Directorates
·	Director General's Office
·	Data Development
·	Strategic Evaluations
·	Partnership and Continuous Evaluations
Publications
·	Evaluation Reports
·	Evaluation Briefs
·	Labour Market Development Agreement Series
·	Lessons Learned Series
·	Evaluation Tool Kit Series
·	Evaluation Forum Newsletter
·	From Theory To Practice

The Insurance Branch has reviewed the evaluation of the impacts and effects of in-person HRDC representation at hearings into appeals against Departmental rulings. Management feels that this document provides important information that will assist in improving the procedures at appeal hearings.

The Insurance Branch notes that the evaluation demonstrated that the results do not substantiate the premise upon which the pilot was first initiated that a large number of claimants were represented by legal or paralegal representatives at Board of Referees (BOR) hearings.

The findings indicate that outcomes of the hearings were not shown to have been affected by the presence of an in-person HRDC representative. As a result, management feels that HRDC representation at appeal hearings should be limited to special cases involving complex issues but not necessarily limited to labour disputes, major fraud and undeclared earnings. The Appeals Directorate will draft and issue guidelines relating to the types of cases warranting such representation.

The evaluation notes there were mixed responses from participants on the value of HRDC representation. For instance, members of the BOR concluded that the level of openness and honesty had improved due to the presence of HRDC representatives. Some HRDC staff indicated it was a good training vehicle; while others expressed the view that some hearings were more stressful and confrontational. This feedback will be helpful in developing a better framework for the implementation of HRDC in-person representation at appeal hearings.

Evidence showed that claimants were unsure of the role and responsibilities of HRDC representation. The training program for agents will now include a section relating to respective roles and responsibilities when attending hearings, and will also enable board members to better explain the role and responsibilities of HRDC representatives when attending hearings.

The results on the outcomes of hearings also show that the number of adjournments was high during the pilot. Management also acknowledges these results and has initiated a pilot project to identify reasons underlying the large numbers and intends to initiate corrective measures as required.

Management recognises that the experimental pilot was a valuable vehicle for assessing the impacts and effects of the requests for in-person HRDC representation at appeal hearings. It was also helpful to obtain the views of HRDC staff, Members of the Boards of Referees and claimants on the appeal process. These informative results will be useful in developing and implementing a more effective system of in-person HRDC representation in special cases.