Department of Justice Canada Client Feedback Survey

PDF Version

Annex F – Client Feedback: Regulatory Drafting Services

The Department of Justice Canada is responsible for the review and drafting of regulations for the government. Regulations are drafted to respect the Constitution, be understandable, operate coherently and effectively with other related laws, to meet the linguistic and legal requirements for laws that speak to both official language communities, and operate effectively in both common law and civil law jurisdictions.

The following table presents an overview of the Cycle II client feedback provided by the 531 service users who identified that they had received regulatory drafting services in the twelve months preceding the administration of the Survey. Presented for comparison purposes are the Cycle I results for regulatory drafting services.Footnote 19

Cycle I results for regulatory drafting services

Colour-Coding of Results

  Cycle II (2012) Cycle I (2009)
Overall quality of Regulatory Drafting Services provided. Table note

8.5 (±0.1)

Strong

7.8 (±0.4)

Moderate


Accessibility/Responsiveness of Legal Services
  Cycle II (2012) Cycle I (2009)
Official languages: Please rate your overall level of satisfaction with the accessibility of legal services in the official language of your choice.

9.3 (±0.1)

Strong

9.2 (±0.2)

Strong

Courteousness/Respectfulness: Please rate your overall level of satisfaction with the courteousness/respectfulness of legal service providers.

8.9 (±0.2)

Strong

8.8 (±0.3)

Strong

Service Provider: Please rate your level of satisfaction with the ease with which the correct service provider to meet your needs was identified.

8.5 (±0.2)

Strong

n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: Electronic.

8.7 (±0.3)

Strong

n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: Telephone.

8.6 (±0.3)

Strong

n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: In person.

8.8 (±0.3)

Strong

n/a
Regularly provided informative progress reports or ongoing feedback informing you of the status of your request for services. Table note

7.7 (±0.2)

Moderate

7.1 (±0.5)Table note *

Opportunities for Improvement


Usefulness of Legal Services
  Cycle II (2012) Cycle I (2009)
Fully understood the nature of the problem/issue for which you received assistance.

8.3 (±0.2)

Positive

7.9 (±0.4)

Positive

Advised you of issues/developments which may impact your department/agency.

8.3 (±0.2)

Positive

8.0 (±0.4)

Positive

Worked with you to identify legal risks.

8.2 (±0.2)

Positive

7.9 (±0.4)

Positive

Involved you in the review/development of legal options to mitigate identified legal risks.

8.0 (±0.2)

Positive

n/a
Provided consistent legal advice. Table note

8.3 (±0.2)

Positive

7.6 (±0.4)

Moderate

Identified opportunities to implement policies or programs by administrative rather than regulatory means. Table note

7.7 (±0.3)

Moderate

7.1 (±0.5)Table note *

Opportunities for Improvement

Proposed appropriate solutions for legal and drafting issues raised. Table note

8.3 (±0.2)

Positive

7.7 (±0.4)

Moderate

Developed regulatory drafting options appropriate to your policy and program objectives. Table note

8.3 (±0.2)

Positive

7.8 (±0.4)

Moderate


Timeliness of Legal Services
  Cycle II (2012) Cycle I (2009)
Responded in a timely manner to requests for legal services. Table note

8.0 (±0.2)

Positive

7.5 (±0.4)

Moderate

Negotiated mutually agreed-upon deadlines.

7.8 (±0.2)

Moderate

7.4 (±0.4)

Moderate

Met mutually agreed-upon deadlines.

8.0 (±0.2)

Positive

7.5 (±0.4)

Moderate

Table note *

High margins of error can result from an insufficient number of responses and/or high variability between users’ responses. For this reason, scores with margins of error exceeding ±0.4 are less reliable, and have a limited potential for analysis. Scores that fit this description are indicated by an asterisk.

Return to table note * referrer

Table note †

Denotes a statistically significant difference between Cycle II and Cycle I client feedback.

Return to table note referrer

In assessing the overall quality of the regulatory drafting services provided, overall client satisfaction has significantly improved since Cycle I (8.5 versus 7.8 on a 10-point scale). Importantly, there has been an increase in client satisfaction on all eighteen additional elements relating to regulatory drafting services since Cycle I.

There are three specific elements where the client feedback was “moderate” – falling slightly below the established target. Specifically:

  • regularly provided informative progress reports or ongoing feedback informing you of the status of your request for services;
  • identified opportunities to implement policies or programs by administrative rather than regulatory means; and,
  • negotiated mutually agreed-upon deadlines.
Date modified: