pdf version

2003-2004
Estimates

A Report on Plans and Priorities

Approved
______________________________________
Solicitor General of Canada

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Section I: Message *

A. Correctional Investigator's Message *
B. Management Representation Statement *

Section II: Raison D'être *

Section III: Planning Overview *

Section IV: Plans and Priorities by Strategic Outcome *

Exhibit 4.1 – OCI Logic Model *
Exhibit 4.2 - Spending Profile by Activity *
Exhibit 4.3 - Reporting Table *

Section V: Organization *

A - Organization Chart *
B. Agency Planned Spending *

Section VI: Annexes *

A. Financial Information *
B. Other Information *
C. References *

A. Correctional Investigator's Message

I am mandated as an Ombudsman for Federal Corrections. I firmly believe that the responsible oversight of correctional operations is a service that Canadians value greatly. The strategic outcome that they expect is that their correctional system will be fair, equitable, humane, reasonable and effective. To ensure that this happens is the focus in all that we strive to accomplish for and on behalf of Canadians. It is our "raison d'être".

Over the past few years, my Office has vigorously pursued an agenda of operational improvement in order to optimize its efficiency in carrying out its primary mandate. We have achieved significant progress in implementing our first Corporate Strategic Plan and have begun to explore new strategic directions. In so doing, the OCI adheres to the new management framework "Results for Canadians". Accordingly, the Office of the Correctional Investigator re-affirms its commitment to excellence in four areas critical to a well performing public sector agency.

Firstly, the OCI will refine and enhance its focus on its mandate in designing, delivering, evaluating and reporting on its activities.

Secondly, the OCI will continue to govern itself and what we do by a clear set of values, which respect and reinforce Canadian institutions of democracy; and we will be guided by the highest professional and ethical values.

The third principle recognizes that the OCI has as its mandate the achievement of results and on reporting them in simple and understandable ways to elected officials and to Canadians.

Fourth, given the limited nature of public funds, the OCI is committed to ensuring responsible spending.

Responsive and well managed federal organizations, oriented to the needs of citizens and working in collaboration with other levels of government and with the private and not-for-profit sector are critical to the attainment of national goals within our Canadian justice system.

R.L. Stewart
Correctional Investigator

B. Management Representation Statement

Section II: Raison D'être

The Office of the Correctional Investigator provides Canadians with timely, thorough and objective monitoring of their federal correctional system, to ensure that it remains fair, equitable, humane, reasonable and effective.

Section III: Planning Overview

The OCI is largely funded through operating expenditures and we have the authority to spend revenue received during the year.

Managerial attention will remain on the implementation and consolidation of the multi-year Corporate Strategic Plan formally adopted in January 2002. In Year 1, efforts were devoted to creating the necessary infrastructure, in terms of human resources information management and reporting systems.

However, its main challenge in Year 2 of its strategic planning exercise will be in the application at the field (operations) level of the Integrated Planning Framework. Concepts, methods, roles and responsibilities, expected outcomes, performance measurement and evaluation strategies were all agreed upon at the November 2002 Strategic Planning Retreat. Progress will be incremental and linked directly to the growth in the OCI investigative staff's ability to gather, analyze and strategically use the information vis-à-vis the individual and systemic issues brought to their attention by or on behalf of federal offenders. Success will be demonstrated by a number of indicators, not the least of which will be the timely deployment of the right resources (including human, material and information) at the right place and vis-à-vis the right issues.

Accordingly, our priorities will be on the appropriate frequency of our institutional visits, the issues of Federally Sentenced Women and Aboriginal Offenders, the review of S.19 investigations and Use of Force videotapes. Emerging systemic issues such as Elderly and Young Offenders will, notwithstanding the potential challenge they represent in terms of resource allocation, also be a concern.

Finally, the OCI remains acutely aware that its ability to provide results for Canadians is linked to the level and quality of its participation as a partner in the criminal justice system. Accordingly, it will pursue its efforts to maintain a positive and productive working relationship with the Correctional Service. The OCI will also, in keeping with the new approach to external communications it adopted as part of its corporate strategic plan, significantly increase its contacts and cooperative endeavours with its other partners and stakeholders in the field of corrections.

