Department of Justice Canada
Client Feedback Survey

• [ Previous Page |
• Table of Contents |
• Next Page ]

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.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. †	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. †	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. †	8.3 (0.0) Positive	8.5 (±0.1) Strong
Advised you of issues/developments which may impact your department/agency. †	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. †	7.9 (±0.1) Positive	8.1 (±0.1) Positive
Identified opportunities to use dispute resolution practices, where appropriate. †	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. †	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. †	7.7 (±0.3) Moderate	7.1 (±0.5)* 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. †	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. †	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

• * 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.

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

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.

---

• [ Previous Page |
• Table of Contents |
• Next Page ]