is to provide effective and efficient registry, judicial support and corporate services to four federal superior courts of record – the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada. Judicial independence is enhanced through the Act by placing the judiciary at arm’s length from the federal government while enhancing accountability for the use of public money.

The provision of administrative and registry services by an entity at arm’s length from the executive branch of the government is internationally recognized as a best practice.

CAS recognizes the independence of the courts in the conduct of their own affairs and aims to provide each with high quality administrative and registry services.

Functions

• Provide the judiciary, litigants and counsel services relating to court hearings;
• Inform litigants about rules of practice, court directives and procedures;
• Maintain court records;
• Act as liaison between the judiciary, the legal profession and lay litigants;
• Process documents filed by or issued to litigants;
• Record all proceedings;
• Enable individuals seeking enforcement of decisions issued by the courts and federal administrative tribunals, such as the Canada Industrial Relations Board and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, to file pertinent documents;
• Provide members of the courts, prothonotaries and employees with library services, information technology services and support, appropriate facilities and security; and
• Provide judicial support to the judiciary.

To facilitate partie's access to the courts, CAS has approximately 610 employees in permanent offices in the following ten cities: Halifax, Fredericton, Québec city, Montréal, Ottawa, Toronto, Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton, and Vancouver. In addition, CAS has a satellite office in London, Ontario. Through agreements with various provincial and territorial partners (Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and Yukon), CAS provides registry services and access to courtrooms.

Judicial independence

Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the Canadian judicial system. The impartiality of the judges and access to justice are fundamental to a free and democratic society. As such, Canada's system of government is centered on three separate, yet interdependent, branches: legislative, executive and judicial. Each branch enjoys a necessary degree of independence and autonomy from the other. The independence of the judiciary ensures that judges are free to make their decisions based solely on the law and facts without interference or improper influence from any source, whether from private interest, political pressure, or otherwise. Judicial independence has three components: security of tenure, financial security, and administrative independence.

While CAS reports to Parliament through the Minister of Justice, the organization plays a critical role by placing the courts at arm's length from the Government of Canada. This model helps CAS enhance the independence of the courts and build public confidence in our institutions.

Strategic Outcome(s) and Program Activity Architecture (PAA)

CAS has one Strategic Outcome, supported by three Program Activities:

Organizational Priorities

Priority Status Legend

Priority: Service Improvement Initiatives	Type1a : Ongoing	Strategic Outcome: The public has timely and fair access to the litigation processes of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada
Status: Mostly Met Although the quality of registry services across the country is high, employees are continuously looking for areas of improvement to increase client satisfaction. During the review period, particular attention was given to the following four areas: Registry processes and operational training Different internal processes and procedures were being followed in the various Registry offices thus causing challenges in terms of providing consistent employee training and knowledge transfer. As well, the different processes generated varying levels of client service. To address this situation, efforts to review, streamline and document registry processes applicable for each court were initiated in previous fiscal years and progressed significantly in 2010-11. Registry employees continued the work to streamline and document the processes applicable in the Registry of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Federal Court. All of the processes for the Registry of the Tax Court of Canada have been fully reviewed, streamlined, documented and made accessible to Registry employees. The establishment of new processes is improving operational training and strengthening employee knowledge. This is helping the organization in its ongoing mission to provide better quality of service to the four courts and their respective litigants. To improve the accessibility of training and to meet specific employee and management needs, adjustments were made to the Operational Training program and course content. Responding to client needs An action plan was developed and implemented following the analysis of the data from the “Survey of Judges and Employees on the Quality of Registry Services”. This resulted in improved communication between the judiciary and registry management and employees. This plan also led to better access to operational training for employees and the implementation of measures to improve the processing of feedback received from the judiciary. The Registry’s client service area for the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court and the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada in Ottawa was moved from an inadequate location that was not user friendly to a much more open and convenient space to provide better client service to litigants. The new location features a more functional workspace, better access to court documents and improved security. In an effort to reduce client wait times, improve client satisfaction and reduce demands on employees, the Registry Office in Toronto implemented a new client flow management system. This advanced queuing system resulted in better flow of clients at the counter, improved provision of priority services, and reduced the need for overtime by enabling employees to service most clients within regular business hours. The amendment of Rule 395 of the Federal Courts Rules allowing the Registries to electronically transmit court decisions to litigants has resulted in improved client service. Service standards Once a new Courts Records Management System (CRMS) is implemented, CAS will be able to develop official registry service standards and monitor them regularly. In the meantime, draft service standards continue to be monitored manually on a quarterly basis. Findings led to adjustments in the registries and in various offices. Technological Improvements For a number of years CAS has been seeking to achieve complete electronic files. The realization of this objective requires a solid IT infrastructure, a modern CRMS, a new electronic filing system, digital audio recording equipment and eventually improved technology in our courtrooms. In 2010-11, CAS had to focus its investments on upgrading the existing infrastructure to ensure it could support upcoming demands on the networks and systems. The organization made important progress in 2010-11 but more work and resources will be required in future years. Planning and development continued on some e-initiatives, but the level of resources required for investments to strengthen the IT infrastructure excluded further work on the development of the CRMS, the e-filing of court documents, the implementation of e-courtrooms, and the conduct of client service surveys. CAS made good progress in the implementation of a digital audio recording system for the Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada. The e-copy solution, which allows paper documents to be scanned into the document management system, was completed and implemented in Ottawa and Toronto. As soon as the IT infrastructure is improved, this initiative will be expanded to all regional offices thereby producing important savings in transportation and mailing costs of court documents. To stay informed about current and future e-initiatives and best practices in other Canadian court jurisdictions, CAS participated in events organized by external court entities and committees such as the Association of Canadian Court Administrators and Canadian Center for Court Technology.