Section IV: Plans and Priorities by Strategic Outcome

A - Summary

B - Details

The primary strategic outcome of the OCI remains the provision to Canadians of an independent review agency to investigate the problems of federal offenders related to decisions, recommendations, acts or omissions of the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC). Section 19 of its enabling legislation, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act (CCRA) also requires that it reviews of all CSC Investigations convened following the death of or serious bodily injury to an inmate. The OCI is also engaged in similar monitoring of all interventions by Institutional Emergency Response Teams (IERT'S), in keeping with the recommendations of the Arbour Commission.

The maintaining of an independent and objective review process within a correctional environment where the office has virtually no control over either the number of complaints or the extent of investigations required presents a number of unique challenges. First, the resolution of disputes in an environment traditionally closed to public scrutiny with an understandably high level of mistrust between correctional officials and inmates, requires that the Office not only be, but be seen to be independent of both the Correctional Service and the Ministry. Second, given that the authority of the Office rests with its power of persuasion and public reporting rather than enforceable recommendations, it is imperative that appropriate administrative and political mechanisms be available to ensure that reasonable, fair, timely, equitable and humane action is taken on the findings made by the OCI.

In recent years, changes to the regulatory and legislative environment have forced the OCI to dramatically expand its services. The Arbour Commission of Inquiry (1996) noted that the statutory mandate of the OCI should continue to be supported and facilitated because only the OCI is in the "unique position both to assist in the resolution of individual problems, and to comment publicly on the systemic shortcomings of the Services."

In 1997, the Auditor General noted that one of the factors creating difficulty at that time, was the overall size of the workload. Indeed since that time the OCI has implemented the recommendations of the Auditor General to address those workload issues, including working with the Correctional Service to improve the inmate grievance procedure and to provide an improved policy and procedure manual to investigators. The Auditor General noted as well, however, that the demand for services remains elevated, incessant and that both the overall volume and complexity of issues continues to increase.

In 2000, the Sub-committee on the Corrections and Conditional Release Act of the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, recommended that the budget of the OCI be "increased in order to expand the number of investigators and [to] cover directly related expenses such as office equipment, communications and travel required to conduct investigations".

The OCI does not foresee any diminution or decline in either the overall demand for services or in the complexity of the issues the OCI is called upon to address. The environment in which the OCI is called upon to provide "Results for Canadians" continues to be extremely challenging and one in which innovative and dedicated service provision is essential to moving ahead.

To respond to these pressures, the OCI identified the following three priority activities that it will implement during the first three years of the strategic plan. These are:

1. Increase the capacity for institutional visits to a level that is acceptable to the detained population and the Canadian people.
2. Create specialist positions to address issues of Federally Sentenced Women and Aboriginal Offenders.
3. Increase the ability to review and follow-up on both investigations as per Section 19 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and Use of Force Videotapes, as per the recommendations of the Arbour Commission.

Currently at the exploratory stage and dependent on the availability of additional resources are two other priority activities:

1. Offer specialized services to Young Offenders housed in federal penitentiaries.
2. Offer specialized services to Older Offenders (presently + or - 16% of the federal inmate population and growing).

The Logic Model presented below sets out just how the OCI views how it delivers the services necessary to support its mandate and deliver on its commitment to the strategic outcome of responsible, humane, fair and effective corrections.

The logic model identifies the linkages between the activities of the OCI program and the achievement of its outcomes. It clarifies the activities that make up its program and the sequence of outcomes expected to result from these activities. It serves as a tool with multiple uses:

• to clarify for OCI managers and staff the linkages between activities, outputs and the expected outcomes of the program. In so doing, it will serve to clarify and distinguish the expected immediate, intermediate and ultimate outcomes;
• to communicate externally about program rationale, activities and expected results;
• to allow all program elements to make informed trade-off decisions for the allocation of resources and the application of effort;
• to test whether the program "makes sense" from a logical perspective;, and
• to provide the fundamental backdrop on which the performance measurement and evaluation strategies are based (i.e. determining what would constitute success).

Exhibit 4.1 – OCI Logic Model

Of legitimate interest to elected officials and Canadians is how the OCI has previously allocated resources and how it plans to do so to respond to the foreseeable demands in upcoming fiscal years. Set out below are spending profiles, consistent with the major activities identified in the OCI logic Model (exhibit 4.1 above).

