I am pleased to submit the Departmental Results Report for the Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Canada (FJA) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022. This report provides parliamentarians and Canadians with information regarding what we accomplished and achieved in the last year.

Over the past fiscal year, we continued to adapt to the residual effects and uncertainty of the COVID‑19 pandemic. We successfully maintained our level of service delivery to our clientèle, approximately 1,200 judges and 1,000 retired judges and their survivors. Additionally, we continued to hold virtual sessions, and started again in-person sessions, related to our judges’ language training program, judicial advisory committees and other such activities.

On February 19, 2021, the Prime Minister announced a process to fill a seat on the Supreme Court of Canada to replace the Honourable Rosalie Silberman Abella upon her retirement on July 1, 2021. The independent Advisory Board, chaired by the Right Honourable Kim Campbell, evaluated candidates and provided non-binding merit-based recommendations to the Prime Minister. Our office was responsible for administering the application process, including assessing the functional bilingualism of candidates, supporting the Independent Advisory Board, as well as preparing the nominated candidate for their appearance before parliamentarians. On June 28, 2021, the Honourable Mahmud Jamal was appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Employees in the Secretariat serving the Canadian Judicial Council assisted in having the Council successfully adopt new Ethical Principles for Judges and approve a set of comprehensive electronic handbooks to assist self-represented litigants, amongst other matters. 2021 also marked the Council’s 50^th anniversary and to commemorate this milestone, a report was published to help communicate the Council’s work and objectives.

Our success is due to the dedication and commitment of all employees serving the Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs and the Canadian Judicial Council. We are a small team of people undertaking a broad scope of activities. I am fortunate to have the opportunity to lead such a team, and I thank all members of our personnel for their efforts and support over the past year.

Marc A. Giroux
Commissioner

Results at a glance

What funds were used?

The department’s actual spending for 2021-22 was $670,782,934.

Who was involved?

The department’s actual full-time equivalents (FTEs) for 2021-22 were 66.

Key results

Provided support to the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments, mandated with providing non-binding merit-based recommendations to the Prime Minister on Supreme Court appointments and preparing the Honourable Mahmud Jamal for his appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Successfully completed mandated IT classification conversion exercise and started preparations for the upcoming PA classification conversion exercise.

For more information on FJA’s plans, priorities and results achieved, see the “Results: what we achieved” section of this report.

Results: what we achieved

Core responsibility

Support to federally appointed judges

Description

To provide services and support to the federal judiciary in a manner which contributes to the independence of the judiciary and the confidence of Canadians in our judicial system.

Results

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was such that operations across all sectors (public and private) experienced adverse effects related but not limited to activities such as travel, in-person meetings and in some cases general service delivery, in adherence to health and safety protocols as dictated by officials on both the provincial and federal levels. The results detailed in the ensuing sections will be reflective of these impacts and effects.

Federally appointed judges are provided with centralized services in a timely and effective manner

During fiscal year 2021-2022 our processes and procedures continued to evolve as we developed plans and strategies in preparation for a hybrid model workforce. We maintained our commitment to a 100% verification of all claims in relation to payments pursuant to the Judges Act. However, this resulted in departures from our usual 10-day service standard for reimbursement to approximately 12 days. We expect to return to our normal standards as we implement our hybrid model.

FJA’s Judges’ Language Training Program continued to deliver training, both one-on-one and immersion leveraging virtual technology. Bilingual capacity is essential to access to justice for all Canadians in that federally appointed judges are able to develop and maintain their second official language proficiency to preside over hearings, understand testimony, read legal text (including broadening their scope of legal terminology), write decisions and participate in conferences making presentations. Our team of personnel also assessed the functional bilingual capacity of candidates applying to the 2021 Supreme Court of Canada judicial appointments process as well as to those candidates seeking nomination to Superior Courts.

The Federal Courts Reports division, in addition to maintaining publishing standards, provided assistance on a number of fronts. In particular, it collaborated with the Court Martial Appeal Court to provide expert advice/support in the preparation of headnotes and keywords for the publication of Volume 7 of their Court Martial Appeal Court Reports.

