ARCHIVED - Courts Administration Service - Report

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Chief Administrator's Message

I am pleased to present the 2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities for the Courts Administration Service (CAS).

This document outlines how the organization proposes to meet its strategic outcome and continue to play a vital role in Canada's justice system by providing essential services to four separate and independent 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.

Over the past few years, we have worked diligently to provide quality judicial, registry and corporate services to the four federal courts, litigants and the public. To ensure we continue to meet our mandate and maintain the capacity to provide these core services, we will need to keep leveraging existing resources to the greatest extent possible. This will be particularly important in 2012-13 as we continue to experience significant resource constraints. As such, it is imperative that we focus on the following priorities, to maintain the ability to deliver comprehensive support services tailored to the needs of each of the four courts:

• Maintain the capacity to deliver fully on our mandate;
• Enhance security measures and services provided to members of the courts, employees, litigants and the public;
• Provide a robust, reliable and secure information management and information
  technology (IM/IT) infrastructure, and modernize judicial support systems;
• Ensure the long-term financial viability of the organization and establish a work environment that addresses employee needs; and
• Review CAS' governance to better respond to the specific needs of each court.

In the coming year, we will focus our efforts in several key areas. To attain optimal organizational performance and a safe and secure environment for users of the courts and the public, we will continue to invest in security, IM/IT and programs for our employees. CAS will also continue to work with the four courts and central agencies to identify possible means to address our long-term financial sustainability and improve our efficiency without compromising any aspects of our mandate. We will continue to assess and review our governance structure and policy frameworks to ensure that we are well-positioned to deliver services that meet the specific needs of the four courts and safeguard their judicial independence.

I look forward to moving ahead on our plans and priorities in order to continue supporting the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada, in the best interest of Canada and all Canadians. I also wish to extend my deepest gratitude to members of the courts and CAS employees for their ongoing support and dedication.

Section I: Organizational Overview

Raison d’être

Responsibilities

CAS recognizes the independence of the courts in the conduct of their own affairs and aims to provide each with quality and efficient administrative and registry services. The purposes of the Act are to:

• Facilitate coordination and cooperation among the four courts for the purpose of ensuring the effective and efficient provision of administrative services;
• Enhance judicial independence by placing administrative services at arm's length from the Government of Canada and by affirming the role of the Chief Justices and judges in the management of the courts; and
• Enhance accountability for the use of public money in support of court administration while safeguarding the independence of the judiciary.

CAS has 639 employees in permanent offices in ten cities across Canada. The head office is located in Ottawa and its main regional offices are in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver.

Judicial Independence

Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the Canadian judicial system. The impartiality of the members of the courts 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 members of the courts 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, as per s. 12 of the Courts Administration Service Act, the organization plays a critical role by placing the courts at arm's length from the Government of Canada and by affirming the role of the Chief Justices and judges in the management of the courts. The Chief Justices are responsible for the judicial functions of their courts, including the direction and supervision over court sittings and the assignment of judicial duties. This model helps CAS enhance the independence of the courts and build public confidence in Canada's judicial system. In 2012-13, CAS will continue to safeguard judicial independence by identifying, monitoring and addressing risks that may hinder this independence.

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

Courts Administration Service
2012-13 Program Activity Architecture

[text version]

Organizational Priorities

 

Priority	Type1	Strategic Outcome
Maintain the capacity to deliver fully on our mandate.	New	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.
Description
Why is it a priority? CAS is mandated to provide effective and efficient judicial, registry and internal services to the four courts, while safeguarding their judicial independence. As such, CAS must allocate its resources to meet the needs of the courts. This limits the organization's control over its resources. The cumulative effect of chronic underfunding has made it challenging for CAS to pursue vital investments in priority projects and systems to maintain essential services to the four courts and their clients. Additional pressures to reduce expenditures continue to decrease CAS' ability to meet its obligations and deliver on its mandate. Plans for meeting the priority To ensure fair and timely access to the four courts, and in keeping with identified priorities and risks for 2012-13, CAS must ensure that its existing legacy systems continue to operate while carrying on with the modernization of its essential security services and IM/IT infrastructure systems. CAS will continue to allocate its resources to meet the essential needs of each court. It will work closely with the four courts to identify and prioritize their needs while continuing to seek efficiencies. CAS will also continue to closely monitor its expenses and promptly identify any new financial risk resulting from non-discretionary expenditures, such as hearing costs, required to support the judicial process. In 2012-13, CAS' staffing strategy must focus on ensuring it has adequate resources to support members of the courts. It will invest in employee training to maintain an experienced workforce with the necessary skill sets to fulfill CAS' mandate.