The core business of the OCI is responding to inmate complaints arising from incarceration and anticipating and addressing more systemic issues that arise periodically (e.g. Aboriginal, Federally Sentenced Women, Section 19 and Use of Force). These two activities comprise the core services provided by the OCI and this is recognized in the spending profile below.

Over the next several years, arising out of the Arbour Report, the recommendations of the Auditor General and the recommendations from the subcommittee studying the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, additional resources were identified to be targeted in response to the systemic issues identified above and to relieve against a steadily increasing overall demand for inmate complaint resolution services. This is also reflected in the spending profile below.

Exhibit 4.2

Spending Profile by Activity including Program Integrity Resources
for fiscal years 2000-2001 to 2004-2005*

In keeping with its reviewed commitment to focus on its mandate in evaluating and reporting on its activities, the Office of the Correctional Investigator has included evaluation and reporting strategies in its recently adopted Corporate Strategic Plan.

The evaluation strategy for the OCI provides a periodic opportunity to take an in-depth look at how its program is doing. The primary focus is on being able to bring about improvements to facilitate the achievement of results or to determine the degree to which the OCI program led to the achievement of desired outcomes (i.e. attribution).

Thus, for every policy, program or initiative, the OCI gives consideration to a core set of key evaluation issues (i.e. relevance, success and cost-effectiveness). Relevance issues might include whether the OCI program is the most appropriate response to the identified need. Issues related to success measure the results achieved throughout the sequence of outcomes as presented in the logic model. Cost-effectiveness is tied to relating resources expended by the OCI to its performance in terms of outputs and results.

As well, issues related to the implementation or delivery of the OCI program are considered as evaluation issues. Here, the OCI addresses how its program is actually being implemented compared to how it was intended to be implemented. Aspects of program delivery by the OCI are measured including assessments of the outputs and the reach (for example, the degree to which inmates of the federal corrections system are being reached). The adequacy of the performance measurement strategy itself is also an evaluation question.

In addition, the OCI's evaluation strategy questions the degree to which unintended positive or negative outcomes have resulted from the OCI program.

In prioritizing evaluation issues of import to it, the OCI takes into account its risk management considerations in order to determine which areas are most important to it; therefore establishing which areas require greater attention. This process ensures that the final set of evaluation metrics address the key information requirements of OCI managers as well as being practical to implement in terms of timing and resourcing. The OCI documents all evaluation issues considered so that a record exists of those issues contemplated but determined to be of lower priority for an evaluation of its program.

The OCI will report annually to Parliament on the results of its ongoing performance measurement and evaluation. It will report annually to the Treasury Board Secretariat on whether or not its reporting commitments are being met. The Correctional Investigator will report the performance information and the evaluation results as per the following schedule:

Exhibit 4.3 - Reporting Table

The performance measurement strategy will be put into operation and monitored by the Correctional Investigator to ensure not only that it is proceeding as intended, but also that it is producing useful information. Adjustments will be made where required to adapt the performance measurement activities such that the utility of the information is maximized.

Section V: Organization

A - Organization Chart

Exhibit 5.1 - OCI Organization

B. Agency Planned Spending

Exhibit 5.2 Agency Planned Spending

The net cost of the OCI program is, at the present time, expected to remain stable over the next three fiscal years. A potential source of increase resides in the OCI's ongoing quest for the additional resources required to offer specialized services to elderly offenders and to young offenders housed in penitentiaries.

* Reflects the best forecast of total net planned spending to the end of the fiscal year.

** Adjustments are to accommodate approvals obtained since the Main Estimates and are to include Budget initiatives Supplementary Estimates etc.

Section VI: Annexes

A.  Financial Information

B.  Other Information

Statutes and Regulations

Corrections and Conditional Release Act, Part III

Reports

• Correctional Investigator's Annual Report 2001-2002
  (http://www.oci-bec.gc.ca)
• Auditor General's Report, chapter 33, December 1997
  (http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca)
• Auditor General's Report, Chapter 32, November 1999
  (http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca)

C. References