Department of Justice Canada Client Feedback Survey

PDF Version

Annex B – Comparison of Cycle I and II Results

The Department of Justice Canada strives for excellence in the practice of law. The Department is committed to providing government with an integrated suite of legal advisory, litigation and legislative drafting services of the highest calibre.

Presented by overall dimension of client satisfaction, the table below provides an overview of the client feedback collected during Cycle II, as provided by the 4,786 responding service users, against the feedback collected during Cycle I, as provided by the 3,562 responding service users. For both Cycles, all service users identified that they had received legal services during the twelve months preceding the administration of the Survey.Footnote 17

Overview of the client feedback collected during Cycle II

Colour-Coding of Results

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

8.4 (0.0)

Strong

8.2 (0.0)

Positive


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 (0.0)

Strong

9.4 (0.0)

Strong

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

9.1 (0.0)

Strong

9.2 (0.0)

Strong

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

8.6 (±0.1)

Strong

n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: Electronic. 8.7 (±0.1)Strong n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: Telephone.

8.7 (±0.1)

Strong

n/a
Satisfaction with access mode: In person.

8.8 (±0.1)

Strong

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

7.3 (±0.1)

Moderate

7.5 (±0.1)

Moderate


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

8.3 (0.0)

Positive

8.5 (±0.1)

Strong

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

8.2 (±0.1)

Positive

8.4 (±0.1)

Strong

Worked with you to identify legal risks.

8.3 (±0.1)

Positive

8.2 (±0.1)

Positive

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

8.0 (±0.1)

Positive

n/a
Involved you in the development of legal strategy and positions.

7.8 (±0.1)

Moderate

7.8 (±0.1)

Moderate

Identified means to prevent or resolve legal disputes at the earliest opportunity. Table note

7.9 (±0.1)

Positive

8.1 (±0.1)

Positive

Identified opportunities to use dispute resolution practices, where appropriate. Table note

7.7 (±0.1)

Moderate

8.0 (±0.1)

Positive

Provided clear and practical guidance on resolving the legal issue.

8.1 (±0.1)

Positive

8.1 (±0.1)

Positive

Provided consistent legal advice. Table note

8.3 (±0.1)

Positive

7.9 (±0.1)

Positive

Identified opportunities to implement policies or programs by administrative rather than legislative means.

7.8 (±0.3)

Moderate

7.8 (±0.2)

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.

8.2 (±0.2)

Positive

8.0 (±0.2)

Positive

Developed legislative drafting options appropriate to your policy and program objectives.

8.3 (±0.2)

Positive

8.2 (±0.2)

Positive

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

8.3 (±0.2)

Positive

7.8 (±0.4)

Moderate

If applicable, provided recommendations on whether to appeal or seek judicial review.

8.4 (±0.2)

Strong

n/a

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

7.8 (±0.1)

Moderate

7.9 (±0.1)

Positive

Negotiated mutually agreed-upon deadlines. Table note

7.8 (±0.1)

Moderate

7.9 (±0.1)

Positive

Met mutually agreed-upon deadlines.

7.9 (±0.1)

Positive

8.0 (±0.1)

Positive

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 legal services provided, overall client satisfaction has significantly improved since Cycle I (8.4 versus 8.2 on a 10-point scale). Moreover and consistent with the findings from Cycle I, against the additional twenty-five elements of service quality investigated during Cycle II, the Department is generally meeting or surpassing the 8.0 target.

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

  • regularly provided informative progress reports or ongoing feedback informing you of the status of your request for services;
  • involved you in the development of legal strategy and positions;
  • identified opportunities to use dispute resolution practices, where appropriate;
  • identified opportunities to implement policies or programs by administrative rather than legislative means;
  • identified opportunities to implement policies or programs by administrative rather than regulatory means;
  • responded in a timely manner to requests for legal services; and,
  • negotiated mutually agreed-upon deadlines.
Date modified: