Public Safety, Defence, and Immigration Portfolio Evaluation

Appendix C: Data Collection Instruments

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio (Management)

The Department of Justice hired Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA), a research company, to support the evaluation of the Public Safety, Defence and Immigration (PSDI) Portfolio. The evaluation includes interviews with those working within the Portfolio, with other representatives of Justice Canada, with representatives of PSDI Portfolio client departments and agencies, and with other non-PSDI client departments.

The evaluation covers a five-year period (2008/09 – 2012/13) and focuses on the relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of PSDI, with the following exceptions: the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Section, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act Division 9 / National Security Inadmissibility Initiative, and the Business Management Office.

With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Note:

Unless otherwise stated, any reference in this interview guide to the work of the PSDI Portfolio is meant to include the work of the Office of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General (ADAG), all Department Legal Service Units (DLSU) within the Portfolio, and of Regional Offices on PSDI files.

Introduction

1. Please describe your current roles and responsibilities. Who do you interact with in the Portfolio?

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

2. In your opinion, what are the most significant factors that require PSDI to play an integrating and coordinating role with respect to providing legal services to its clients? [Q1,2]

3. How have the demands placed on the Portfolio evolved over the past five years? What have been the most significant changes, if any? How has the Portfolio responded to them? [Q2]

4. In your opinion, how is the government’s agenda with respect to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence and immigration affecting the provision of legal services by PSDI counsel? What impact, if any, is this agenda expected to have on the role played by the Portfolio? [Q1,2]

Design of the Portfolio

5. Over time, the role and the composition of the Portfolio have evolved to reflect the changing mandate and needs of its client departments and agencies. Are both the current mandate and objectives pursued by the Portfolio clearly understood within your team? Considering the current structure and composition of the Portfolio, how would you describe the key strengths of the Portfolio? What changes, if any, could be considered to enhance the efficiency and/or the effectiveness of the Portfolio’s structure and composition? [Q4,5]

6. In your view, does PSDI provide legal services to the most appropriate mix of departments and agencies to support the government’s national security and public safety agenda? If not, what other departments or agencies should ideally be included and/or what departments or agencies should be excluded?

7. The work of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General (ADAG) and Deputy ADAG, and the Portfolio more generally is supported by the National Litigation Coordination Team (NLCT). In the current context, what do you consider to be the main contribution of the NLCT? What changes could be made, if any, to enhance the contribution of the NLCT? [Q6,7]

8. The work of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General (ADAG) and certain DLSUs is also supported by the National Security Law Team (NSLT). In the current context, what do you consider to be the main contribution of the NSLT? What changes could be made, if any, to enhance the contribution of the NSLT? [Q6,7]

9. The ADAG (Litigation Branch) is responsible for the management of national security litigation. In some circumstances, this work is supported by the National Security Group (NSG). How is the work performed by the Litigation Branch coordinated with that undertaken by the PSDI Portfolio? [Q6,7]

10. To what extent is the work undertaken by the Policy Sector coordinated with that undertaken by the PSDI Portfolio? [Q6,7]

11. In your opinion, what impacts, if any, does the work of the Justice National Security and Intelligence Committee (NSIC) and the National Security Coordinator have on that undertaken by the PSDI Portfolio? [Q6,7]

12. The ADAG PSDI is functionally responsible for the work performed by regional office counsel for PSDI clients. What do you consider to be the key challenges in ensuring a consistent approach in the work performed by regional offices? What changes, if any, could be done to enhance this specific aspect of the coordinating role undertaken by the Portfolio? [Q6,7]

13. Please describe how the PSDI Portfolio manages legal risks, in cooperation with client departments. In particular, what are the key tools, strategies, committees or structures currently used to assist in managing legal risks? In your opinion, how efficient and/or effective have they been? What role have clients played in managing these risks? [Q10]

14. What has been the level and the nature of the collaboration between the Portfolio and other specialized sections or portfolios (e.g., Public Law Sector, Litigation Branch and Legislative Services Branch)? How effective has this collaboration been? What change, if any, could improve this collaboration? [Q10]

15. Overall, are there any systemic barriers that limit the ability of the Portfolio to achieve its planned results? If so, please describe these barriers and what you think would be required to address them. [Q7]

16. The Office of Business Management (OBM) is responsible for analysing business issues and requirements related to the work of the Portfolio. To what extent is the OBM capable of producing the information required to effectively monitor the work of the Portfolio and the achievement of its expected results? What change, if any, could be made to enhance the capacity of the OBM? [Q8]

Performance – Effectiveness

17. How would you describe the Portfolio’s current capacity to assess, plan and manage both the quality (usefulness, responsiveness, consistency, and timeliness) and the costs of legal services offered? What changes, if any, could be made to enhance this capacity? [Q9]

18. Please describe what you consider to be the key impacts of professional development activities undertaken to date in support of the work of legal counsel (practice groups, training sessions, presentations, etc.)? Should changes to the type and range of issues addressed by professional development be considered (e.g. are the professional development activities sufficient to support the work of PSDI)? If so, please describe. [Q9]

19. In your opinion, has the level of awareness and understanding of legal risks among client departments and agencies improved over the last five years? If so, what do you consider to be the key contributions of the Portfolio towards this outcome? If not, please explain. What more needs to be done? [Q10]

20. How would you describe the nature, level and scope of integration and cooperation within the PSDI Portfolio and, more generally, between the PSDI Portfolio and Justice Canada? [Q16]

21. What do you consider to be the Portfolio’s main achievements in ensuring a coordinated, consistent and responsive approach to legal issues pertaining to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence and immigration? How satisfied are you with this level of coordination? What changes, if any, could be made to enhance this coordination? [Q11,12]

22. What do you consider to be the primary challenges that the Portfolio is facing in reaching its expected results? [Q10,11,12]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

23. Since 2012, the Portfolio has been implementing a number of strategies to increase the efficiency of its resource utilization (such as those initiatives related to process optimization and benchmarking). In your opinion, how well have the roles and responsibilities related to this goal been communicated and understood by managers in PSDI? [Q14]

24. Please describe what you perceive to be the key results achieved to date in maximizing efficiency. [Q14,16]

25. Are there remaining challenges that influence PSDI’s ability to achieve its expected outcomes effectively? What changes, if any, are needed to enhance the processes and tools to maximize resource utilization within the Portfolio? [Q14,16]

26. In light of the limited resources currently available, what do you expect to be the key challenges in responding to the forecasted demands for the services of the Portfolio? [Q15]

27. Are there any aspects of legal management practices or models in other portfolios of Justice Canada or in other jurisdictions that could be considered for implementation within the PSDI portfolio to enhance its efficiency and/or effectiveness? If so, please describe them. [Q17]

Conclusion

28. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio (DLSU)

With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Note:

Introduction

1. Please describe your current roles and responsibilities. Who do you interact with in the Portfolio?

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

2. Considering the legal issues your client department deals with, particularly those related to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence or immigration, please describe how the demand for legal services from your DLSU has evolved over the past five years. What has been the most significant change, if any? [Q2]

3. In the current context, is there a continued need for the integrating and coordinating role that the Portfolio plays in supporting your work, particularly as it relates to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence or immigration? [Q1,2]

Design of the Portfolio

5. Over time, the role and the composition of the Portfolio have evolved to reflect the changing mandate and needs of its client departments and agencies. Are both the current mandate and objectives pursued by the Portfolio clearly understood within your DLSU? Considering the current structure and composition of the Portfolio, how would you describe the key strengths of the Portfolio? What changes, if any, could be considered to enhance the efficiency of the Portfolio’s structure and composition? [Q4,5]

7. The work of the Portfolio is supported by the National Litigation Coordination Team (NLCT). [Q6,7]

Please describe the interactions your DLSU has had with the NLCT.
In the current context, what do you consider to be the main contribution of the NLCT? What changes could be made, if any, to enhance the work of the NLCT?

8. The work of the Portfolio is also supported by the National Security Law Team (NSLT). In the current context, what do you consider to be the main contribution of the NSLT? What changes could be made, if any, to enhance the contribution of the NSLT? [Q6,7]

9. The ADAG PSDI is functionally responsible for the work performed by regional office counsel for PSDI clients. What do you consider to be the key challenges in ensuring a consistent approach in the work performed by regional offices? What changes, if any, could be made to enhance this specific aspect of the coordinating role undertaken by the Portfolio? [Q6,7]

10. Please describe the key strategies or processes currently used to assist your DLSU in managing legal risks. In your opinion, how effective have they been? What role have clients played in managing these risks? [Q10]

11. What has been the level and the nature of the collaboration between your DLSU and Justice Canada’s specialized sections (e.g. Public Law Sector, Litigation Branch, Legislative Services Branch)? How effective has this collaboration been? What change, if any, could improve this collaboration? [Q10]

Performance - Effectiveness

12. Overall, how would you describe the Portfolio’s current capacity to assess, plan and manage both the quality (usefulness, responsiveness, consistency, and timeliness) and the costs of legal services offered by DLSUs? What change, if any, could be made to enhance this capacity? [Q9]

13. Please describe what you consider to be the key impacts of professional development activities undertaken in support of the work of legal counsel within your DLSU (practice groups, training sessions, presentations, etc.). Should changes to the type and range of issues addressed by professional development be considered (e.g. are the professional development activities sufficient to support the work of PSDI)? If so, please describe. [Q9]

14. In your opinion, has your client’s level of awareness and understanding of legal risks improved over the last five years? If so, what do you consider to be the key contribution of the Portfolio towards this outcome? If not, please explain. What more needs to be done? [Q10]

15. How would you describe the nature, level and scope of integration and cooperation within the PSDI Portfolio and, more generally, between the PSDI Portfolio and Justice Canada? [Q16]

16. What do you consider to be the Portfolio’s main achievements in ensuring a coordinated, consistent and responsive approach to legal issues pertaining to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence and immigration? How satisfied are you with this level of coordination? What changes, if any, could be made to enhance this coordination? [Q9] [Q11,12]

17. What do you consider to be the primary challenges that the Portfolio is facing in reaching its expected results? [Q10,11,12]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

18. Since 2012, the Portfolio has implemented a number of strategies to increase the efficiency of its resource utilization (such as those initiatives related to process optimization and benchmarking). In your opinion, how well have these initiatives been communicated to and understood by counsel in your DLSU? [Q14]

19. Does your client play a role in improving your DLSU’s efficiency in delivering legal services?

20. Please describe what you perceive to be the key results achieved to date in maximizing efficiency. [Q14,16]

21. Are there remaining challenges that influence PSDI’s ability to achieve its expected outcomes effectively? What changes, if any, are needed to enhance the processes and tools to maximize resource utilization within the Portfolio? [Q14,16]

22. In light of the limited resources currently available, what do you expect to be the key challenges in responding to the forecasted demands for the services of the Portfolio? [Q15]

23. Are there any aspects of legal management practices or models in other portfolios of Justice Canada or in other jurisdictions that could be considered for implementation within the PSDI Portfolio to enhance its efficiency and/or effectiveness? If so, please describe them. [Q17]

Conclusion

24. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio
(Managers in Regional Offices)

With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Note:

Introduction

1. Please describe your current roles and responsibilities. Who do you interact with in the Portfolio?

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

2. Considering the range of litigation files involving departments and agencies included in the Portfolio, please describe how the demands for the litigation services from your regional office (RO) have evolved over the past five years. What has been the most significant change, if any? [Q2]

3. In the current context, is there a continued need for the integrating and coordinating roles that the Portfolio plays in supporting your litigation work, particularly as it relates to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence and immigration? [Q1,2]

4. How do you see the government’s agenda evolving in relation to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence and immigration? What impact, if any, is this agenda expected to have on your services? [Q1,2]

Design of the Portfolio

5. Over time, the role and the composition of the Portfolio have evolved to reflect the changing mandate and needs of its client departments and agencies. Are both the current mandate and objectives pursued by the Portfolio clearly understood within your RO? Considering the current structure and composition of the Portfolio, how would you describe its key strengths? What changes, if any, could be considered to enhance the efficiency and/or effectiveness of the Portfolio’s structure and composition? [Q4,5]

6. The work of the Portfolio is supported by the National Litigation Coordination Team (NLCT). [Q6,7]

Please describe the interactions your RO has had with the NLCT.
In the current context, what do you consider to be the main contribution of the NLCT? What changes could be made, if any, to enhance the contribution of the NLCT to your work in the region?

7. The ADAG (Litigation Branch) is responsible for the management of national security litigation. In some circumstances, this work is supported by the National Security Group (NSG). How is the work performed by the Litigation Branch coordinated with that undertaken by the PSDI Portfolio? [Q6,7]

8. The ADAG PSDI is functionally responsible for the work performed by regional office counsel for PSDI clients. What do you consider to be the key challenges in ensuring a consistent approach in the work performed by regional offices? What changes, if any, could be done to enhance this specific aspect of the coordinating role undertaken by the Portfolio? [Q6,7]

9. Please describe how the PSDI Portfolio manages legal risks, in cooperation with client departments. In particular, what key tools, strategies, committees or structures are currently accessible to assist in managing legal risks? How do those tools differ from the ones developed by your RO? In your opinion, how efficient and/or effective have they been? What role have clients played in managing these risks? [Q10]

10. What has been the level and the nature of the collaboration between your RO and the PSDI DLSU? How effective has this collaboration been? What change, if any, could improve this collaboration? [Q10]

11. What has been the level and the nature of the collaboration between your RO and Justice Canada’s specialized sections (e.g. Public Law Sector, Legislative Services Branch) on PSDI files? How effective has this collaboration been? What change, if any, could improve this collaboration? [Q10]

12. Overall, are there any systemic barriers that limit the ability of the Portfolio to achieve its planned results? If so, could you describe these barriers and what would be required to address them? [Q7]

Performance – Effectiveness

13. How would you describe the Portfolio’s current capacity to assess, plan and manage both the quality (usefulness, responsiveness, consistency, and timeliness) and the costs of legal services offered? What change, if any, could be made to enhance this capacity? [Q9]

14. Please describe what you consider to be the key impacts of professional development activities undertaken to date in support of the work of legal counsel (practice groups, training sessions, presentations, etc.)? Should changes to the type and range of issues addressed by professional development be considered (e.g. are the professional development activities sufficient to support the work of PSDI)? If so, please describe. [Q9]

15. In your opinion, has the level of awareness and understanding of legal risks among client departments and agencies improved over the last five years? If so, what do you consider to be the Portfolio’s key contribution towards this outcome? If not, how have you come to this conclusion? [Q10]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

17. Is there anything that the PSDI Portfolio could do to make your work more effective and efficient?

18. To what extent are counsel at the appropriate level of classification assigned to files, given the risk and complexity levels of the files?

19. What specific steps has the RO taken to reduce legal costs related to PSDI files?

Conclusion

20. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio
(Counsel in Regional Offices)

With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Note:

Introduction

1. Please describe your current roles and responsibilities. Who do you interact with in the Portfolio?

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Design of the Portfolio

5. Over time, the role and the composition of the Portfolio have evolved to reflect the changing mandate and needs of its client departments and agencies. Are both the current mandate and objectives pursued by the Portfolio clearly understood within your RO? Considering the current structure and composition of the Portfolio, how would you describe its key strengths? What changes, if any, could be considered to enhance the efficiency of the Portfolio’s structure and composition? [Q4,5]

6. The work of the Portfolio is supported by the National Litigation Coordination Team (NLCT). [Q6,7]

Please describe the interactions your RO has had with the NLCT.
In the current context, what do you consider to be the main contribution of the NLCT? What changes could be made, if any, to enhance the contribution of the NLCT to your work in the region?

8. The ADAG PSDI is functionally responsible for the work performed by regional office counsel for PSDI clients. What do you consider to be the key challenges in ensuring a consistent approach in the work performed by regional offices? What changes, if any, could be made to enhance this specific aspect of the coordinating role undertaken by the Portfolio? [Q6,7]

9. Please describe how the PSDI Portfolio manages legal risks, in cooperation with client departments. In particular, what key tools, strategies, committees or structures are currently accessible to assist in managing legal risks? How do those tools differ from the ones developed by your regional office? In your opinion, how efficient and/or effective have they been? What role have clients played in managing these risks? [Q10]

Performance – Effectiveness

12. How would you describe the Portfolio’s current capacity to assess, plan and manage both the quality (usefulness, responsiveness, consistency, and timeliness) and the costs of legal services offered? What change, if any, could be made to enhance this capacity? [Q9]

13. Please describe what you consider to be the key impacts of professional development activities undertaken to date in support of the work of legal counsel (practice groups, training sessions, presentations, etc.)? Should changes to the type and range of issues addressed by professional development be considered (e.g. are the professional development activities sufficient to support the work of PSDI)? If so, please describe. [Q9]

14. In your opinion, has the level of awareness and understanding of legal risks among client departments and agencies improved over the last five years? If so, what do you consider to be the Portfolio’s key contribution towards this outcome? If not, how have you come to this conclusion? [Q10]

15. What do you consider to be the Portfolio’s main achievements in ensuring a coordinated, consistent and responsive approach to legal issues pertaining to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence and immigration? [Q11,12]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

16. Is there anything that the PSDI Portfolio could do to make your work more effective and efficient?

17. To what extent are counsel at the appropriate level of classification assigned to the files you have worked on, given the risk and complexity levels of the files?

Conclusion

18. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Representatives of the
National Litigation Coordination Team

The Department of Justice hired Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA), a research company, to support the evaluation of the Public Safety, Defence and Immigration (PSDI) Portfolio. The evaluation includes interviews with those working within the Portfolio, other representatives of Justice Canada, representatives of PSDI Portfolio client departments and agencies, and other non-Portfolio client departments.

The evaluation covers a five-year period (2008/09 – 2012/13) and focuses on the relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of the PSDI Portfolio, with the following exceptions: the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Section, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act Division 9 / National Security Inadmissibility Initiative, and the Business Management Office.

With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Note:

Questions included in this guide are meant to clarify or complement findings that have already emerged from other interviews conducted as part of this evaluation. As a result, questions are typically based on assumptions. Please feel free to comment, clarify or challenge these assumptions.

Introduction

1. Please describe your current roles and responsibilities. When did you join the National Litigation Coordination Team (NLCT)?

Current Mandate of the NLCT

2. The NLCT first emerged to assist in coordinating litigation relating to immigration. Overtime, the mandate of the NLCT extended to cover other areas of law included in the scope of the Portfolio. :

At this point in time, approximately what proportion of your time and efforts is dedicated to immigration-related files?
Please describe the other areas of law (covered by the Portfolio) in which you have been involved over the past three to five years or so.
Are there areas of law covered by the Portfolio where the NLCT should play a greater role? If so, which ones? Why has the NLCT not been in a position to play a greater role?

Assistance in Litigation Cases

3. The NLCT is expected to contribute to the assessment of legal risks relating to certain litigation files involving more than one department or that are deemed to be of great significance for the Department of Justice Canada.

Can you describe the process you use to identify files for which you play a role in assessing legal risks?
Could you describe how you assess legal risks? What tools, if any, do you use to conduct this assessment?
What role do litigators play in assessing these legal risks?

4. The NLCT has developed the Blue Book, which provides national guidelines for legal counsel dealing with immigration files.

How is the Blue Book managed? For instance, who is responsible and what is the process for updating this manual?
What have been the main benefits of the Blue Book? Can you identify ways by which this tool could be made more efficient?

5. As it relates specifically to immigration files, the NLCT participates in the work of the Scratch Legal Issues Committee. Could you elaborate on the role of the NLCT on that committee? Should the scope of its work be expanded to cover other areas of law related to the PSDI Portfolio?

6. The NLCT is expected to review facta or legal opinions prepared in support of certain litigation files.

What is the process for selecting files for which a review will be done?
What is the process for reviewing the selected files?
Based on your experience, what have been the key benefits of these reviews?

7. In certain files, the NLCT participates in the development of contingency plans. This work is done in collaboration with Departmental Legal Services Units representatives and litigators.

Please describe the process currently used to develop these plans. How effective is that process? Are there ways by which this process could be improved?

8. Could you elaborate on the working relationship between the NLCT and the Litigation Branch of the Department, particularly as it relates to the following components of the Branch:

The Litigation Practice Management Centre
The Civil Litigation Section
The Management of Class Actions and Mass Litigation Unit
The National Security Group
The National Security Coordinator
The International Assistance Group

Other Activities

9. The NLCT is expected to brief the ADAG and other senior officials from the Department on key files or issues of significance for the Portfolio.

Could you describe the current procedures or tools (formal or informal) that are used to carry on this role?

10. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Representatives of the National Security Law Team

The Department of Justice hired Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA), a research company, to support the evaluation of the Public Safety, Defence and Immigration (PSDI) Portfolio. The evaluation includes interviews with those working within the Portfolio, other representatives of Justice Canada, representatives of PSDI Portfolio client departments and agencies, and other non-Portfolio client departments.

With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Note:

Introduction

1. Please describe your current roles and responsibilities. When did you join the National Security Law Team (NSLT)?

Current Mandate of the NSLT

2. The NSLT is expected to support the Assistant Deputy Attorney General (ADAG) in fulfilling his or her Department-wide functional responsibility for advisory work on national security law issues.

Could you further describe the Department-wide functional responsibility that is attributed to the ADAG? How does it relate to the work of the Departmental Legal Services Units (DLSUs) included in the PSDI Portfolio, and to the work of the other DLSUs (not included in the Portfolio)?
Please describe the range of issues that are currently covered in the work of the NSLT. How have they evolved over the past three to five years (nature of the issues, complexity, volume, etc.).

3. The NSLT is expected to serve as the ADAG’s eyes and ears on national security matters.

Can you describe the processes or tools (formal or informal) you use to identify the files for which you intend to play a monitoring or coordinating role? If applicable, please describe how this process could be improved.
Please describe the processes (formal or informal) you use to determine the role you intend to play in an identified file of interest. How are these decisions made? Is this process efficient? If applicable, please indicate how this process could be improved.

4. NSLT’s mandate largely focuses on advisory or policy files related to national security. In some circumstances, the group also provides assistance in litigation files. Please elaborate on the circumstances where the NSLT is involved in litigation files. In these cases, how do the roles of the National Litigation Coordination Team and the NSLT align?

Monitoring Role

5. National security issues involve several stakeholders within the Department of Justice Canada, notably the National Security Group and the National Security Coordinator (that both report to the ADAG Litigation), the Policy Sector, and more broadly the National Security and Intelligence Committee.

How does the role of the NSLT align with the role of these other stakeholders?
Are there other key stakeholders with whom you collaborate or with whom you should be collaborating?

6. What are the processes or tools you currently use to communicate the relevant information to the ADAG? How effective are these processes or tools? If applicable, how could they be improved?

7. If applicable, what are the barriers that may limit your ability to access or effectively relay relevant information to the ADAG?

8. What do you consider to be the NSLT’s main achievements in monitoring files or issues related to national security?

Coordination Role

9. In cases where you play a coordinating role, could you describe the types of activities you undertake as part of that role? Please consider both scenarios where only one department is involved, as well as multi-client files.

10. What factors, if any, facilitate or hinder your ability to effectively coordinate a file?

11. What do you perceive to be the main benefits of having the NSLT coordinate a file?

Conclusion

12. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio
(Client Department)

The information we gather through this interview will be summarized in aggregate form only. Interview notes will not be shared outside of PRA and the Evaluation Division of Justice Canada. You will have an opportunity to review our written summary of the interview and make any corrections or additions. With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Background Information

The Department of Justice provides an integrated suite of legal services to the Minister of Justice and to all federal departments and agencies. To facilitate the effective and efficient delivery of legal services, the Department organized itself into sectors, branches, regional offices and portfolios. As it currently stands, the PSDI Portfolio includes Departmental Legal Services Units serving three departments^{Footnote 40} and six agencies^{Footnote 41} (at both the regional and headquarter levels), involved in managing legal files related to national security, public safety, defence and immigration. The PSDI Portfolio also includes the litigation work of Regional Offices in PSDI related files. The legal services provided by PSDI Portfolio are managed and coordinated at the national level by the Office of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General, which includes a number of specialized teams and committees.

The PSDI Portfolio’s work is directly shaped by its clients’ mandates, operations and policy, and legislative initiatives that pertain to the government’s priorities as well as those that more broadly pertain to the government’s priorities related to national security, public safety, defence and immigration.

Note:

Introduction

1. What are your current roles and responsibilities? Who do you interact with in the Portfolio?

2. Please describe the types of PSDI related files or initiatives on which you (or your staff) have worked on. What were your role and responsibilities when working on these projects?

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

3. Considering the legal issues your department or agency deals with, particularly those issues related to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence or immigration, please describe how your demand for legal services from your DLSU, regional office counsel or from other PSDI offices has evolved over the past five years. For example, have there been changes in the volume or nature of legal issues, the complexity and/or urgency of the requests being made, the level of legal risks or any other characteristics? What has been the most significant change, if any? [Q2]

Performance - Effectiveness

5. Based on your experience, overall, how satisfied were you with the services provided by your DLSU, by the regional offices or other PSDI offices? [Q9]

6. More specifically, and again based on your experience, please comment on the following dimensions of the quality of the overall services provided by your DLSU, by regional offices or other PSDI offices: [Q9]

Their current capacity to respond to your requests in a timely manner.
The extent to which your department/agency is provided with advice/options appropriate to your policy and program objectives.
The extent to which legal advice is presented in a manner that meets your needs and expectations.
The extent to which litigation services offered by regional offices are carried out in a manner that meets your needs and expectations.
The extent to which your department or agency receives consistent legal advice.

7. The legal advice provided by your DLSU, by regional offices or other PSDI offices is expected to assist your department/agency in understanding and managing legal risks associated with certain decisions or initiatives.

How effectively has the DLSU, regional offices or other PSDI offices worked with your department/agency to assist you in managing your legal risks?
Are you aware of the Portfolio’s efforts in coordinating the legal work done on issues pertaining to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence and immigration? What additional steps, if any, could be undertaken to enhance this coordination work?

8. In particular, in files involving multiple departments or agencies (three or more departments or agencies), the Portfolio is expected to coordinate the legal services being offered. To what extent are you aware of these coordination efforts in these files? If so, are you satisfied with the level of coordination achieved? [Q11]

9. Have you participated in any PSDI related training activities or information sessions offered regionally or nationally by your DLSU, by the regional offices or from another part of Justice within the past five years? [if yes] What type of training did you receive? Were you satisfied with this training? Was it relevant to your work? [Q9]

10. What challenges, if any, is your DLSU, the regional offices or other PSDI offices facing in providing the PSDI related legal services required by your department or agency? [Q10,11]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

11. Since 2012, the Department of Justice has been implementing a number of strategies to increase the efficiency of its resource utilization. Based on your experience, what has been the impact, if any, of these changes on the services offered by your DLSU or the regional offices? [Q14]

12. To your knowledge, are there any factors that influence the ability of your DLSU or the regional offices to deliver their services effectively? If so, please describe these factors. What changes, if any, are needed to increase the efficiency and/or effectiveness of the services offered? [Q14,16]

13. In light of what you expect to be the demand for the services provided by your DLSU, by the regional offices or other PSDI offices in the short to medium term, how adequate are the current and expected levels of resources provided? What are the resource challenges, if any?[Q15]

Conclusion

14. Do you have any further comments relating to this evaluation?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Other Justice Canada Sectors, Branches and Portfolios

With your permission, we would like to digitally record the interview to ensure the accuracy of our notes. The audio file will be deleted after the completion of the study.

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Note:

Unless otherwise stated, any reference in this interview guide to the work of the PSDI Portfolio is meant to include the work performed by the Office of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General (ADAG), all Department Legal Service Units (DLSU) within the Portfolio, and of Regional Offices on PSDI files.

Introduction

1. Please describe your current roles and responsibilities, specifically as they relate to working with the PSDI Portfolio. Who do you interact with in the Portfolio?

2. What type of legal services have you provided to PSDI over the past five years (e.g., what type of advice; litigation support)?

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

3. Considering the legal issues your unit deals with, particularly those issues related to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence or immigration, please describe how your work with the PSDI Portfolio has evolved over the past five years. For example, have there been changes in the volume or nature of legal issues, the complexity and/or urgency of the requests being made, the levels of legal risk level, file complexity, or any other characteristics? What has been the most significant change, if any? [Q2].

4. In your opinion, to what extent do the services of PSDI meet the needs of the Government of Canada in terms of the provision of legal services? Is there anything you are aware of that would require PSDI to change the way it provides legal services? [Q2]

Performance – Effectiveness

5. Please describe how your work with the PSDI Portfolio is currently structured. We are particularly interested in any processes you may have in place (formal or informal) to deal with files related to national security, public safety, defence or immigration.

6. Please describe your level of satisfaction with the following dimensions of your work with the PSDI Portfolio: [Q9]

The extent to which your group is consulted in a timely manner.
The extent to which the timeframes for completing requests are appropriate.
The extent to which you are consulted on the appropriate issues, at an appropriate level, etc.

7. How does the PSDI Portfolio coordinate/integrate its activities, including those involving multiple departments, with those of your unit (or vice versa)? How satisfied are you with this level of coordination? What changes, if any, could be made to enhance this coordination? [Q9]

8. Over the past five years, has your group provided training either to PSDI legal counsel or to their clients? If yes, what was the nature of this training? Did the training improve the effectiveness of PSDI? [Q9]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

9. Since 2012, the Portfolio has been implementing a number of strategies to increase the efficiency of its resource utilization. Have you seen any changes in your working relationship with PSDI since 2012? If so, please explain. [Q14]

10. How could the PSDI work more effectively and efficiently with your group?

Conclusion

11. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – DLSUs Outside of the PSDI Portfolio

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Background Information

The Department of Justice provides an integrated suite of legal services to the Minister of Justice and to all federal departments and agencies. To facilitate the effective and efficient delivery of legal services, the Department organized itself into sectors, branches, regional offices and portfolios. As it currently stands, the PSDI Portfolio includes Departmental Legal Services Units serving three departments^{Footnote 42} and six agencies^{Footnote 43} (at both the regional and headquarter levels), involved in managing legal files related to national security, public safety, defence and immigration. The PSDI Portfolio also includes the litigation work performed by Regional Offices on PSDI related files. The legal services provided by PSDI Portfolio are managed and coordinated at the national level by the Office of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General, which includes a number of specialized teams and committees.

The PSDI Portfolio’s work is shaped by its clients’ mandates, operations and policy, and legislative initiatives that pertain to the government’s priorities as well as more broadly those that pertain to the government’s priorities related to national security, public safety, national security, defence and immigration.

Note:

Introduction

1. Please describe your current role and responsibilities. Who do you interact with in the Portfolio?

2. What type of legal service have you provided or sought from PSDI over the past five years (e.g., what type of advice; litigation support; consultation)?

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

3. Considering the legal issues your DLSU deals with, particularly those related to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence or immigration, please describe how your work with the PSDI Portfolio has evolved over the past five years. What has been the most significant change, if any? [Q2]

4. In your view, does PSDI provide legal services to the most appropriate mix of departments to support its mandate? If not, what other departments or agencies should ideally be included and/or what departments or agencies should be excluded?

Performance – Effectiveness

6. Please describe your level of satisfaction with the following dimensions of your work with the PSDI Portfolio: [Q9]

The extent to which your group is consulted in a timely manner.
The extent to which the timeframes for completing requests are appropriate.
The extent to which you are consulted on the appropriate issues, at an appropriate level, etc.

7. How does the PSDI Portfolio coordinate and integrate its activities, including those involving multiple departments, with those of your DLSU (or vice versa)? How satisfied are you with this level of coordination? What changes, if any, could be made to enhance this coordination? [Q9]

8. Over the past five years, has your DLSU provided training either to PSDI legal counsel or to their clients? If yes, what was the nature of this training? Did the training improve the effectiveness of PSDI? [Q9]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

9. Since 2012, the PSDI Portfolio has been implementing a number of strategies to increase the efficiency of its resource utilization. Have you seen any changes in your working relationship with PSDI since 2012? If so, please explain. [Q14]

10. How could the PSDI work more effectively and efficiently with your DLSU?

Conclusion

11. Do you have any further comments relating to the work of the PSDI Portfolio?

Thank you for your participation

Interview Guide – Representative of Senior Management and
Central Agencies

Finally, some questions may not be applicable to the work being done by your unit. Please let us know, and we will skip those questions.

Background Information

The Department of Justice provides an integrated suite of legal services to the Minister of Justice and to all federal departments and agencies. To facilitate the effective and efficient delivery of legal services, the Department organized itself into sectors, branches, regional offices and portfolios. As it currently stands, the PSDI Portfolio includes Departmental Legal Services Units serving three departments^{Footnote 44} and six agencies^{Footnote 45} (at both the regional and headquarter levels), involved in managing legal files related to national security, public safety, defence and immigration. The PSDI Portfolio also includes the litigation work of Regional Offices in PSDI related files. The legal services provided by PSDI Portfolio are managed and coordinated at the national level by the Office of the Assistant Deputy Attorney General, which includes a number of specialized teams and committees.

Note:

Introduction

1. What are your current roles and responsibilities? How do you interact with the Portfolio?

2. Please describe the types of PSDI related files or initiatives in which you have been involved.

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

3. Based on your experience and considering the range of issues faced by the federal government in relation to national security, public safety (including emergency management), defence or immigration, please describe how the demand for legal services from the PSDI Portfolio has evolved over the past five years. For example, have there been changes in the volume or nature of legal issues, the complexity and/or urgency of the requests being made, the level of legal risks or any other characteristics? What has been the most significant change, if any? [Q2]

5. In your view, does PSDI provide legal services to the most appropriate mix of departments and agencies to support the government’s national security and public safety agenda? If not, what other departments or agencies should ideally be included and/or what departments or agencies should be excluded?

Performance – Effectiveness

6. Please describe how your work with the PSDI Portfolio is currently structured. We are particularly interested in any processes you may have in place (formal or informal) to deal with files related to national security, public safety, defence or immigration.

7. Based on your experience with the Portfolio (with all or with some of its sectors), please comment on the following dimensions of the quality of the services provided by the Portfolio: [Q9]

Its current capacity to respond to requests in a timely manner.
The extent to which the advice/options provided are appropriate to the policy or program targeted.
The extent to which legal advice is presented in a manner that meets your needs and expectations.
The extent to which litigation services offered by regional offices are carried out in a manner that meets your needs and expectations.
The extent to which the legal advice provided is consistent.

8. In files involving multiple departments or agencies (three or more departments or agencies), the Portfolio is expected to coordinate the legal services being offered. To what extent are you aware of these coordination efforts in these files? If so, are you satisfied with the level of coordination achieved? [Q11]

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

10. To your knowledge, are there any factors that influence the ability of the Portfolio to deliver its services effectively? If so, please describe these factors. What changes, if any, are needed to increase the efficiency and/or effectiveness of the services offered? [Q14,16]

Conclusion

11. Do you have any further comments relating to this evaluation?

Thank you for your participation

Survey Questionnaire – PSDI Legal Counsel

As legal counsel, you are invited to participate in this survey, which is part of the evaluation of the Public Safety, Defence and Immigration (PSDI) Portfolio. The evaluation is undertaken in accordance with the 2009 Treasury Board Policy on Evaluation, which requires all federal departments to evaluate their activities on a cyclical basis. In the case of the Department of Justice Canada, this requirement covers legal services offered by all its portfolios.

The Department of Justice Canada hired Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA), a research company, to support the evaluation of the PSDI Portfolio. The evaluation process includes many forms of consultations, such as interviews, focus groups, and this survey.

Gathering insights from legal counsel involved in litigation or advisory files related to public safety, defence, and immigration issues is a critical component of this evaluation process. The questionnaire should take approximately 20 minutes to complete. Most questions only ask you to click on the appropriate response. All information you provide is confidential and will be used only to create aggregate results to be included in the evaluation report. No individual responses will be identified. We would appreciate receiving your completed questionnaire by (date to be confirmed).

It you encounter technical problems with the survey, please contact Éric Albert from PRA Inc. at 613-233-5474, ext. 306. If you have any questions about the evaluation in general, please contact Susan Kelly, Evaluation Division, Department of Justice Canada, at 613-957-7657.

Background

The following questions will be used to establish a profile of survey respondents.

1. When did you first join the Department of Justice Canada?

Less than a year ago
Between 1 and 5 years ago
Between 6 and 10 years ago
More than 10 years ago

2. How long have you been working under the PSDI Portfolio structure?

Less than a year
Between 1 and 3 years
Between 4 and 6 years
More than 6 years

3. Where do you work?

In a Departmental Legal Services Unit
In a Regional Office
In the Office of the Assistant Deputy
Attorney General of Canada (ADAG)

Only ask Q4 if Q3 = 01

4. Please specify the legal services unit you currently belong to:

Public Safety Canada
Canada Border Services Agency
National Security Litigation and Advisory Group
Parole Board of Canada
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Correctional Service of Canada
Citizenship and Immigration Canada
National Defence/Canadian Forces
Communications Security Establishment Canada

Only ask Q5 if Q3 = 02

5. In which regional office are you currently located?

Atlantic Regional Office
British Columbia Regional Office
Northern Region
Ontario Regional Office
Prairie Region
Quebec Regional Office

Only ask Q6 if Q3 = 02

6. For which department do you predominantly undertake legal work? (please select all applicable options)

Public Safety Canada
Canada Border Services Agency
Canadian Security Intelligence Service
Parole Board of Canada
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Correctional Service of Canada
Citizenship and Immigration Canada
National Defence/Canadian Forces
Communications Security Establishment Canada

7. What is your current classification level?

LP-00
LP-01
LP-02
LP-03
LP-04
LP-05
LC-01
LC-02
LC-03
LC-04
Other

8. On which type of files do you predominantly work?

Advisory
Litigation or litigation support
Other

9. Based on the nature of the files you work on and your overall experience over the past three to five years in PSDI, please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:

Scale = strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, not applicable

The volume of files in which I have been involved has significantly increased.
The level of complexity of files in which I have been involved has significantly increased.
An increasing proportion of my files involves more than one department or agency.
An increasing proportion of my files involve departments or agencies outside of the Portfolio.

Work of the PSDI Portfolio

10. At this point, how would you assess your overall understanding of the role and mandate of the PSDI Portfolio?

Very good understanding
Good understanding
Limited understanding
Very little understanding
Don’t know

11. In your current functions, have you had dealings with the National Litigation Coordination Team?

Yes
No
Don’t know

12. How would you assess your overall understanding of the role and mandate of the National Litigation Coordination Team?

Very good understanding
Good understanding
Limited understanding
Very little understanding
Don’t know

13. In your current functions, have you had dealings with the National Security Law Team?

Yes
No
Don’t know

14. How would you assess your overall understanding of the role and mandate of the National Security Law Team?

Very good understanding
Good understanding
Limited understanding
Very little understanding
Don’t know

15. There is a recognized need to ensure an integrated and coordinated approach among legal counsel involved in PSDI files. Based on your experience, how relevant is the overall work of the Portfolio in supporting this goal?

The Portfolio’s work is very relevant
The Portfolio’s work is relevant
The Portfolio’s work is not relevant
The Portfolio’s work is completely irrelevant
Don’t know

Ask Q16 only if Q11 = 01

16. More specifically, how would you assess the overall contribution of the National Litigation Coordination Team in ensuring a consistent approach to litigation files involving national security, public safety, defence or immigration issues?

Very significant contribution
Significant contribution
Limited contribution
No contribution
Don’t know

Ask Q17 only if Q13 = 01

17. More specifically, how would you assess the overall contribution of the National Security Law Team in ensuring a consistent approach to advisory files involving national security, public safety, defence or immigration issues?

Very significant contribution
Significant contribution
Limited contribution
No contribution
Don’t know

Current capacity to meet expectations

18. In considering your current workload, please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:

Scale = strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, not applicable

My assignments are typically well articulated in terms of scope and expectations.
I have access to the required information to successfully complete my assignments.
I have access to the required tools to successfully complete my assignments.
I am capable of delivering my legal services in a timely manner.
I am kept well-informed of the progress of the files in which I am involved.

19. Based on the files you have been involved with in the last three to five years, how often have you:

Scale = frequently, regularly, occasionally, rarely, never, don’t know, not applicable to my work

Consulted with the client department or agency to further understand the nature of the legal problem?
Provided the client department or agency with updates or progress reports?
Involved the client department or agency in the development of legal strategies, positions or options?
Discussed policy or program objectives with the client department or agency?
Worked with the client department or agency to identify legal risks, their impact, and options to manage them?
Consulted with the PSDI Portfolio ADAG’s Office?
Consulted with other potentially affected departments or agencies?
Involved or consulted with regional offices?
Briefed or reported on your files to senior Justice officials?
Briefed or reported on your files to senior client officials?

20. In your view and based on the files you have been involved with in the last three to five years, how often were the following goals achieved?

Scale = frequently, regularly, occasionally, rarely, never, don’t know, not applicable to my work

Responded to legal service requests by clients in a timely manner
Met client deadlines
Met internal Department of Justice deadlines
Provided timely assessments of legal risk so that it can be factored into decision-making
Reassessed legal risk when factors that affect the level of risk change
Identified means to prevent or resolve legal disputes at the earliest opportunity

21. Please provide your level of agreement with the following statements.

Scale = strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree, don’t know, not applicable to my work

The PSDI Portfolio has structures in place to ensure that Justice provides consistent legal advice.
The PSDI Portfolio has structures in place to ensure that consistent legal positions are adopted nationally.
The PSDI Portfolio has structures in place to ensure that risks are assessed in a consistent manner across DLSUs and regions.
The PSDI Portfolio has contributed to enhancing clients’ understanding of legal issues and their implications.
The PSDI Portfolio systematically offers legal services in both official languages.

22. To what extent do you find the following tools, structures and processes to be useful to your work?

Scale: very useful, useful, neutral, not very useful, not at all useful, don’t know, not applicable to my work

Legal risk management assessment grid/matrix
Practice directives
Practice groups
Justipedia
Peer review
Early Warning Notes
Internal mentoring practices
Information sharing on best practices

23. Are there other tools, structures or processes that you have found useful in managing your work?

No other tools, structures or processes
Other, please specify:

24. In your experience to date, have you had interactions with specialized units from the Public Law Sector (such as the Constitutional, Administrative and International Law Section (CAILS) or the Human Rights Law Section)?

Yes
No
Don’t know

Ask Q25 only if Q24 = 01

25. Please select all applicable groups with which you have collaborated, along with your level of satisfaction with the support you received.

Scale = very satisfied, satisfied, unsatisfied, very unsatisfied, don’t know, not applicable to my work

International Private Law Section
Trade Law Bureau (JLT)
Constitutional, Administrative and International Law Section
Human Rights Law Section
Official Languages Directorate
Judicial Affairs, Courts and Tribunal Policy
Centre for Information and Privacy Law

26. Have you collaborated with other specialized groups within the Department of Justice Canada?

Yes
No
Don’t know

Ask Q27 only if Q26 = 01

27. Please indicate which group, along with your level of satisfaction.

Scale = very satisfied, satisfied, unsatisfied, very unsatisfied, don’t know

28. How satisfied are you with the current professional development activities that are being offered to support your work?

Very satisfied
Satisfied
Unsatisfied
Very unsatisfied
Don’t know

Ask Q29 only if Q28 = 03 or 04

29. Please describe what types of professional development activities would better respond to your needs.

30. In your opinion and based on the files you have been involved with in the last three to five years, how often:

Scale: frequently, regularly, occasionally, rarely, never, don’t know, not applicable to my work

Were files managed in a cost-effective manner?
Were files assigned to the appropriate level of counsel given the legal risk/complexity of the files?
Were tasks allocated appropriately (level and experience) within the team assigned to manage the files?
Were appropriate levels of mentoring and/or supervision provided to support the management of your files?

31. Based on your experience, please describe what you consider to be the greatest achievements of the PSDI Portfolio.

32. What do you consider to be the greatest challenges faced by the PSDI Portfolio?

33. In conclusion, please provide any additional information you consider relevant for the purpose of the evaluation of the PSDI Portfolio.

Thank you very much for your contribution to this evaluation process.

Case Study Guide – Representative of the client department or agency

The Department of Justice hired Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA), a research company, to support the evaluation of the Public Safety, Defence and Immigration (PSDI) Portfolio. The evaluation comprises a number of data sources, including seven case studies that focus on specific files involving counsel from the PSDI Portfolio. These case studies are providing a unique opportunity to better understand the work of the portfolio at an operational level.

Introduction

1. What was your role on the file we will be discussing today?

Processes and tools

2. Please describe how the roles and responsibilities between your department or agency and the Department of Justice were structured in relation to this specific file. How satisfied were you with this distribution of roles and responsibilities? What change, if any, could have been made to make this distribution more efficient?

3. To your knowledge, was there more than one group within Justice Canada that was involved in this file (departmental legal services units, regional offices, specialized sections of Justice Canada, etc.)? If so, and based on your experience, how efficiently was the work coordinated between these different groups?

4. To your knowledge, were there other groups within Justice Canada (regional or national litigation committees, or specialized units from the Public Law Sector) that were involved in this file? If so, please describe the role you played, if any, during the work of these other groups.

Legal risk assessment

5. Did the department of Justice Canada involve you in assessing the legal risks associated with this file? If so, what process was used?

6. How satisfied are you with the role you played in assessing the legal risks associated with this file?

7. How was the legal risk assessment communicated to you? How satisfied are you with the way the legal risks were communicated to you?

8. How did you use the legal risk assessment? What impact, if any, did it have on your decision-making process?

Outcomes

9. Based on your experience, please comment on the following dimensions of the quality of the overall services provided by Justice Canada in relation to this file:

its capacity to respond to your requests in a timely manner
the extent to which your department or agency was provided with advice and options appropriate to your policy and program objectives
(for advisory files) the extent to which legal advice was presented in a manner that met your needs and expectations
(for litigation files) the extent to which litigation services offered were carried out in a manner that met your needs and expectations
the extent to which your department or agency received consistent legal advice

10. What challenges, if any, did Justice Canada face in providing the legal services required by your department or agency?

Deployment of resources

11. In your opinion, were the appropriate resources assigned to this file (in the extent to which sufficient resources were assigned in relation to the nature of the file, level of expertise, etc.)?

12. Since 2012, the portfolio has implemented a number of strategies to increase the efficiency of its resource utilization (those initiatives related to process optimization and benchmarking). Based on your experience, have any of these initiatives had an impact (positive or negative) on the outcome of this file?

13. Please describe what changes, if any, could have been done to achieve a greater level of efficiency in managing this file?

Conclusion

14. Do you have any further comments relating to this evaluation?

Thank you for your participation.

Case Study Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio

The Department of Justice hired Prairie Research Associates Inc. (PRA), a research company, to support the evaluation of the Public Safety, Defence and Immigration (PSDI) Portfolio. The evaluation comprises a number of data sources, including seven case studies that focus on specific files involving counsel from the PSDI Portfolio. These case studies are providing a unique opportunity to better understand the work of the portfolio at an operational level.

Introduction

1. Please describe the key legal issues raised in the file we selected for our discussion today.

Processes and tools

2. How were the roles and responsibilities among the various legal counsel involved in this file distributed? What role did you specifically play? In your opinion, were the roles and responsibilities adequately assigned?

3. As applicable, which processes were used to coordinate the work of legal counsel on this file? Based on your experience, what worked well with these processes and what challenges, if any, did you encounter?

4. Was the National Litigation Coordination Team or the National Security Law Team involved in this file? If yes, please describe the role it played and the impact it had on the file.

5. Were there other groups within Justice Canada ( scratch committees, regional or national litigation committees, specialized units from the Public Law Sector, etc.) that were involved in this file? If so, please describe their involvement and their impact on the file.

6. What was your experience in accessing and using the required tools to adequately fulfill your assignment (reference and guidance information, communication tools, etc.)? What challenges, if any, did you face?

Legal risk assessment

7. How was the legal risk assessed on this file? Who was responsible for assessing the legal risk, and what process was used to complete the assessment?

8. How was the legal risk communicated to the client department or agency? How well did the client department or agency understand the legal risks involved in the file? How did the client use the assessment?

9. What challenges, if any, did you face in assessing or communicating the legal risk associated to this file?

Deployment of resources

10. In your opinion, were the appropriate resources assigned to this file (in the extent to which sufficient resources were assigned in relation to the nature of the file, level of expertise, etc.)?

11. Since 2012, the portfolio has implemented a number of strategies to increase the efficiency of its resource utilization (initiatives related to process optimization and benchmarking). Based on your experience, have any of these initiatives had an impact (positive or negative) on the outcome of this file?

12. Please describe what changes, if any, could have been done to achieve a greater level of efficiency in managing this file?

Outcomes

13. Were you in a position to deliver your services in a timely manner? What challenges, if any, have you faced in attempting to meet the time frame required by the client department or agency?

14. How would you describe the impact of the legal services you provided on the decisions made by the client department or agency?

Conclusion

15. Do you have any further comments relating to this file?

Thank you for your participation.

File Review

Overview

1. File Number:

2. Date file opened: (mm/dd/yy) Date file closed: (mm/dd/yy)

3. Lead department:

4. Other departments involved (as applicable):

5. Lead counsel
Organizational unit:

DLSU (provide name):
Regional office (provide location):
Other:

6. Other counsel involved in the file:
Organizational unit:

DLSU (provide name):
Regional office (provide location):
Other:

7. File type:

Litigation
Advisory
Litigation support

8. Total number of counsel who worked on the file:

Consecutively:
Simultaneously:
Cannot determine:

9. Total number of paralegals who worked on the file:

Consecutively:
Simultaneously:
Cannot determine:

Litigation files ONLY

10. Legal issue and brief description of the nature of the file, without waiving solicitor-client privilege.

11. Lead department is:

Claimant/Applicant
Respondent/Defendant
Appellant
Respondent on appeal
Can’t tell

12. Level of court:

Supreme Court of Canada
Federal Court of Appeal
Federal Court
Provincial Court of Appeal
Provincial/Territorial Superior Court
Provincial Court
Administrative Tribunal
Other, please specify

13. What was the outcome of the case?

Settled
Court decision on merits in favour of government
Court decision on merits in favour of other party
Case dismissed without a decision on the merits
Case withdrawn
Partially successful
Other, please specify

14. Has the case been appealed or judicially reviewed?

Yes
No
Not applicable (cannot appeal from decision – e.g., Supreme Court file)
No decision re: appeal yet/ can’t determine
Can’t tell

If yes, remember to complete the Appeal Schedule

Advisory File ONLY

15. a) What was the advisory services requested:

Advisory to support Policy Making (MC, TB sub, etc.)
Advisory to support Legislative Drafting
Advisory to support Agreement Drafting or Negotiation
Advisory to support Operation (including ATIP)
Advisory to support litigation

b) Legal issues encountered, without waiving solicitor-client privilege.

16. What was the outcome of the file? (Check all that apply.)

Advisory services was given
Client considered Advisory services
Client did not consider Advisory services given
Unclear from the file

iCase information To Be Completed By The Evaluation Division

17. Potential client impact:

Affects administration of justice/ public confidence
Affects federal, provincial, or international relations, treaties, or agreements
Legal issues or events that may be controversial, attract significant national media attention, or involve Cabinet Ministers or prominent public figures
Limitations of federal jurisdiction
Effect on fiscal resources of client or government
Effect on human rights, personnel, access and privacy, gender, or diversity issues
Effect on law/ regulations of client or government
Effect on programs/ policies/ initiatives of client or government
Effect on relations with Aboriginal people, Métis
Effect on the Charter or Constitution
Matter of national interest
Impact on national security
Not applicable
Unable to assess

18. Risk level (1-9 or Low-Medium-High):

b) Initial risk level (if available through iCase)

19. Complexity:

Low
Medium
High
Mega
Not applicable

20. What was the group/level of lead counsel (note: the lead counsel may or may not be attached to PSDI)

LA0
LA1
LA2A
LA2B
LA3A
LA3B
LA3C
Can’t tell

21. How many hours did lead counsel spend on the file?
hours

22. Indicate the number of additional counsel on the file by seniority level and indicate the number of hours spent on the file (note: include all counsel, PSDI and non-PSDI, as applicable):

LA0	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA1	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA2A	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA2B	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA3A	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA3B	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA3C	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:

23. Indicate the number of paralegals on the file and indicate the number of hours spent on the file by each paralegal:

Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:

Information from file [Answer the following questions based on documents in the file]

24. Did legal counsel miss any client-imposed hard deadlines?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

25. (If yes to Q24) How many times, and for what reason(s) (if an explanation to the client is available on file)?

26. Is there documented evidence that timelines were negotiated with clients?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

27. (If yes to Q26) What evidence is there in the files?

28. (Litigation files only) Did legal counsel miss any court deadlines?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

29. (If yes to Q28) How many times?

30. (If yes to Q28) Were additional court procedures required (e.g., motions)?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

31. How did PSDI legal counsel consult with client department(s)? Consultations can include oral/written updates or oral/written discussions of possible strategies, options, approaches to the file.

Not applicable, file handled by early resolution
Unable to assess

(GO TO Q35)

32. Is there documentation in the file that shows what the client department(s) was consulted about? (Check all that apply.) (If none apply, go to Q35.)

Identifying and assessing legal risk
Options to manage legal risk
Developing legal strategies and positions
To discuss the impact of legal risk
To discuss possible settlement (including early resolution)
Other
Unable to assess

33. (If identify any categories listed in Q32) What evidence is there in the files?

34. Have client department(s) expressed any concerns relating to a lack of consultation?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

35. How often did PSDI legal counsel respond to documented client requests?

Always (100-90%)
Usually (90-60%)
About half the time (40-60%)
Rarely (40-10%)
Never (Less than 10%)
Unable to Assess

36. How often did PSDI paralegals respond to documented client requests?

Always (100-90%)
Usually (90-60%)
About half the time (40-60%)
Rarely (40-10%)
Never (Less than 10%)
Unable to Assess

37. On average, how soon after documented client requests did PSDI legal counsel respond?

2-3 days
4-10 days
11-20 days
21-30 days
More than 30 days

38. Was the file brought to the attention of any relevant PSDI committees?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

39. (If yes to Q38) Which committees?

National Litigation Committee
National Security and Intelligence Committee
Scratch Legal Issues Committee
Regional litigation committees
Other

40. Was the file brought to the attention of other Justice officials/structures?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

41. (If yes to Q40) Which ones?

42. Did counsel consult with specialized sections within Justice?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

43. (If yes to Q42) Which ones:

44. Were the specialized sections consulted about? (Check all that apply):

Identifying and assessing legal risk
Managing legal risk
Potential legal options
Potential litigation strategies
Questions of law
Other

45. Were other potentially affected departments and agencies consulted?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

46. If yes to Q45, which one(s)?

47. (If yes to Q45) Were they consulted about? (Check all that apply):

Identifying and assessing legal risk
Managing legal risk
Potential legal options
Potential litigation strategies
Questions of law
Other
Unable to asses

Questions 48-50 are for litigation files only.

48. At what stage were dispute resolution options considered? (Check all that apply.)

DR not considered (GO TO Q53)
Post-pleading
Post-production of documents
Post-discovery
Just prior to trial or hearing
Other (please specify)
Don’t know/can’t tell

49. At what stage were dispute resolution options used?

Post-pleading
Post-production of documents
Post-discovery
Just prior to trial or hearing
Other (please specify)
Don’t know/can’t tell

50. What dispute resolution options were used?

Negotiation
Voluntary mediation
Court-mandated mediation
Neutral evaluation
Other (please specify)
Don’t know/can’t tell

51. (Advisory files only) Is there documented evidence in the file that the client department considered the PSDI Portfolio legal advice in program and policy development?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

52. (If yes to Q51) What evidence is there in the files?

53. Is there documented evidence in the file that the client department considered PSDI Portfolio legal advice to prevent, mitigate, and/or manage legal risk?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

54. (If yes to Q53) What evidence is there in the files?

55. Is there documentation in the file that shows that any of the following were used/prepared?

Risk assessment document (e.g., letter/memo to client re: likelihood of success and impact on client)
Contingency plan
Communication plan (should be part of contingency plan, but check to ensure it is)
Briefing notes
Documents on roles and responsibilities from Civil Actions toolkit or similar document (e.g., for litigation strategy, dispute resolution, risk assessment, communication strategy, contingency planning, etc.)
Early Warning Note for file
Documentation on structured review of facta/approval of facta
Early Resolution process
Practice directives
National Litigation Instructions

56. Was the file included in any of the following?

Early Warning Notes
Justice Practice Group discussion
Litigation report

Risk assessment [from file or from text fields in iCase (background, impact, and status)]

57. What legal risks are identified? Please check all that apply. Only include if there is documentation that specifies risks (in iCase or in file); do not try to interpret information (e.g., counsel indicates difficult facts in memo in file; the researcher should not make their own decision that facts are difficult). You do not have to enter risks that are already listed under potential client impact in iCase (see Q17). You should include other risks that might be identified in the Background, Impact, and Status sections of iCase as well as risks identified in the paper files.

New/novel legal issue
Constitutional or Charter issue
Issue with availability of evidence
Issue with availability of affiants/witnesses
Difficult facts to support claim/defence
Unfavourable case law
Significant media interest
Potential to lead to termination or elimination of program
Class action
Cabinet Ministers or other prominent figures involved
Legal issue considered controversial
Case involves national security
Other, please specify
Can’t tell

58. Is there a discussion/indication of risk level indicated in the file?

Yes
No (GO TO Q66)

59. What is the initial (or only) risk level (1-9 or Low-Medium-High)?

Can’t tell

60. Date of initial (or only) risk assessment:

(mm/dd/yy)
Can’t tell

61. (Litigation only) At what stage in the case was the initial (or only) risk assessment done?

Post-pleadings
Post-discovery
Pre-scheduled trial date
After decision
After appeal filed
Leave stage
Post-leave stage
Prior to judicial review hearing
Post-hearing
Prior to decision on the judicial review
Other, please specify
Can’t tell

62. Was risk reassessed?

Yes
No (GO TO Q65)
Can’t determine (GO TO Q65)

63. (Litigation only) At what stage in the case was the risk reassessed?

Post-pleadings
Post-discovery
Pre-scheduled trial date
After decision
After appeal filed
Other, please specify
Can’t tell

64. If case was reassessed to a higher risk level, did any of the following occur after the reassessment?

Increased number of counsel on file
Assignment of senior counsel to file
Consideration of dispute resolution process
Use of dispute resolution process
Increased consultations
Increased reporting
Other, please specify
Can’t tell

65. What language was used to describe the level of legal risk to clients? Please give verbatim examples that show the range of language used.

66. Any additional comments? (indicate applicable Q, if appropriate).

File Review – Appeal Schedule (use only for the last level of appeal)

Overview

1. File Number:

2. Date file opened: (mm/dd/yy) Date file closed: (mm/dd/yy)

3. Lead department:

4. Other departments (as applicable):

5. Lead counsel: Organizational unit:

DLSU (provide name):
Regional office (provide location):
Other:

6. Other counsel involved in the file: Organizational unit:

DLSU (provide name):
Regional office (provide location):
Other:

7. Number of counsel on file:

8. Client is:

Claimant
Respondent
Appellant
Respondent on appeal
Can’t tell

9. Last Level of court:

Supreme Court of Canada
Federal Court of Appeal
Federal Court
Provincial Court of Appeal
Provincial/Territorial Superior Court
Other, please specify

10. What was the outcome of the case on appeal?

Settled
Court decision on merits in favour of government
Court decision on merits in favour of other party
Appeal dismissed without a decision on the merits
Partially successful
Other, please specify

11. What was the seniority level of lead counsel assigned to this level of appeal:

LA0
LA1
LA2A
LA2B
LA3A
LA3B
Can’t tell

12. How many hours did lead counsel spend on this level of appeal?

hours

13. Indicate the number of additional counsel on the file by seniority level and indicate the number of hours spent on the file:

LA0	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA1	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA2A	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA2B	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA3A	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA3B	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
LA3C	Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:

14. Indicate the number of paralegals on the file and indicate the number of hours spent on the file by each paralegal.

Hours for 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:

Information from file [Answer the following questions based on documents in the file]

15. How often did the PSDI Portfolio counsel consult with the client on the appeal?

Weekly
Bi-weekly
Monthly
Less than monthly
Only at critical times in the file
Unable to assess
Other (please specify):

16. Based on the documentation in the file, what the client was consulted about? (Check all that apply.)

Identifying and assessing legal risk
Options to manage legal risk
Developing legal strategies and positions
To discuss the impact of legal risk
To discuss possible settlement (including early resolution)
Unable to assess
Other

17. Was the file brought to the attention of any PSDI committees?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

18. (If yes to Q17) Which committees?

National Litigation Committee
Scratch Legal Issues Committee
Regional Litigation Committee
Other

19. Was the file brought to the attention of other Justice officials/structures?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

20. (If yes to Q19) Which ones?

21. Did counsel consult with specialized sections within Justice?

Yes
No
Unable to assess

22. (If yes to Q21) Which ones:

23. (If yes to Q21) Were the specialized sections consulted about (Check all that apply):

Identifying and assessing legal risk
Managing legal risk
Potential legal options
Potential litigation strategies
Questions of law
Other

24. Is there documentation in the file that shows that any of the following were used/prepared?

Risk assessment document (e.g., letter/memo to client re: likelihood of success and impact on client)
Contingency plan
Communication plan (should be part of contingency plan, but check to ensure it is)
Briefing notes
Documents on roles and responsibilities from Civil Actions toolkit or similar document (e.g., for litigation strategy, dispute resolution, risk assessment, communication strategy, contingency planning, etc.)
Early Warning Note for file
Documentation on structured review of facta/approval of facta
Practice directives
National Litigation Instructions
Litigation reports

25. Was the file included in any of the following?

Early Warning Notes
Top 100 High Impact Report
Radar Screen
Scanning News
Justice Practice Group discussion

Risk assessment

26. Is there a discussion/indication of risk level indicated in the appeal file?

27. What is the risk level for this level of appeal (1-9)?

Can’t tell

28. If the case was reassessed from its earlier level of risk to a higher risk level at this appeal stage, did any of the following occur after the reassessment?

Increased number of counsel on file
Assignment of senior counsel to file
Consideration of dispute resolution process
Use of dispute resolution process
Increased consultations
Increased reporting
Other, please specify
Can’t tell

29. Complexity:

Low
Medium
High
Mega
Not applicable

30. Any additional comments? (Indicate applicable Q, if appropriate).

Footnotes

Footnote 40

These three departments are: Public Safety Canada, National Defence and the Canadian Forces, and Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

Return to fortieth footnote 40 referrer

Footnote 41

These six agencies are: Canada Border Services Agency, Canadian Security Intelligence Services, Correctional Service of Canada, Parole Board of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and Communications Security Establishment Canada.

Return to forty-first footnote 41 referrer

Footnote 42

These three departments are: Public Safety Canada, National Defence and the Canadian Forces, and Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

Return to forty-second footnote 42 referrer

Footnote 43

Return to forty-third footnote 43 referrer

Footnote 44

These three departments are: Public Safety Canada, National Defence and the Canadian Forces, and Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

Return to forty-fourth footnote 44 referrer

Footnote 45

Return to forty-fifth footnote 45 referrer

Date modified:: 2022-05-13

Public Safety, Defence, and Immigration Portfolio Evaluation

Appendix C: Data Collection Instruments

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio (Management)

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Design of the Portfolio

Performance – Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio (DLSU)

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Design of the Portfolio

Performance - Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio (Managers in Regional Offices)

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Design of the Portfolio

Performance – Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio (Counsel in Regional Offices)

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Design of the Portfolio

Performance – Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Interview Guide – Representatives of the National Litigation Coordination Team

Introduction

Current Mandate of the NLCT

Assistance in Litigation Cases

Other Activities

Interview Guide – Representatives of the National Security Law Team

Introduction

Current Mandate of the NSLT

Monitoring Role

Coordination Role

Conclusion

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio (Client Department)

Background Information

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Performance - Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Interview Guide – Other Justice Canada Sectors, Branches and Portfolios

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Performance – Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Interview Guide – DLSUs Outside of the PSDI Portfolio

Background Information

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Performance – Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Interview Guide – Representative of Senior Management and Central Agencies

Background Information

Introduction

Relevance of the PSDI Portfolio Work

Performance – Effectiveness

Performance – Efficiency and Economy

Conclusion

Survey Questionnaire – PSDI Legal Counsel

Background

Work of the PSDI Portfolio

Current capacity to meet expectations

Case Study Guide – Representative of the client department or agency

Introduction

Processes and tools

Legal risk assessment

Outcomes

Deployment of resources

Conclusion

Case Study Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio
(Managers in Regional Offices)

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio
(Counsel in Regional Offices)

Interview Guide – Representatives of the
National Litigation Coordination Team

Interview Guide – Representative of the PSDI Portfolio
(Client Department)

Interview Guide – Representative of Senior Management and
Central Agencies