Departmental Results Report 2018-2019

Table of contents

• Message from the Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer
• Results at a glance
• Results: what we achieved
  • Program Core Responsibilities
    • Independent Review of Military Grievances
    • Internal Services
• Analysis of trends in spending and human resources
  • Actual expenditures
  • Actual human resources
  • Expenditures by vote
  • Government of Canada spending and activities
  • Financial statements and financial statements highlights
    • Financial statements
    • Financial statements highlights
• Supplementary information
  • Corporate information
    • Organizational profile
    • Reporting framework
  • Raison d'être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do
    • Raison d'être
    • Mandate and role
  • Operating context and key risks
    • Operating context
    • Key risks
  • Supporting information on the Program Inventory
  • Supplementary information tables
  • Federal tax expenditures
  • Organizational contact information
• Appendix: definitions
• Endnotes

Message from the Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer

I am pleased to submit the 2018-2019 Departmental Results Report of the Military Grievances External Review Committee (Committee), as the Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer (CEO).

The 2018-19 fiscal year saw renewal and continuity within the Committee.

The year started with the departure of my predecessor, Caroline Maynard, who moved on to become Information Commissioner of Canada. Her excellent work, left an enduring mark on our organization and I wish to personally extend my genuine appreciation to her, personally and on behalf of the Committee.  

In the spring, we welcomed four new Members appointed by the Governor in Council to oversee the review of grievances referred to the Committee. Collectively, our new Members come to us with decades of experience in legal, management and conflict resolution matters, acquired within the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and federal administrative tribunals. CAF personnel and all of us at the Committee is fortunate to have access to their experience, their abilities and their knowledge. Having been the Committee's Director-General of Corporate Services for three years, I was officially appointed as Chair in June, rounding out an entirely renewed complement of Members.

During the summer, a new senior management team was formed with the appointment of a new Director-General of Corporate Services who succeeded me, and a new Director-General of Operations and General Counsel who succeeded Caroline Maynard.

In the fall, we developed our Strategic Plan 2019-2022, which outlines precisely where we want to lead the Committee over the next three years and how we will do so. The vision I hope to accomplish by 2022 is that of a modern and agile administrative tribunal, where employees and Members have what they need to do their work efficiently and effectively in an innovative environment and the CAF members and Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) have useful, clear and complete findings and recommendations (F&R) reports.

In 2018, we have reviewed fewer grievance files than in previous years due to elements beyond the Committee's control. These included the departure of several seasoned grievance review officers at the operations level; the interval before new Members were appointed; and the learning period of these Members once they were appointed. This is a temporary situation that should rectify itself in 2019.

I am also pleased to report that despite these pressures and challenges, the quality of the F&Rs remained exceptionally high thanks to the dedication and professionalism of our Members and employees. This has been demonstrated by the results of the survey that we send to the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) with an average of 5 out 5 for all three attributes: usefulness, clarity and completeness of our own F&R reports.

At the corporate level, we pursued the development of improved processes, including new lean and green initiatives. These enhancements will allow us to continue to provide value-added services to both internally and to our external stakeholders. In addition to the efficiencies resulting from the improvement of our corporate business processes, we also started to analyze the efficiency gains that can be achieved within the Corporate Services function. As a result, a new and more efficient organizational structure will be implemented in the coming fiscal year.

As a result of the Committee's analysis of its Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) 2018, I have ensured that the activities related to our PSES action plan, more specifically Mental Health activities, obtain the necessary resources, support and attention from senior management. Among other things, a speaker came to share her experience related to Mental Health. Informative material on this topic was also shared with all employees throughout the year and physical activities are now included in our monthly all-employee meetings.

In closing, I applaud all Committee Members and employees for their dedication and resilience. We have managed and navigated through a year of transition. Our employees have fulfilled their duties with enthusiasm and confidence. The quality of their work is evidence of their can-do attitude and their resolve. I look forward to the great achievements that the coming years will bring to us.