Priority: Investment in our People	Type1b : New	Strategic Outcome: The public has timely and fair access to the litigation processes of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada
Status: Met all In accordance with the 2008 Public Service Employee Survey Action Plan, CAS worked towards creating a people-oriented environment focused on leadership, communication, learning and ethics. Specifically, to strengthen leadership and management skills, training tools were developed, learning circle events on feedback, coaching and constructive criticism were organized, and a community of practice for managers was created. Other initiatives undertaken in response to the Action Plan included the development and promotion of an “Alternative Work Arrangements Guide” and the renewal of the activities promoted by the CAS Wellness at Work Committee. In addition, a suggestion box was added on the intranet to provide employees with a new form of dialogue with senior management. To ensure that employees work in a safe and healthy environment, CAS created new union-management committees focused on workplace safety and security, and introduced a mandatory course for all the employees. To attract and retain employees, several measures were undertaken. Managers were encouraged to discuss acting assignments as part of the development of personal learning plans (PLP) and during performance reviews. “Expressions of Interest” were used more frequently to solicit employees for developmental acting opportunities. To help employees take advantage of these acting opportunities, “Interview Preparation Workshops” were offered. Informal mentoring and coaching is ongoing throughout the organization. For new employees, an on-boarding program was developed and implemented. To enhance the Performance Management Program (PMP), CAS developed new tools and communicated them to employees through a revised intranet module. Improvements were made to the PMP by including SMART performance measures, behavioural competencies for employees and key leadership competencies for managers. A PLP database was also built to facilitate the analysis of the organization’s learning needs and to establish priorities. To assist employees interested in obtaining a diploma for accredited learning activities, CAS adopted a “Directive on Educational Assistance”. This clarified the requirements for employees wanting to pursue their own development through a formal education program. To emphasize the importance of Values and Ethics in the organization, CAS developed a multi-year plan, implemented mandatory training for managers, and created a new Web page on the topic. The organization also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Departement of Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada to provide informal conflict resolution assistance to CAS employees. To promote a workplace free of discrimination, CAS launched a National Day for the Prevention of Harassment and Discrimination, as well as a Linguistic Duality Day. To promote wellness at work, new activities focusing on mental, physical and financial health were organized and announced to all employees.

Priority: Strengthened Planning and Accountability	Type1c : Ongoing	Strategic Outcome(s) and/or Program Activity(ies): The public has timely and fair access to the litigation processes of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada
Status: Mostly met During 2010-11, CAS began strengthening and improving the integration of business planning, risk management, resource allocation and budget management. The aim is to become more efficient and develop a systematic approach when defining corporate priorities, identifying risks and allocating available financial, human and other resources. As such, CAS is seeking to optimize the alignment of its scarce resources to meet the short and long term needs of the courts and improve accountability. To better support the decision making process, CAS increased consultation with the Chief Justices of the courts and improved reporting to the Executive Committee. Work began on a new web-based dashboard to expand and accelerate reporting of the financial situation. However, the lack of resources limited the rate of progress on this initiative. CAS also developed an Integrated Risk Management Framework, and risk profiles at both the corporate and branch levels. In addition, managers at the operational level were encouraged to develop perspectives on risk within their own particular environments. Decisions regarding priorities, activities and allocation of resources are now directly informed by the Corporate Risk Profile. Important progress was made on the development of project management and change management frameworks. The organization’s capacity in these areas was strengthened through the hiring of specialized resources and training of existing staff. This initiative will help ensure that projects such as development of the CRMS deliver results in accordance with plans and requirements. During the reporting period, CAS moved forward with the creation of the Departmental Audit Committee. One external member was appointed and a second was identified for appointment in 2011-12. The organization is working with the Office of the Comptroller General to explore innovative models for the establishment of a cost-effective internal audit function.

Risk Analysis

In the 2010–11 RPP, risk management was identified as a priority for CAS. Accordingly, the organization incorporated risk management into departmental planning and reporting through its integrated business planning approach. As part of this process, CAS conducted environmental scans to identify key potential risks and challenges, and established a set of risk management tools and frameworks. CAS is now able to engage in a continuous and integrated approach to managing its operational and strategic risks.

The organization approved a Corporate Risk Profile (CRP) during the reporting period. The CRP focuses on ten main areas of risk, which it addresses though several mitigation strategies. Highlights of the key critical risks facing CAS are described below.

It is important to note that some of the risks facing CAS could ultimately impact on the organization’s ability to support the courts and the Chief Justices who are responsible for ensuring timely and fair access to the judicial system.

Key Critical Risks

Information Technology Security

Ongoing advances in technology pose challenges to all government departments, and CAS is no exception. IT systems require continual investment in hardware, software and the personnel who manage them. Maintaining the security of these systems requires that particular attention be given to the practices adopted by users of the systems, as well as to the implementation of strategies to prevent harm. As with most government institutions, CAS relies heavily on its IT systems to maintain operations and ensure the security of the information it manages. Preventing disruption of these systems is critical to maintaining the business of the courts and the support CAS provides to them.

Accordingly, CAS updated its threat and risk assessments to identify vulnerabilities, and is taking corrective action where necessary. The organization began to invest in upgrading outdated and vulnerable IT infrastructure. To find the necessary resources, many important technology-enabled service improvement initiatives had to be put on hold, but addressing the urgent need to refurbish critical IT infrastructure could not be delayed. It was essential to ensure the business continuity of the federal courts, maintain secure and efficient operations and meet legislated requirements.

Resource Pressures

The most acute financial pressure during the reporting period resulted from the requirement for CAS to absorb the costs of a number of judicial positions previously funded from the Treasury Board management reserve. This temporary funding was ended in 2009-10. Since then, it has been necessary to reallocate major funding to this core activity from other priority areas.

In addition, increasing expectations of the judiciary and users of the courts, coupled with the need to meet legislative and Treasury Board requirements, challenged the ability of CAS to meet the obligations stemming from its mandate within available resource levels. Ultimately, if this situation is not resolved it could impede the functioning of court operations.

To address the situation, CAS identified key areas in which additional permanent funding was needed to mitigate the risks and to enable it to deliver the core program. It was calculated that some $10 million per year would be needed to ensure full program integrity across a range of activities, including the high priority areas of IT infrastructure, court and registry business systems, court-related security, and departmental accountability requirements. The request was partially met, and incremental annual funding rising from $2.65 million in 2011-12 to an ongoing $3.0 million by 2016-17 was provided for CAS in the 2011 Federal Budget.

During 2010-11, CAS managed the financial pressures on a mission-critical basis, seeking temporary funding where possible and redirecting available resources to the most critical areas, notably IT infrastructure.

A further challenge is created because close to 80% of CAS’ non-salary operating expenses are contracted costs for primarily non-discretionary services supporting the judicial process and court hearings. These costs are mostly driven by the number and type of hearings conducted in any given year. A risk management strategy is in place to monitor these costs and manage their fluctuation and related impacts on other key areas.

Physical Security

Due to the nature of their work, CAS employees and members of the courts may be exposed to incidents of threat and intimidation. In this regard, physical security gaps are increasingly of concern and must be addressed on an ongoing basis to protect people, assets and services.

To ensure the safety and security of members of the courts and employees, CAS developed a National Security Strategy. The organization is working to ensure appropriate controls and measures (procedures and equipment) for prevention, detection, response and recovery are in place and consistent across the organization.

Information Management

Information Management (IM) is a key operational priority for CAS and for the courts, whose records are extensive, requiring significant resources for their creation, management and storage. The loss of paper or digital records could have a serious impact on the four courts which are, by law, courts of record. CAS must have the capacity to support the Judicial Information Blueprint developed by the Canadian Judicial Council and IM security requirements for rigorous protection and management of records and information. As well, the organization must have the capacity to develop, implement and maintain IM policies, practices and tools.