 

Priority	Type2	Strategic Outcome
Enhance security measures and services provided to members of the courts, employees, litigants and the public.	New	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.
Description
Why is it a priority? Proper security is fundamental to the effective functioning of Canada's justice system. As such, the safe and secure operation of the courts is an integral component of CAS' service delivery model. CAS must provide members of the courts, employees and court users with adequate security and an environment free from fear and intimidation. CAS conducted a review of its security posture, and gaps were identified. These must be addressed, and national standards must be developed and applied. Plans for meeting the priority Over the next three years, CAS will continue to establish a comprehensive security program on behalf of the four courts. In 2012-13, CAS will begin the implementation of key programs in support of a standardized nationwide security approach for prevention, detection, response and recovery. CAS will apply new intelligence-led security strategies to proactively address potential security risks and ensure optimal application of security measures. This will be accomplished by gathering information from various sources, including law enforcement partners. To further enhance its detection capabilities, CAS will implement elements of its security program, harmonize its security service delivery standards and leverage new technologies. The organization will update its wide-ranging business continuity plan, issue new standards for security personnel, implement a new program for security officers, acquire and deploy new screening equipment and deliver a comprehensive and ongoing security awareness program for members of the courts and CAS employees. This approach will be deployed gradually over the next three years. It will increase the organization's capacity to address security needs in a more timely, effective and cost-efficient manner. By enhancing security measures and services, CAS will also strengthen its security culture throughout the organization and reinforce the focus on this top priority. This will help CAS identify and mitigate associated risks on an ongoing basis and provide increased protection for members of the courts, employees, litigants and the public.

Priority	Type3	Strategic Outcome
Provide a robust, reliable and secure IM/IT infrastructure, and modernize judicial support systems.	New	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.
Description
Why is it a priority? Court operations depend on the effective and efficient management of information. To properly support court operations nationally, and provide the services required by litigants and the public, CAS relies on its IM/IT infrastructure and judicial support systems. As such, CAS must continue to develop its IT infrastructure to provide a secure and stable technological environment. CAS supports the courts with legacy systems which are obsolete, inefficient and incompatible with new and emerging technologies. These systems are placing additional demands on CAS' limited human and financial resources. CAS is faced with increasing pressures from both internal and external users of the courts for technological solutions that facilitate and improve the conduct of business. Some of the key essential judicial support systems include: Court and Registry Management System, e-filling, e-scanning, e-copying, digital audio recording and videoconferencing. These systems are required to support the Judiciary in the conduct of court operations and enable the Registry to receive, file, manage and retrieve documents, and to provide services to the courts and their users. Plans for meeting the priority In 2012-13, CAS will complete upgrades to its technological infrastructure and start dedicating more resources towards the development of judicial support systems. As part of the technological infrastructure upgrades, CAS will continue to focus a substantial part of its resources on the replacement of critical IT network components and on completing the implementation of its new data centre. With a robust and reliable technical infrastructure, CAS will ensure the integrity and functionality of its information technology operations and offer a secure IT platform for the integration and implementation of key judicial support systems required to maintain and advance court operations. To ensure CAS delivers on this priority while adhering to principles of good governance, stewardship, accountability, sound decision-making and effective planning, CAS will continue to strengthen its project management capacity. Through the new Enterprise Project Management Office (EPMO), CAS will ensure better project oversight and provide training to employees involved in the delivery of its projects. In addition, the EPMO will provide assistance and direction to project leaders working on upgrading, replacing and introducing systems required for the smooth running of the courts. The EPMO will guide all business analysis activities to ensure the proper identification and documentation of user requirements, workflows and business process improvements.

 

Priority	Type4	Strategic Outcome
Ensure the long-term financial viability of the organization and establish a work environment that addresses employee needs.	Previously committed to	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.
Description
Why is it a priority? Financial Viability: To maintain the provision of core services to the four courts, CAS must ensure its long-term financial viability. Like many federal government organizations, CAS faces serious budget constraints attributable to several factors. Principal among these are: Approximately 80% of the non-salary operating and maintenance expenses for CAS are contracted costs for services to support the judicial process and court hearings. Since CAS is required under the Act to provide these services as directed by the judiciary, the related expenditures are essentially non-discretionary and limit the organization's financial flexibility. CAS is required to support additional judicial appointments with no corresponding source of funds. Funding for the Security Certificate Initiative has yet to be confirmed for 2012-13. CAS has had to absorb costs related to wage increases resulting from the collective bargaining process. Employee Needs: CAS is a service-delivery organization that depends on a stable, qualified and experienced workforce to deliver high-quality services to the judiciary and the public. To maintain this capacity, CAS must focus on employee career development and succession planning. The 2011 Public Service Employee Survey highlighted areas for improvements that continue to affect employee satisfaction. Addressing these issues is of vital importance. Plans for meeting the priority Financial Viability For several years, CAS has faced significant financial challenges which have affected its capacity to deliver on its programs and to move forward on a number of initiatives. This financial reality has also led to serious program integrity issues, which were recognized and partly addressed in the federal budget 2011. To ensure its long-term financial viability, CAS will work collaboratively with the courts, central agencies, other key partners and stakeholders to develop a more sustainable funding model. CAS will continue to closely monitor and manage its significant financial risk by prioritizing the allocation of its resources. Top of Page   Employee Needs Senior Management is committed to supporting and developing employees, both individually and collectively. CAS will manage and engage its workplace and workforce with a special focus on planning, diversity, values and ethics, succession planning, learning and career development. CAS will renew its support to executives and managers through leadership management development in order to enable them to proactively and effectively manage and support their employees. Finally, through its planning and resource allocation frameworks, CAS will develop and implement an action plan in response to the results of the 2011 Public Service Employee Survey.