Christine Guérette, CPA, CGA
Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer

Results at a glance

• Integrated five new Governor in Council (GIC) appointed Committee Members, including the Chairperson, through training and on-boarding procedures.
• Implemented a new performance measurement framework.
• Implemented a survey mechanism sent to the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) and his delegates, to inform the Committee on the usefulness, clarity and completeness of its F&Rs.
• Developed lean and green business processes in order to offer online service, thus reducing its paper consumption.
• Acquired and implemented wireless telephones for all corporate services employees.
• Updated its information management framework and aligned the Committee information system with the new Government of Canada Digital policy.
• Organized mental health activities, such as, a conference and the sharing of informative material on the subject, as well as promoting physical activities at all staff meetings.

For more information on the Military Grievances External Review Committee's plans, priorities and results achieved, see the "Results: what we achieved" section of this report.

Results: what we achieved

Program Core Responsibilities

Independent Review of Military Grievances

Description

The National Defence Act, Section 29.28 (1) and (2), requires the Military Grievances External Review Committee to review every grievance referred to it by the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) and to provide Findings and Recommendations in writing to the CDS and the officer or non-commissioned member who submitted the grievance.

Results

Results achieved

In fiscal year 2018-2019, the Committee welcomed four new members. The Committee supported these new members by providing the necessary training and context in order to ensure a smooth transition and integration into their new role.  The summer/fall of 2018 also saw the arrival of a new senior management team.  Concurrently, the Committee experienced staffing challenges in critical operational areas.  In the fall of 2018, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) upgraded their grievance case management system resulting in a delay in referral of files to the Committee.  Consequently, in the last quarter of the fiscal year, the Committee received an uncharacteristically high number of grievance referrals. The combination of these factors impacted the operational tempo of the Committee during 2018-2019 and will continue to do so in 2019-2020. Despite the setbacks, the Committee issued 82 F&R reports.

Continuing on the efforts of the previous year, the Committee implemented an upgraded case management system in January 2019.  This system, combined with the reduction in the use of paper products, allowed the Committee to meet its organizational priority of developing lean and green business processes.

In addition, the Committee streamlined its F&R approval process.  This included an electronic F&R report approval process that aligns with a modern digital focus, reflecting a more mobile workforce.

This year, the Committee implemented a new survey to seek feedback from the Final Authority (FA) in the grievance system.  The feedback will allow the Committee to assess whether the F&R reports it provides to the Final Authority (FA) are useful, clear and complete.  Similar surveys are also sent to individual grievors. 

The Committee has put in place a 3-year strategic framework and a robust 2018-2019 deliverables plan that focuses on operational excellence.  With respect to its operations, the Committee began to examine its grievance review process and the review of its organizational structure. The combination of these initiative will allow the Committee to use the full potential of its human capital and strengthen its business practices to ensure that it can effectively and efficiently deliver on its statutory mandate to provide its findings and recommendations to Chief of the Defence Staff and to the grievor.

Note: Results for 2016-2017 and 2017-2018 are not available, as these indicators were developed in line with the new Policy on Results.

At the end of 2017-2018, all grievance files under review were put on hold until a new compliment of Committee Members were appointed. This resulted in a delay of approximately 3 to 4 months in the review of case files. A steep learning curve for new Committee Members and a high turnover for grievance officers meant no F&R were issued within 4 months of receipt of the grievance in 2018-2019.

For more information on these results, please refer to the budgetary performance summary for Programs and Internal Services table.
Further financial, human resources and performance information for the Military Grievance External Review Committee's Program Inventory is also available in the GC InfoBase.^{Endnote i}

Internal Services

Description

Internal Services are those groups of related activities and resources that the federal government considers to be services in support of programs and/or required to meet corporate obligations of an organization. Internal Services refers to the activities and resources of the 10 distinct service categories that support Program delivery in the organization, regardless of the Internal Services delivery model in a department. The 10 service categories are: 

• Acquisition Management Services
• Communications Services
• Financial Management Services
• Human Resources Management Services
• Information Management Services
• Information Technology Services
• Legal Services
• Materiel Management Services
• Management and Oversight Services
• Real Property Management Services

Results

In the fiscal year, the Committee prioritized the modernization of its business process.

As part of the Committee's commitment to creating a lean and green office, certain key corporate procedures were streamlined and offered electronically.  Corporate Services documented current methods and optimized some key activities. For example, the onboarding and departure measures taken reduced the number of forms, steps and approvals required.  Corporate Services delivered training sessions to all employees on the new practices. These new streamlined and electronic developments have resulted, among other things, in a decrease in the consumption of paper and the management of paper-based information records.

The Committee also implemented the integrated financial system SAP and made significant changes to its financial and administrative operations. With the modernization of its financial and materiel management function, the Committee is better positioned to provide timely access to accurate human resource and financial management information and advice to programs and decision-makers.

In addition, an update to the Committee's Information Management policy framework was completed and approved by the Executive Committee. The framework is aligned with the recommendations of the Government of Canada's Chief Information Officer.

During the year, the Committee focused its attention on Human Resource (HR) management, specifically HR planning and hiring. To address human resource needs, the HR Directorate has updated the Committee's staffing plan on a regular basis and prioritized staffing processes. A former senior executive and other temporary personnel were brought in to help with the delivery of many HR projects. The Committee employees also used more modern, diversified recruitment methods, including LinkedIn or GC Talent Cloud.

In response to some of the shortcomings identified in the 2018 Public Service Employee Survey, the governance structure of the Committee was reviewed and amended. The new governance model features an Executive Committee supported by a new Management Committee. The Management Committee members includes all employees with financial or human resources responsibilities.  This new structure positions managers and team leaders at the heart of the Committee's governance structure and allows their advice and recommendations on key strategic issues to move up the chain to the Executive Committee. The new structure means decisions made by these committees flow down to managers, team leaders and all employees. It has significantly improved the integration of Branches and the flow of information throughout the Committee.

As part of the Committee's support of mental health and to providing its employees with a healthy work environment, the Mental Health Action Plan was updated with the assurance that the related activities were resourced, supported, and promoted.

For more information on these results, please refer to the budgetary performance summary for Programs and Internal Services table.

Analysis of trends in spending and human resources

Actual expenditures

The decrease in actual spending from 2017-2018 to 2018-2019 (417K) is largely attributable to the Committee's Workplace Renewal Initiative done in 2017-2018. This project reduced the Committee's occupancy space and resulted in some ongoing savings.
The variance in 2018-2019 planned versus actual spending ($452K) is largely attributable to unexpected employee departures and the delay in staffing of other positions in the Independent review of military grievances program.

Actual human resources

Actual full-time equivalents (FTEs) in 2018-2019 (39) are slightly higher than in 2017-2018 (36) and are mainly due to the fact that the Committee benefited throughout the year from a full complement of members. Unexpected departures and the delay in the staffing of other positions in the Independent Review of Military Grievances program explains the variance with the planned FTEs in 2018-2019.

Expenditures by vote

For information on the Military Grievances External Review Committee's organizational voted and statutory expenditures, consult the Public Accounts of Canada 2018–2019.^{Endnote ii}

Government of Canada spending and activities

Information on the alignment of the Military Grievances External Review Committee's spending with the Government of Canada's spending and activities is available in the GC InfoBase^{Endnote iii}.

Financial statements and financial statements highlights

Financial statements

The Military Grievances External Review Committee's financial statements (unaudited) for the year ended March 31, 2019, are available on the departmental website.

Financial statements highlights

The majority of the Committee's expenses relate to salaries, office space rental, and professional services. The variance between 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 actual results can be attributed largely to an increase in employee wages, including non-budgetary transactions related to employee benefit plans.

In 2018-2019, there was a significant increase in the total non-financial assets, which is mainly attributable to expenditures related the Committee's Workplace Renewal Initiative, as well as investment in information technology equipment in support of the Committee's technology infrastructure renewal strategy.

Supplementary information

Corporate information

Organizational profile

Appropriate minister: The Hon. Harjit S. Sajjan, PC, OMM, MSM, CD, MP

Institutional head: Christine Guérette, Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer

Ministerial portfolio: National Defence

Enabling instrument: National Defence Act , R.S.C. 1985, c. N-5

Year of incorporation / commencement: 2000

Other: About the Committee

Reporting framework

The Military Grievances External Review Committee's Strategic Outcome and Program Alignment Architecture of record for 2018-2019 are shown below.

Raison d'être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do

Raison d'être, mandate and role: who we are and what we do is available on the Military Grievances External Review Committee's website.

Raison d'être

The raison d'être of the Military Grievances External Review Committee (Committee) is to provide an independent and external review of military grievances. Section 29 of the National Defence Act (NDA) provides a statutory right for an officer or a non-commissioned member who has been aggrieved, to grieve a decision, an act or an omission in the administration of the affairs of the Canadian Armed Forces. The importance of this broad right cannot be overstated since it is, with certain narrow exceptions, the only formal complaint process available to Canadian Armed Forces members.

Mandate and role

The Military Grievances External Review Committee is an independent administrative tribunal reporting to Parliament through the Minister of National Defence.

The Committee reviews military grievances referred to it pursuant to s. 29 of the National Defence Act and provides findings and recommendations to the Chief of the Defence Staff and the Canadian Armed Forces member who submitted the grievance.

The Committee also has the obligation to deal with all matters before it as informally and expeditiously as the circumstances and the considerations of fairness permit.

For more general information about the department, see the "Supplementary information" section of this report.

For more information on the department's organizational mandate letter commitments, see the Minister's mandate letter.

Operating context and key risks

Information on operating context and key risks is available on the Military Grievances External Review Committee's website.

Operating context

The Committee is a micro organization of fewer than 50 employees responsible for the delivery of a very specific mandate – the independent review of military grievances. Since its establishment in 2000, the Committee has built a strong foundation and reputation, and maintains a stable complement of skilled and experienced employees. As a result, the Committee is able to produce F&R that are sound in facts and law. Over the years, the Committee's reputation for producing quality F&R has been supported by the appreciation of the CAF members and the decision-makers at the final authority level of the grievance process.

The Committee does not control the number of cases referred for its review in any given year, and in the past several years, the Committee's workload has fluctuated significantly. These changing numbers have offered the Committee the opportunity to revise its internal grievance review process to ensure that it continues to be able to produce high-quality F&R and respect its established service standards. The Committee is made up of members appointed by the GIC. At the end of 2017-2018, a complement of all-new members were appointed. This posed a challenge for the Committee in 2018-2019 in terms of its ability to issue F&Rs in a timely fashion, as new members became more familiar with their role, learned the grievance review process, and shared fresh perspectives. In spite of these challenges, however, the Committee continually demonstrated its ability to adapt to a changing workload and remained an agile organization, able to mitigate risks. By maintaining its complement of knowledgeable employees and its robust operational process, the Committee is assured of its resilience and will continue to demonstrate its ability to adapt and overcome obstacles.

Key risks

Risk #1 – Committee capacity and competencies

Small, micro organizations that require multifaceted employees to carry the work but offer limited room for career advancement, face the challenge of attracting and retaining an adequate complement of members and employees. This, when coupled with the unique mandate of the Committee made it difficult to fulfill its mandate, and ultimately impacted the timeliness of its F&R reports.

To mitigate this risk, the Committee continued to support its newly-appointed Committee Members. The Committee closely monitored the internal review process and timelines, and adapted its grievance review process as required. In addition, succession plans for key positions were maintained, and a variety of staffing mechanisms were made available. Anticipatory staffing processes that supported knowledge transfer in the case of anticipated retirements, as well as the establishment of pools of pre-qualified candidates for senior grievance officer positions, helped ease the transition period in the event of an employee's departure.

Risk # 2 – Transformation of Internal Services

In 2018-2019, the Committee continued to modernize its way of doing business through its lean and green business process initiative to support the government in transforming its internal services. Routine activities were often in conflict with projects, particularly given the small number of Committee employees. As a result, there was a risk that the transition associated with government-wide initiatives would interrupt the day-to-day business and ultimately prevent the Committee from effectively delivering on its mandate.

To mitigate this risk, the Committee managed its priorities, participated in horizontal internal services initiatives, explored opportunities to establish agreements with other small organizations to provide/share/receive internal services, and increased efficiency to reduce costs to whatever extent possible. The Committee monitored this risk closely.

Risk # 3 – Significant fluctuation in volume of grievances received

The Committee is a demand-driven organization and has no control over the volume of cases referred to it by the CAF. The CAF recently implemented a new integrated complaint and conflict management (ICCM) program, which resulted in a significant fluctuation in the Committee's workload.

To mitigate this risk, the Committee communicated regularly with CAF and key stakeholders in the grievance process. The Committee continued to monitor the quality of F&Rs produced, and explored opportunities to streamline its internal grievance process, as well as managed workload through careful planning and monitoring. In addition, it ensured appropriate staffing strategies were in place. The Committee monitored this risk closely.

The Military Grievances External Review Committee's Departmental Results Framework and Program Inventory of record for 2018–19 are shown below.

Graphical presentation of Departmental Results Framework and Program Inventory

The Military Grievances External Review Committee's Departmental Results Framework and Program Inventory of record for 2018-2019

Supporting information on the Program Inventory

Financial, human resources and performance information for the Military Grievances External Review Committee's Program Inventory is available in the GC InfoBase^{Endnote iv}.

Supplementary information tables

The following supplementary information tables are available on the Military Grievances External Review Committee's website:
Gender-based analysis plus

Federal tax expenditures

The tax system can be used to achieve public policy objectives through the application of special measures such as low tax rates, exemptions, deductions, deferrals and credits. The Department of Finance Canada publishes cost estimates and projections for these measures each year in the Report on Federal Tax Expenditures.^{Endnote v} This report also provides detailed background information on tax expenditures, including descriptions, objectives, historical information and references to related federal spending programs. The tax measures presented in this report are the responsibility of the Minister of Finance.

Organizational contact information

60 Queen Street, 10^th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5Y7
Canada
Telephone: (613) 996-8529
Toll-Free Telephone: 877-276-4193
Fax: (613) 996-6491
Email: mgerc-ceegm@mgerc-ceegm.gc.ca
Web: https://www.canada.ca/en/military-grievances-external-review.html

Appendix: definitions

appropriation (crédit)
Any authority of Parliament to pay money out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.

budgetary expenditures (dépenses budgétaires)
Operating and capital expenditures; transfer payments to other levels of government, organizations or individuals; and payments to Crown corporations.

Core Responsibility (responsabilité essentielle)
An enduring function or role performed by a department. The intentions of the department with respect to a Core Responsibility are reflected in one or more related Departmental Results that the department seeks to contribute to or influence.

Departmental Plan (plan ministériel)
A report on the plans and expected performance of an appropriated department over a three‑year period. Departmental Plans are tabled in Parliament each spring.

Departmental Result (résultat ministériel)
A Departmental Result represents the change or changes that the department seeks to influence. A Departmental Result is often outside departments' immediate control, but it should be influenced by program-level outcomes.

Departmental Result Indicator (indicateur de résultat ministériel)
A factor or variable that provides a valid and reliable means to measure or describe progress on a Departmental Result.

Departmental Results Framework (cadre ministériel des résultats)
Consists of the department's Core Responsibilities, Departmental Results and Departmental Result Indicators.

Departmental Results Report (rapport sur les résultats ministériels)
A report on an appropriated department's actual accomplishments against the plans, priorities and expected results set out in the corresponding Departmental Plan.

experimentation (expérimentation)                                                                  
Activities that seek to explore, test and compare the effects and impacts of policies, interventions and approaches, to inform evidence-based decision-making, by learning what works and what does not.

full‑time equivalent (équivalent temps plein)
A measure of the extent to which an employee represents a full person‑year charge against a departmental budget. Full‑time equivalents are calculated as a ratio of assigned hours of work to scheduled hours of work. Scheduled hours of work are set out in collective agreements.

gender-based analysis plus (GBA+) (analyse comparative entre les sexes plus [ACS+])
An analytical process used to help identify the potential impacts of policies, Programs and services on diverse groups of women, men and gender differences. We all have multiple identity factors that intersect to make us who we are; GBA+ considers many other identity factors, such as race, ethnicity, religion, age, and mental or physical disability.

government-wide priorities (priorités pangouvernementales)
For the purpose of the 2018–19 Departmental Results Report, those high-level themes outlining the government's agenda in the 2015 Speech from the Throne, namely: Growth for the Middle Class; Open and Transparent Government;  A Clean Environment and a Strong Economy; Diversity is Canada's Strength; and Security and Opportunity.

horizontal initiative (initiative horizontale)
An initiative where two or more departments are given funding to pursue a shared outcome, often linked to a government priority.

non‑budgetary expenditures (dépenses non budgétaires)
Net outlays and receipts related to loans, investments and advances, which change the composition of the financial assets of the Government of Canada.

performance (rendement)
What an organization did with its resources to achieve its results, how well those results compare to what the organization intended to achieve, and how well lessons learned have been identified.

performance indicator (indicateur de rendement)
A qualitative or quantitative means of measuring an output or outcome, with the intention of gauging the performance of an organization, program, policy or initiative respecting expected results.

performance reporting (production de rapports sur le rendement)
The process of communicating evidence‑based performance information. Performance reporting supports decision making, accountability and transparency.

plan (plan)
The articulation of strategic choices, which provides information on how an organization intends to achieve its priorities and associated results. Generally a plan will explain the logic behind the strategies chosen and tend to focus on actions that lead up to the expected result.

planned spending (dépenses prévues)
For Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports, planned spending refers to those amounts presented in Main Estimates.
A department is expected to be aware of the authorities that it has sought and received. The determination of planned spending is a departmental responsibility, and departments must be able to defend the expenditure and accrual numbers presented in their Departmental Plans and Departmental Results Reports.

priority (priorité)
A plan or project that an organization has chosen to focus and report on during the planning period. Priorities represent the things that are most important or what must be done first to support the achievement of the desired Strategic Outcome(s) or Departmental Results.

program (programme)
Individual or groups of services, activities or combinations thereof that are managed together within the department and focus on a specific set of outputs, outcomes or service levels.

result (résultat)
An external consequence attributed, in part, to an organization, policy, program or initiative. Results are not within the control of a single organization, policy, program or initiative; instead they are within the area of the organization's influence.

statutory expenditures (dépenses législatives)
Expenditures that Parliament has approved through legislation other than appropriation acts. The legislation sets out the purpose of the expenditures and the terms and conditions under which they may be made.

Strategic Outcome (résultat stratégique)
A long‑term and enduring benefit to Canadians that is linked to the organization's mandate, vision and core functions.

target (cible)
A measurable performance or success level that an organization, program or initiative plans to achieve within a specified time period. Targets can be either quantitative or qualitative.

voted expenditures (dépenses votées)
Expenditures that Parliament approves annually through an Appropriation Act. The Vote wording becomes the governing conditions under which these expenditures may be made.