Reports

Page2

3.2 Governance Structure of the Complaint Process

The Commission reports annually on its performance to Parliament through the Minister of Justice.  The Commission’s Complaint Process involves the following organizations:

• the Chief Commissioner,
• Commissioners,
• the Secretary General, 
• Legal Services Branch,
• the Executive Secretariat,
• the Operations Sector,
• the Alternative Dispute Resolution Services Branch (ADRS), and
• the Policy and International Program Branch.

The Chief Commissioner is appointed for a term of up to seven years, and is responsible for the operations of the Commission.  The Chief Commissioner is supported by a group of Commissioners, who themselves are appointed to terms of up to three years.

The Secretary General is the Chief Operating Officer of the Commission, and is responsible for the operations at headquarters and in the regions.

The Legal Services Branch provides legal services to the Commission and represents the Commission before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, acting as an impartial defender of the public interest.  The General Counsel reports to the Chief Commissioner.

The inquiry, intake, and investigation activities of the Complaint Process fall under the responsibility of the Deputy Secretary General of the Operations Sector, who reports directly to the Secretary General.

The mediation and conciliation activities report to the Director General, ADRS Branch, who reports directly to the Secretary General.

The Policy and International Program Branch assists in the Complaint Process by providing advice to both the ADRS Branch and to the Operations Sector.  The Director reports to the Secretary General.

The Executive Secretariat provides support to the Commissioners and to the decision-making process.

3.3 Resources

In the 2003-2004 reporting period, the Commission’s budget will be $20.7M and approximately $11.14M (54%) will b e allocated to Complaint Management and Resolution.  Of the Commission’s total staff of 195, about 96 persons are involved directly in the Complaint Process.  Additional people are involved through team and other processes.

4.0 Methodology

The analysis carried out throughout the development of this document was based on the following research methods:

• A review of selected internal CHRC documentation,
• Interviews with senior CHRC personnel,
• A working session of senior individuals involved in the Complaint Process, to discuss the intended results of the Process,
• Interviews with representatives from a selection of stakeholder organizations and other Human Rights commissions in Canada,
• A review of selected print and electronic media concerning the Commission.

The information compiled through the above activities led to the development of structured analyses, which were in turn used to develop this document.  The planning and development phases of the project also included consultations with senior Commission personnel.

5.0 Logic Model and Performance Measures

5.1 Logic Model

A logic model identifies the linkages between the activities, outputs, and the immediate, intermediate, and ultimate outcomes of a policy, program, or initiative.  It illustrates the set of related activities and shows the chain of results connecting these activities to ultimate outcomes.

A logic model also serves important organizational management and accountability functions.  It sets out the activities and results for which management is responsible. Additionally, a logic model can assist organizational performance reporting by facilitating the assessment of planned results versus achieved outcomes, which in turn, allows Parliamentarians and Canadians to be informed in a transparent and timely manner.

The approach used to develop logic models is based on the longstanding practices of program evaluation, and reflects the current approach suggested by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS).  The Treasury Board Secretariat provides a useful lexicon of terms for performance measurement.  This lexicon is attached in Appendix A.  Some key definitions for understanding logic models provided below:

• Activities - What are the key activities that staff are engaged in under the Complaint Process?  What are the key activities intended to contribute to the achievement of the outcomes.
• Outputs - What are the outputs of the key activities?  That is, what demonstrates that the activities have been undertaken?  Outputs are the products or services generated by the activities and they provide evidence that the activity did occur.
• Immediate Outcomes - What are the short-term outcomes that stem from the activities and outputs?  Outcomes in a logic model are typically associated with “action words” such as “increased”, “improved”, etc and they represent the consequences of the activities and outputs.
• Intermediate Outcomes - What are the next links in the chain of outcomes that occur, flowing from the activities and occurring after the immediate outcomes have been achieved?  These outcomes could be considered to be medium-term.
• Ultimate Outcomes - What are the ultimate outcomes of the Complaint Process, or why are these activities being engaged in?  These are generally outcomes that take a longer time period to be realized.

When reviewing logic models, readers should start from the left and examine one activity group at a time, following the activity’s outputs and logical results chain.  This sequence explains how individual activities contribute to an organization’s immediate, intermediate and ultimate results.  At the immediate outcome level, results can occur within the short-term, about a year; intermediate results can occur within the medium term, about 3-5 years; and final results, which the organization is striving to ultimately achieve, occur over the longer-term.

Previous Page

Table of Contents

Next Page