 

Priority	Type5	Strategic Outcome
Review CAS' governance to better respond to the specific needs of each court.	New	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.
Description
Why is it a priority? CAS' service delivery model centers around the specific service requirements of four separate and independent courts, each with distinct priorities, issues, expectations and client needs. CAS' current governance structure poses a challenge as a result of the need to reach consensus among the four courts on decisions related to its service delivery model and to the establishment of its priorities and budget decisions. Plans for meeting the priority In 2012-13, CAS will continue to work closely with the four courts to implement a new governance structure. This will further enhance coordination with, and cooperation among the four courts and improve CAS' ability to fulfill its mandate. To ensure proper alignment with the new governance structure, CAS will also pursue the review of its organizational structure, policies, business processes and management frameworks.

Risk Analysis

CAS must manage its risks in an increasingly complex and challenging environment. The nature of its business, the unique characteristics of the Canadian judicial system, its governance structure and its unique clientele, are inherent factors which pose many challenges and risks to the effective management of CAS' business priorities. Other factors, such as government-wide priorities and limited resources, pose additional constraints which impact the management and execution of the organization's mandate. In 2012-13, CAS will continue to employ innovative and informed strategies to address its exposure to risks.

As part of its risk management activities, CAS conducts an annual review of risk factors that may impede its ability to achieve its mandate. Through a tailored integrated risk management approach, CAS has taken steps to proactively identify, assess, monitor and address key risks. The result is the development of a formal corporate risk profile that provides a summary of the key risks faced by the organization.

In 2012-13, CAS will continue to implement strong governance, oversight and risk management practices. The identification of risks and the development of mitigation measures and controls will continue to contribute to the establishment of priorities, planning, resource allocation, policy development, program management and performance reports.

The following represents the key risks facing CAS in 2012-13 and some of the mitigation strategies planned for each risk. It must be noted that CAS' key risks are aligned with its priorities.

Court and Registry Information Technology Systems

There is a risk that the court and registry information technology systems and infrastructure will be unable to meet the requirements of evolving technology and program activities. To ensure it meets the specific needs of the courts and of court users, CAS must keep up with current technological advancements and applications used by the Canadian courts and the legal profession. In order to properly address this key risk, CAS must ensure that the courts and registry information systems are able to meet the requirements of evolving technology and program activities. The first step to mitigate this risk will be the completion of infrastructure enhancements and the implementation of a new data centre. This will be followed by measures to enhance server security and the
implementation of new IT policies and procedures. While this work is underway, CAS will also increase its project management capacity through its new Enterprise Project Management Office, and support employees with project management tools and training.

Upgrading CAS' technology infrastructure will support the implementation of a new Court and Registry Management System, the use of digital audio recording, videoconferencing, electronic filing and electronic storage of documents. These projects will be implemented over the coming years and are included in CAS' new five-year Investment Plan.

 

Financial Resources Sufficiency

There is a risk that sufficient financial resources will not be available to maintain CAS' capacity to deliver fully on its mandate. This risk is driven by many factors: demands on its resource base; aging IM/IT systems and infrastructure; lack of budget or mechanism to finance capital projects; and limited options to address program integrity.

CAS has no control over a significant portion of judicial expenditures, notably those related to hearings. Approximately 80% of the non-salary operating and maintenance expenses for CAS are contracted costs for services to support the judicial process and court hearings. Since CAS is required under the Act to provide these services as directed by the judiciary, the related expenditures are essentially non-discretionary and limit the organization's financial flexibility.

To address this risk, CAS will continue to monitor closely its budget spending through frequent reviews of expenditures to rapidly identify pressures and surpluses, and to reallocate funding to pressing priorities. The program integrity funding received through Budget 2011 will be used to address some critical security and IT needs. While the organization's program integrity issues were recognized, they were only partially addressed. For this reason, CAS will work collaboratively with central agencies to identify a sustainable funding model and develop a business case seeking additional funding to address urgent court accommodation issues.

Security

The need for enhanced security measures and services for members of the courts, employees, litigants and the public has been identified as both a key risk and a top priority for CAS in 2012-13. To help the organization mitigate this risk, CAS has undertaken a Security Threat and Risk Assessment and is developing a National Security Strategy along with its corporate security action plan with well-defined priorities.

In Budget 2011, CAS received multi-year program integrity funding. CAS will continue to invest some of these funds in improved and standardized security measures across the country and to initiate or complete many security initiatives identified in its security action plan. These include security awareness training, screening and security equipment, security risk management process, security officer program and various upgrades to its facilities.

Information Management

There is a risk that CAS may be unable to meet the IM requirements for rigorous protection and management of records and information. This risk is driven by two main factors: (1) safeguard of court records and (2) access to corporate information to support decision-making. To mitigate this risk, CAS will implement a scanning project for court records to safeguard federal courts records.

The second factor is related to the possibility of losing corporate information. This may diminish the effectiveness of decision-making within the organization and impact its ability to comply with various policies. To mitigate this risk, CAS must adopt current information management principles, practices and standards, and implement a Document Management System which will act as the central repository to store and manage corporate documents.

 

Planning Summary

Financial Resources ($ millions)

2012-13	2013-14	2014-15
68.1	65.7	65.8

Human Resources (full-time equivalents)

2012-13	2013-14	2014-15
639	639	639

Note: The financial and human resources for the implementation of Bill C-11, an Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Balanced Refugee Reform Act) and the Federal Courts Act are included in the tables above. Also, 2011-12 represents the final year of funding for CAS to manage immigration cases involving classified information under Division 9 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

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
On a scale of 1 to 5, satisfaction rate of the public of at least 4 with CAS regarding access to the litigation process.	80%

Planning Summary Table
($ millions)

Program Activity	Forecast Spending 2011-12	Planned Spending			Alignment to Government of Canada Outcomes
		2012-13	2013-14	2014-15
Judicial Services	22.0	22.0	21.8	21.8	Strong and independent democratic institutions
Registry Services	29.7	25.5	25.5	25.6	Strong and independent democratic institutions
Total Planned Spending		47.5	47.3	47.4

Note: The table above includes financial resources for the implementation of Bill C-11, an Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Balanced Refugee Reform Act) and the Federal Courts Act. Also, 2011-12 represents the final year of funding for CAS to manage immigration cases involving classified information under Division 9 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Planning Summary Table
($ millions)

Program Activity	Forecast Spending 2011-12	Planned Spending			Alignment to Government of Canada Outcomes
		2012-13	2013-14	2014-15
Internal Services	23.7	20.6	18.4	18.3	Strong and independent democratic institutions
Total Planned Spending		20.6	18.4	18.3

Note: The table above includes financial resources for the implementation of Bill C-11, an Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Balanced Refugee Reform Act) and the Federal Courts Act. Also, 2011-12 represents the final year of funding for CAS to manage immigration cases involving classified information under Division 9 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Expenditure Profile

 

[text version]

The variations in spending seen in the chart are attributable to a series of factors which fall under two broad categories: CAS' responsibilities and government decisions.

In the first category, the factors which most significantly impact actual spending include: the termination in 2008-09 of funding from the Treasury Board Management Reserve for the unfunded costs of certain judicial positions; the costs in 2008-09 of relocating registry employees within the National Capital Region; and the variations in the funding provided for the Bill C-3 Security Certificate Initiative, with the minimum amount being in 2009-10. The increase in forecast spending in 2011-12 includes: payments to employees in relation to collective agreements signed in 2011; the costs of relocating CAS' corporate functions and the data centre; a major investment in information technology infrastructure to address rust-out issues; and the provision in Budget 2011 for permanent program integrity funding for CAS to improve court security and to fund legislatively
mandated judicial appointments.

In the second category, the factors related to government decisions include lump sum funding for collective agreements and existing employee benefits such as severance and maternity pay. One such example is the option recently offered to many employees to convert severance pay entitlements into cash; this represents the biggest single component in the 2011-12 increase in spending. Other factors affecting spending from year-to-year include various government expenditure restraint measures.

 

For the forecast period, year-over-year planned spending decreases, in part because costs associated with collective agreements and other pay-list requirements are expected to decline. In addition, there are two specific situations that could have an important impact on expenditures: funding has not yet been approved for the Security Certificate Initiative; and funding for additional judicial appointments in support of refugee reform under Bill C-11 is included in the planned expenditure levels but is not available to CAS until these appointments are made.

 

Estimates by Vote

For information on our organizational appropriations, please see the 2012-13 Main Estimates publication at: http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20122013/p2-eng.asp

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page