FJA’s International Program has been successfully establishing itself to provide Secretariat services in support of federal judges’ international work on different fronts and at different levels. In response to the changing landscape abroad and an identified need for security considerations, a modular self-directed training tool accessible by federally appointed judges was developed to provide orientation content on personal security when travelling abroad. In January, the second semi-annual Round Table meeting involving senior GAC officials and senior members of the judiciary was held. These regular meetings focus on examining the role that active and retired members of the Canadian judiciary can play in providing assistance to strengthen human rights protections in other judicial systems. Once such instance was the appointment of a retired member of our judiciary to an advisory committee of international stakeholders to vet future members of the High Qualification Commission of Ukraine – a body that is responsible for administering judicial appointments to Ukrainian courts.

The judicial appointments process is managed efficiently

During the 2021-2022 fiscal year, nine new Advisory Committees were appointed. New Committees were provided with orientation and training to ensure adherence to the Judicial Appointments process. During this reporting period, 247 applications, consisting of both new and outstanding submissions carried over from the previous fiscal year, were assessed. Given the ongoing pandemic, all meetings were conducted using virtual technology.

For each of the 64 appointments made during the 2021-2022 fiscal year, our staff prepared the necessary supporting order-in-council and ministerial recommendation documentation. Further information regarding these applications is available on FJA’s website.^[i]

On February 19, 2021, the Prime Minister launched the appointment process to select a justice for the Supreme Court of Canada, to fill the vacancy created by the upcoming retirement of Justice Rosalie Silberman Abella. The Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, mandated to provide support to the Independent Advisory Board and administering the application and assessment process, began the preliminary activities in fiscal year 2020-2021 to accept candidate applications (due by April 1, 2021) and continued activities, some virtually, in fiscal year 2021-2022 to, amongst other things, assess the functional bilingual proficiency of the candidates as well as prepare the nominated candidate for appearance before parliamentarians.

The judicial conduct review process is completed in a timely and effective manner

The Canadian Judicial Council continued its work to ensure that all complaints made to the Council were consistently reviewed in a timely way.

The Council reports that from April 1, 2021, to March 31, 2022, it opened and reviewed 871 files, of which 92% were treated within 6 months. While complaints were dealt with in an efficient manner at the early stages of review, the Council continued to urge the government to move forward with legislative reform in order to improve the judicial conduct review process, particularly at the inquiry stage, and to reduce the cost and delay that may result.

CJC ensures that federally appointed judges have access to relevant training and learning opportunities

In this reporting period, the Council and its key education partners, including the National Judicial Institute, the Canadian Institute for the Administration of Justice, and others, delivered 109 educational programs which included national programs, court-requested programs, and other more informal sessions such as court-based lunch and learn lectures.

With the objective of pursuing an open and transparent relationship with Canadians and journalists about the work of the Council, its committees, and its mandate, details relating to the nature and content of these education programs, as well as the number of participants who attended, can be found on the Council website.^[ii]

Experimentation

FJA had neither the financial nor human resources capacity to undertake key experiments in order to achieve the results for the core responsibility.

Results achieved

The following table shows, for support to federally appointed judges, the results achieved, the performance indicators, the targets and the target dates for 2021–22, and the actual results for the three most recent fiscal years for which actual results are available.

Departmental results	Performance indicators	Target	Date to achieve target	2019–20 Actual results	2020–21 Actual results	2021–22 Actual results
Federally appointed judges are provided with centralized services in a timely and effective manner	% of judges’ allowances processed within the 10-day service standard	At least 90%	March 2022	98% of judges’ allowances were processed within the 10-day service standard	83% of judges’ allowances were processed within the 10-day service standard	76% of judges’ allowances were processed within the 10-day service standard
The judicial appointments process is managed efficiently	% of candidate applications ready to be evaluated within 3 months of reception	100%	March 2022	Over 95% of applications were screened and ready to be evaluated by Committees within 3 months of reception	Over 95% of applications were screened and ready to be evaluated by Committees within 3 months of reception	Over 95% of applications were screened and ready to be evaluated by Committees within 3 months of reception
The judicial conduct review process is completed in a timely and effective manner	% of complaints reviewed within six months	At least 80%	March 2022	80% of complaints were reviewed within six months	97% of complaints were reviewed within six months	92% of complaints were reviewed within six months
CJC ensures that federally appointed judges have access to relevant training and learning opportunities	% of judges who reported to the CJC that their training and learning needs were met	At least 90%	March 2022	90% of judges reported to the CJC that their training and learning needs were met	90% of judges reported to the CJC that their training and learning needs were met	90% of judges reported to the CJC that their training and learning needs were met

Financial, human resources and performance information for FJA’s Program Inventory is available in GC InfoBase.^[iii]

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)

The following table shows, for support to federally appointed judges, budgetary spending for 2021–22, as well as actual spending for that year.

2021–22 Main Estimates	2021–22 Planned spending	2021–22 Total authorities available for use	2021–22 Actual spending (authorities used)	2021–22 Difference (Actual spending minus Planned spending)
682,143,930	682,143,930	672,808,852	670,056,134	(12,087,796)

Financial, human resources and performance information for FJA’s Program Inventory is available in GC InfoBase.^[iv]

Human resources (full-time equivalents)

The following table shows, in full‑time equivalents, the human resources the department needed to fulfill this core responsibility for 2021–22.

2021–22 Planned full-time equivalents	2021–22 Actual full-time equivalents	2021–22 Difference (Actual full-time equivalents minus Planned full-time equivalents)
60.5	60.5	0

Financial, human resources and performance information for FJA’s Program Inventory is available in the GC InfoBase.^[v]

Internal services

Description

Internal Services are those groups of related activities and resources that the federal government considers to be services in support of programs and/or required to meet corporate obligations of an organization. Internal Services refers to the activities and resources of the 10 distinct service categories that support Program delivery in the organization, regardless of the Internal Services delivery model in a department. The 10-service categories are:

Acquisition Management Services
Communications Services
Financial Management Services
Human Resources Management Services
Information Management Services
Information Technology Services
Legal Services
Materiel Management Services
Management and Oversight Services
Real Property Management Services

Results

In 2021-2022, FJA internal services continued to provide the necessary support to the organization meeting its core mandate objectives as well as staying abreast of Government of Canada-Wide initiatives in the areas of financial reporting, information management, IT and physical security and human resources.

FJA pay services were not transferred to the Miramichi Pay Centre and as such is a direct-entry organization employing a team of on-site pay advisors to manage the pay functions for FJA employees, federally appointed judges, retired federal judges and their survivors, as well as compensation services to Judicial Advisory Committee members. The impact of the Phoenix pay issues has been relatively low compared to the rest of government. FJA’s managers are provided with advice and services in the areas of staffing, classification, labour relations, compensation, performance management and other human resources disciplines.

Our compensation team continued to deliver services to our clients and FJA personnel and was able to maintain a 2-day service standard for 90% of pay and pension transactions.

FJA has continued to provide compensation, pension and benefits services to federal judges, retired federal judges and their survivors. During 2021-2022, this included 64 new appointments, 64 retirements and 47 deaths (active and retired judges).

In addition to service delivery to FJA and CJC personnel as well as to active and retired judges and survivors in the areas of compensation, pension and benefits we continued to offer advice and services to FJA managers and CJC senior management in the areas of staffing, classification, labour relations, compensation, performance management and other human resources disciplines. The IT classification conversion exercise was successfully completed and preparations for the upcoming PA classification conversion exercise were made.

As with many organizations, a key HR risk is the possible loss of expertise and corporate memory due to employee departures. FJA continues to do succession and integrated HR planning to mitigate this risk. The health and wellbeing of our employees continue to be priorities for the senior management team. Internally, we promoted LifeSpeak and the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) with campaigns and newsletters.

Budgetary financial resources (dollars)

The following table shows, for internal services, budgetary spending for 2021–22, as well as spending for that year.

2021–22 Main Estimates	2021–22 Planned spending	2021–22 Total authorities available for use	2021–22 Actual spending (authorities used)	2021–22 Difference (Actual spending minus Planned spending)
726,800	726,800	726,800	726,800	0

Human resources (full-time equivalents)

The following table shows, in full‑time equivalents, the human resources the department needed to carry out its internal services for 2021–22.

2021–22 Planned full-time equivalents	2021–22 Actual full-time equivalents	2021–22 Difference (Actual full-time equivalents minus Planned full-time equivalents)
5.5	5.5	0

Spending and human resources

Spending

Spending 2019-20 to 2024-25

The following graph presents planned (voted and statutory spending) over time.

The actual spending for the department shows a continual increase over the reporting periods resulting from the annual increase in judges’ salaries based on the Industrial Aggregate as provided for in the Judges Act, and an increase in the number of judges appointed to the bench and the number of pensioners receiving benefits under the Judges Act. Fiscal year 2020-2021 was an exception, as spending was lower than the previous period due to a significant decrease in expenses related to transportation as a result of travel restriction imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Budgetary performance summary for the core responsibility and internal services (dollars)

The “Budgetary performance summary for core responsibilities and internal services” table presents the budgetary financial resources allocated for FJA’s core responsibility and for internal services.

Core responsibility and internal services	2021–22 Main Estimates	2021–22 Planned spending	2022–23 Planned spending	2023–24 Planned spending	2021–22 Total authorities available for use	2019–20 Actual spending (authorities used)	2020–21 Actual spending (authorities used)	2021–22 Actual spending (authorities used)
Administrative support to federally appointed judges	682,143,930	682,143,930	710,327,915	732,627,518	672,808,852	627,331,184	626,389,832	670,056,134
Subtotal	682,143,930	682,143,930	710,327,915	732,627,518	672,808,852	627,331,184	626,389,832	670,056,134
Internal Services	726,800	726,800	726,800	726,800	726,800	726,800	726,800	726,800
Total	682,870,730	682,870,730	711,054,715	733,354,318	673,535,652	628,057,948	627,116,632	670,782,934

Human resources

The “Human resources summary for core responsibilities and internal services” table presents the full-time equivalents (FTEs) allocated to each of FJA’s core responsibilities and to internal services.

Human resources summary for the core responsibility and internal services

Core responsibility and internal services	2019–20 Actual full‑time equivalents	2020–21 Actual full‑time equivalents	2021–22 Planned full‑time equivalents	2021–22 Actual full‑time equivalents	2022–23 Planned full‑time equivalents	2023–24 Planned full‑time equivalents
Administrative support to federally appointed judges	56.5	57.5	60.5	60.5	60.5	60.5
Subtotal	56.5	57.5	60.5	60.5	60.5	60.5
Internal Services	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.5	5.5
Total	62	63	66	66	66	66

Expenditures by vote

For information on FJA’s organizational voted and statutory expenditures, consult the Public Accounts of Canada 2022 [vi].

Government of Canada spending and activities

Information on the alignment of FJA’s spending with the Government of Canada’s spending and activities is available in the GC InfoBase [vii].

Financial statements and financial statements highlights

Financial statements

FJA’s financial statements [viii] (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2022, are available on the departmental website.

Financial statements highlights

Condensed Statement of Operations (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2022 (dollars)

Financial information	2021–22 Planned results	2021–22 Actual results	2020–21 Actual results	Difference (2021–22 Actual results minus 2021–22 Planned results)	Difference (2021–22 Actual results minus 2020–21 Actual results)
Total expenses	685,217,000	672,330,765	628,728,180	(12,886,235)	43,602,585
Total revenues	18,007,000	19,112,880	17,788,620	1,105,880	1,324,260
Net cost of operations before government funding and transfers	667,210,000	653,217,885	610,939,560	(13,992,115)	42,278,325

The departmental net cost of operations shows an increase of $42.3 million over the previous fiscal year. This increase is primarily a result of a provision in the Judges Act that allows for an annual increase in salaries to judges based on the Industrial Aggregate, an increase in the number of pensioners receiving benefits under the Judges Act. Additionally, an increase in expenses related to transportation is attributable to the lifting of some travel restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Condensed Statement of Financial Position (unaudited) as of March 31, 2022 (dollars)

Financial Information	2021–22	2020–21	Difference (2021–22 minus 2020–21)
Total net liabilities	277,870,289	267,022,974	10,847,315
Total net financial assets	4,004,579	4,482,655	(478,076)
Departmental net debt	273,865,710	262,540,319	11,325,391
Total non‑financial assets	125,610	171,882	(46,272)
Departmental net financial position	(273,740,100)	(262,368,437)	(11,371,663)

Net liabilities for 2021-22 are comprised primarily of $1.9 million in accrued liabilities and $275.9 million for the Judges’ Supplementary Retirement Benefits Account (SRBA). The SRBA is the pension plan for federally appointed judges which provides fully indexed annuities to judges and to all eligible survivors providing they meet minimum age and service requirements. Unlike other pension plans, the judges’ plan lacks an explicit accrual rate for benefits. Instead the full benefit amount is generally payable when the member has completed 15 years of pensionable service and the total of the member’s age and years of service total 80. The increase of $10.8 million in net liabilities over last fiscal year is fully attributable to the actuarial liability associated with the SRBA.

FJA’s future-oriented statement of operations (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2022, is available on the FJA’s website [ix].

Corporate information

Organizational profile

Appropriate minister: The Honourable David Lametti, P.C., M.P.

Institutional head: Marc A. Giroux, Commissioner

Ministerial portfolio: Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Enabling instrument: Judges Act ^[x] (R.S.C., 1985, c. J-1)

Year of incorporation / commencement: 1978

Other: Information about the Canadian Judicial Council, its mandate and programs are found at the Council’s website [xi].

Raison d’être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do

Raison d’être

“Raison d’être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do” is available on FJA’s website [xii].

Mandate and role

FJA was created in 1978 under an Act of the Parliament of Canada to safeguard the independence of the judiciary and put federally appointed judges at arm’s length from the Department of Justice. Our mandate extends to promoting the better administration of justice and providing support for the federal judiciary. The Judges Act[xiii] provides for the designation of an officer called the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs. One of the roles and responsibilities of the Commissioner is to act on behalf of the Minister of Justice in matters related to the administration of Part I of the Judges Act.

FJA’s judicial appointments secretariat administers 17 advisory committees across Canada that are responsible for evaluating candidates under the superior courts judicial appointments process for federal judicial appointments and administering and supporting the process for appointment of prothonotaries to the Federal Court. FJA also has the mandate to manage the Independent Advisory Board for Supreme Court of Canada Judicial Appointments process, established to assess candidates for appointment to the Supreme Court of Canada.

FJA provides and maintains a secure on-line system (JUDICOM) to facilitate communication and collaboration amongst members of the Canadian federal judiciary.

In order to support the courts, FJA’s Judges’ Language Training Program develops and maintains a tailored curriculum providing individual and group training services in both official languages, as well as conducting language assessments of candidates for appointment to the superior courts and the Supreme Court of Canada. This allows federally appointed judges to improve their second language proficiency and legal terminology, and ensures that Canadians have access to justice in the official language of their choice.

Additionally, FJA coordinates initiatives with various government and non-government stakeholders related to the federal Canadian judiciary’s role in international cooperation.

The Federal Courts Reports section of FJA is responsible for selecting and publishing Federal Court of Appeal and Federal Court decisions in both official languages. Selected decisions undergo a thorough editorial process that includes copy editing and citation verification, the preparation of headnotes and captions, and translation accuracy confirmation.

The Canadian Judicial Council has the power and duty to ensure the proper conduct of federally appointed judges. In turn, judges must feel confident to make decisions without fear of reprisal. To achieve this dual objective, the Council has the power to investigate the conduct - and not the decisions - of federally appointed judges when a complaint is made against one of them. The Council can make recommendations for certain actions, including the removal of a judge.

Operating context

FJA’s environment is complex due to the range of services it provides and the large number of clients served. Recognizing this context, FJA has developed a risk profile and actively monitors internal and external risks through its management team. Being a very small organization, the main human resources risk FJA has to face is the loss of expertise and corporate memory from the departure of experienced staff, and the lack of in-house expertise and backup in specialized areas unique to FJA. FJA continues to do succession and HR planning to mitigate this risk.

FJA continues to operate within its existing reference levels, which have remained relatively constant for several years. New funding received in the current and previous fiscal years has been provided to support growth in existing programs and cannot be readily allocated towards addressing gaps and deficiencies at the operating level. This has impacted FJA’s ability to make investments in new strategic priorities. FJA has responded to these challenges by identifying efficiencies and reallocating internal resources as required.

For more general information about the department, see the “Supplementary information” section of this report.

Reporting Framework

FJA’s Departmental Results Framework and Program Inventory of record for 2021–22 are shown below.

Graphical presentation of Departmental Results Framework and Program Inventory

Departmental Results Framework	Core Responsibility: Administrative Support to Federally Appointed Judges		Internal Services

	Departmental Result: Federally appointed judges are provided with centralized services in a timely and effective manner	Indicator: 90% of judges’ allowances processed within the 10-day service standard

	Departmental Result: The judicial appointments process is managed efficiently	Indicator: 100% of candidate applications ready to be evaluated within 3 months of reception

	Departmental Result: The judicial conduct review process is completed in a timely and effective manner	Indicator: 80% of complaints reviewed within six months

	Departmental Result: CJC ensures that federally appointed judges have access to relevant training and learning opportunities	Indicator: 90% of judges who reported to the CJC that their training and learning needs were met

Program Inventory	Program: Payments pursuant to the Judges Act

	Program: Canadian Judicial Council

	Program: Federal Judicial Affairs

Supporting information on the Program Inventory

Supporting information on planned expenditures, human resources, and results related to the FJA’s Program Inventory is available in the GC InfoBase [xiv].

Supplementary information tables

The following supplementary information tables are available on FJA’s website [xv].

Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy
Gender-based analysis plus

Federal tax expenditures

The tax system can be used to achieve public policy objectives through the application of special measures such as low tax rates, exemptions, deductions, deferrals and credits. The Department of Finance Canada publishes cost estimates and projections for these measures each year in the Report on Federal Tax Expenditures ^[xvi]. This report also provides detailed background information on tax expenditures, including descriptions, objectives, historical information and references to related federal spending programs as well as evaluations and GBA+ of tax expenditures.

Organizational contact information

Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Canada

99 Metcalfe Street, 8^th Floor

Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1E3

Canada

Telephone: (613) 995-5140

Facsimile: (613) 995-5615

Email: info@fja-cmf.gc.ca

Web site: http://www.fja-cmf.gc.ca

Appendix: definitions

appropriation (crédit)

Any authority of Parliament to pay money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

budgetary expenditures (dépenses budgétaires)

Operating and capital expenditures; transfer payments to other levels of government, organizations or individuals; and payments to Crown corporations.

core responsibility (responsabilité essentielle)

An enduring function or role performed by a department. The intentions of the department with respect to a core responsibility are reflected in one or more related departmental results that the department seeks to contribute to or influence.

Departmental Plan (plan ministériel)

A report on the plans and expected performance of an appropriated department over a 3‑year period. Departmental Plans are usually tabled in Parliament each spring.

departmental priority (priorité)

A plan or project that a department has chosen to focus and report on during the planning period. Priorities represent the things that are most important or what must be done first to support the achievement of the desired departmental results.

departmental result (résultat ministériel)

A consequence or outcome that a department seeks to achieve. A departmental result is often outside departments’ immediate control, but it should be influenced by program-level outcomes.

departmental result indicator (indicateur de résultat ministériel)

A quantitative measure of progress on a departmental result.

departmental results framework (cadre ministériel des résultats)

A framework that connects the department’s core responsibilities to its departmental results and departmental result indicators.

Departmental Results Report (rapport sur les résultats ministériels)

A report on a department’s actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Departmental Plan.

experimentation (expérimentation)

The conducting of activities that seek to first explore, then test and compare the effects and impacts of policies and interventions in order to inform evidence-based decision-making, and improve outcomes for Canadians, by learning what works, for whom and in what circumstances. Experimentation is related to, but distinct from innovation (the trying of new things), because it involves a rigorous comparison of results. For example, using a new website to communicate with Canadians can be an innovation; systematically testing the new website against existing outreach tools or an old website to see which one leads to more engagement, is experimentation.

full‑time equivalent (équivalent temps plein)

A measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person‑year charge against a departmental budget. For a particular position, the full‑time equivalent figure is the ratio of number of hours the person actually works divided by the standard number of hours set out in the person’s collective agreement.

gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) (analyse comparative entre les sexes plus [ACS+])

An analytical process used to assess how diverse groups of women, men and gender-diverse people experience policies, programs and services based on multiple factors including race ethnicity, religion, age, and mental or physical disability.

government-wide priorities (priorités pangouvernementales)

For the purpose of the 2020–21 Departmental Results Report, those high-level themes outlining the government’s agenda in the 2019 Speech from the Throne, namely: Fighting climate change; Strengthening the Middle Class; Walking the road of reconciliation; Keeping Canadians safe and healthy; and Positioning Canada for success in an uncertain world.

horizontal initiative (initiative horizontale)

An initiative where two or more federal organizations are given funding to pursue a shared outcome, often linked to a government priority.

non‑budgetary expenditures (dépenses non budgétaires)

Net outlays and receipts related to loans, investments and advances, which change the composition of the financial assets of the Government of Canada.

performance (rendement)

What an organization did with its resources to achieve its results, how well those results compare to what the organization intended to achieve, and how well lessons learned have been identified.

performance indicator (indicateur de rendement)

A qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging the performance of an organization, program, policy or initiative respecting expected results.

performance reporting (production de rapports sur le rendement)

The process of communicating evidence‑based performance information. Performance reporting supports decision making, accountability and transparency.

plan (plan)

The articulation of strategic choices, which provides information on how an organization intends to achieve its priorities and associated results. Generally, a plan will explain the logic behind the strategies chosen and tend to focus on actions that lead to the expected result.

planned spending (dépenses prévues)

For Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports, planned spending refers to those amounts presented in Main Estimates.

A department is expected to be aware of the authorities that it has sought and received. The determination of planned spending is a departmental responsibility, and departments must be able to defend the expenditure and accrual numbers presented in their Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports.

program (programme)

Individual or groups of services, activities or combinations thereof that are managed together within the department and focus on a specific set of outputs, outcomes or service levels.

program inventory (répertoire des programmes)

Identifies all the department’s programs and describes how resources are organized to contribute to the department’s core responsibilities and results.

result (résultat)

A consequence attributed, in part, to an organization, policy, program or initiative. Results are not within the control of a single organization, policy, program or initiative; instead they are within the area of the organization’s influence.

statutory expenditures (dépenses législatives)

Expenditures that Parliament has approved through legislation other than appropriation acts. The legislation sets out the purpose of the expenditures and the terms and conditions under which they may be made.

target (cible)

A measurable performance or success level that an organization, program or initiative plans to achieve within a specified time period. Targets can be either quantitative or qualitative.

voted expenditures (dépenses votées)

Expenditures that Parliament approves annually through an appropriation act. The vote wording becomes the governing conditions under which these expenditures may be made.