People

The potential inability to attract and retain employees was identified as a key risk in the 2010-11 RPP. The organization relies on highly specialized, qualified and engaged employees. Many of the skills required are unique to the judicial or quasi-judicial environment, and the demands on staff are high. To staff key vacant positions and to ensure proper succession planning, CAS implemented many new strategies. Managers were encouraged to discuss acting assignments through the development of personal learning plans and during the conduct of performance reviews. To further develop employees, rotational acting assignments were offered instead of immediately filling positions. “Expressions of Interest” were used more frequently to solicit employees for developmental acting opportunities, and more training, mentoring and coaching was offered to help employees prepare for these competitive processes.

Summary of Performance

Faced with increasingly severe financial constraints and significant turnover at the senior management level, the organization focused its activities on key issues and initiated projects to address critical risk areas. Central to the organization’s efforts was the continuing provision of quality registry, judicial and corporate services, notwithstanding the difficult financial situation facing the organization. A key preoccupation was addressing severe risks to the information technology infrastructure, investing in employees, and developing the integrated risk management framework, including the corporate risk profile. 

2010-11 Financial Resources ($ Millions)^2a

Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending
59.7	64.9	63.6

2010-11 Human Resources (FTEs)

Planned	Actual	Difference
615	617	2

There was a $5.2 million variance between total authorities and planned spending. The largest component of this was supplementary funds received to manage cases involving classified information under Division 9 of part 1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act ($2.9 million) and to support the reform of Canada’s refugee determination system ($0.5 million). Additional funds were also received for collective agreements ($0.1 million), pay list requirements ($0.8 million), the operating carry forward ($0.8M) and the adjustments to employee benefits ($0.5 million). Funds were also returned in Supplementary Estimates for Budget 2010 cost containment measures ($0.4 million).

The variance between total authorities and actual spending represents a lapse of $1.3 million. Of this amount, $0.5 million related to funding set aside by Treasury Board, within the CAS budget, to support the reform of Canada’s refugee determination system. However, CAS was not authorized to use these funds until a new judicial appointment was made; since there was no such appointment during the year, the unused funding became a forced lapse for CAS.

The remaining $0.8 million lapse was due to the following factors:

• Resources were set aside to cover estimated court-reporting and transcript costs for hearings scheduled at year end. However, a higher number of hearings were postponed or cases resolved than expected, thus generating an unplanned surplus. 
• For a number of transactions, the goods or services involved were not delivered until after fiscal year end; this occurred particularly in relation to the translation of judgments and the delivery of IT acquisitions.  
• Net transfers from other government organizations materialized at year-end.  

Finally, due to the expenditure restraint measures and the freeze on operating budgets there was a very small increase in staff.

CAS has one Strategic Outcome, supported by three ProgramcActivities:

Strategic Outcome
The public has timely and fair access to the litigation processes of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada

Performance Indicators	Targets	2010-11 Performance
Satisfaction rate with CAS regarding access among parties participating in the judicial process	Surveys of clients and the judiciary – 85% satisfaction rate	The survey was designed but not carried-out due to the lack of resources and funding required for the acquisition of the software. The satisfaction rate was monitored through manual mechanisms and indicates a good satisfaction level from clients and the judiciary.

 

($ Millions)

Program Activity	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-113				Alignment to Government of Canada Outcomes
		Main Estimates	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending
Registry Services	26.1	24.6	24.6	26.6	25.8	Strong and independent democratic institutions
Judicial Services	20.4	18.9	18.9	20.0	19.9
Total	46.5	43.5	43.5	46.6	45.7

 

($ Millions)

Program Activity	2009-10 Actual Spending	2010-112b
		Main Estimates	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending
Internal Services	19.7	16.2	16.2	18.3	17.9

 

Expenditure Profile

Canada’s Economic Action Plan (CEAP)
No funding was received by CAS for the Canada Economic Action Plan.

Departmental Spending Trend

[D]

Estimates by Vote

For information on our organizational votes and/or statutory expenditures, please see the 2010–11 Public Accounts of Canada (Volume II) publication. An electronic version of the Public Accounts is available on the Public Works and Government Services Canada website.⁴

---

Footnotes

1a,b,c Type is defined as follows: Previously committed to—committed to in the first or second fiscal year before the subject year of the report; Ongoing—committed to at least three fiscal years before the subject year of the report; and New—newly committed to in the reporting year of the DPR.

2a,b Financial Resources should equal the Total line for Program Activities and Internal Services.

3 Commencing in the 2009–10 Estimates cycle, the resources for Program Activity: Internal Service is displayed separately from other program activities; they are no longer distributed among the remaining program activities, as was the case in previous Main Estimates. This has affected the comparability of spending and FTE information by Program Activity between fiscal years.

4 See Public Accounts of Canada 2010,
http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/recgen/txt/72-eng-r2.asp.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page