ARCHIVED - Appendix D: Report cards for 15 “separate employer” federal institutions – Methodology and results
The Standard on Web Usability replaces this content. This content is archived because Common Look and Feel 2.0 Standards have been rescinded.
Archived Content
Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
Page 14 of 15
The report card is one of the key tools used by the Commissioner each year to proactively evaluate the performance of federal institutions with regard to implementing the Official Languages Act.
In 2008–2009, the Commissioner made some changes to the report cards. As a result:
- a two-year cycle for the report cards has been put in place: this year, the Commissioner focused on the performance of 15 separate employers; next year, he will assess the performance of departments;
- the Commissioner has decided to give more weight to the quantitative result indicators for evaluating the performance of the institutions examined;
- the Commissioner furthered his analysis of available information by examining the action plans of the 15 separate employers that were selected and the measures taken in terms of Part VII of the Act.
This year, the Commissioner decided to examine, for the first time, the quality of services in English and French offered by institutions through e-mail. Two aspects were evaluated: the availability of service in both official languages as well as the time it took to obtain a response to a question asked in English compared to the time it took to obtain a response to a question asked in French.
Response time was evaluated as follows:
- 5 = Exemplary
- 4 = Good
- 3 = Average
- 2 = Poor
- 1 = Very poor
The results of this year’s exercise namely demonstrate that there is still a lot of work left to do in terms of service to the public and language of work. In fact, a number of the 15 separate employers that were evaluated are still having difficulty overcoming some of the significant challenges they face in terms of bilingualism. It should nevertheless be mentioned that each of these institutions performs well in certain language-related areas.
The report card results for separate employers are presented in Tables 3 and 4.
The complete report cards of the institutions that were examined are available on the Office of the Commissioner’s Web site.
| Table 3 - Comparative Ratings Table* | ||||||
| Program Management | Service to the Public | Language of Work | Equitable Participation | Advancement and Support | Overall Rating | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Business development Bank of canada | B | B | A | A | B | B |
| Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation | B | A | C | A | B | B |
| Canada Post | B | B | D | B | A | B |
| Canada Revenue Agency | B | B | D | A | A | B |
| Canadian Food Inspection Agency | B | B | D | C | C | C |
| Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation | C | B | B | B | C | B |
| Canadian Tourism Commission | A | B | S/O** | A | B | A |
| CBC/Radio-Canada | D | B | B | B | B | B |
| National Arts Centre | C | A | B | A | B | B |
| National Capital Commission | B | A | B | B | A | B |
| National Film Board | B | B | B | A | A | B |
| NAV CANADA | B | A | E | A | C | C |
| Parks Canada | B | C | C | C | A | C |
| Royal Canadian Mounted Police | C | C | D | A | C | C |
| VIA Rail | B | B | C | A | B | B |
* The institutions’ results are given as letters that correspond to the following scale: A = Exemplary / B = Good / C = Fair / D = Poor / E = Very poor.
A detailed rating guide that describes the methodology can be found on the Office of the Commissioner’s Web site.
** Given the small number of employees in designated bilingual regions, the Office of the Commissioner was not able to carry out a survey on language of work for this institution.
| Table 4 - Observation Results* on Service in 2008–2009 | ||||||||
| In Person | Over the Telephone | By E-mail | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Institution | Visual Active Offer (Rating in %) | Active offer (Rating in %) | Service (Rating in %) | Active Offer (Rating in %) | Service (Rating in %) | Service (Rating in %) | Response Time (Rating out of 5) | Overall Result |
| Business Development Bank of Canada | 88.7 | 16.9 | 59.3 | 100.0 | 91.2 | 90.0 | 5.0 | B |
| Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation | 95.0 | 39.2 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 90.9 | 100.0 | 5.0 | A |
| Canada Post | 90.8 | 11.1 | 82.0 | 100.0 | 93.5 | 87.5 | 4.0 | B |
| Canada Revenue Agency** | 97.3 | 24.5 | 75.7 | 100.0 | 97.5 | S/O | S/O | B |
| Canadian Food Inspection Agency | 83.0 | 17.0 | 72.,5 | 100.0 | 91.4 | 88.9 | 4.0 | B |
| Canadian Museum of Civilization Corporation | 100.0 | 31.9 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 3.0 | B |
| Canadian Tourism Commission | 100.0 | 50.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 85.7 | 2.0 | B |
| CBC/Radio-Canada | 62.5 | 12.5 | 91.7 | 100.0 | 90.9 | 70.0 | 4.0 | B |
| National Arts Centre | 100.0 | 58.3 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 90.0 | 5.0 | A |
| National Capital Commission | 100.0 | 50.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 88.9 | 5.0 | A |
| National Film Board | 100.0 | 50.0 | 75.0 | 100.0 | 75.0 | 88.9 | 4.0 | B |
| NAV CANADA*** | S/O | S/O | 99.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 87.5 | 5.0 | A |
| Parks Canada | 92.9 | 39.0 | 88.9 | 81.8 | 80.3 | 90.0 | 1.0 | C |
| Royal Canadian Mounted Police | 65.3 | 5.6 | 59.9 | 100.0 | 73.0 | 90.0 | 5.0 | C |
| VIA Rail | 86.5 | 10.8 | 81.1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 75.0 | 5.0 | B |
* For more specific details about the methodology used, see the Rating Guide on the Office of the Commissioner’s Web site.
** The Office of the Commissioner was not able to make observations on service by e-mail for this institution because it does not communicate with the public by e-mail.
*** This year, observations on service in person at NAV CANADA were made by using a satisfaction survey for pilots who are guided by the Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport’s control tower. Therefore only service was rated.
