Evaluation of the Department of Justice Professional Development Function

Executive Summary

1. Introduction

The evaluation of the Department of Justice (Department) Professional Development (PD) function was conducted by the Department’s Evaluation Division and covers a five-year period (2012-13 to 2016-17). The evaluation was completed in accordance with Treasury Board’s Policy on Results (2016). Its main objective was to assess the performance (effectiveness and efficiency) of the PD function.

2. Professional Development Function Profile

The purpose of the PD function is to ensure that employees are equipped with the knowledge and skills to effectively deliver on their work objectives. Furthermore, employees are offered the possibility to develop new skills to meet both departmental business requirements and career aspirations. For the Department’s lawyers, continuing PD training is required by law societies in order to maintain their licenses to practice law, and those licenses are a requirement of employment.

The function is based on three main delivery providers:

3. Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation strategy was based on an approach using multiple sources of evidence. The lines of evidence included: a document and data review; key informant interviews with 37 individuals responsible for developing, delivering and/or coordinating PD within the Department, as well as portfolio, sector and regional office representatives dedicated to the PD function; and an online survey completed by 940 departmental employees, including legal professionals and other professionals.

Limitations

Examining and comparing data for PD at the Department to analyze efficiency and effectiveness were challenging due to the consistency of data entry related to PD attendance, activities and training expenditures. The coding of LPD, CLEP and CSPS training in PeopleSoft and iCase may be inaccurately reported by employees. Furthermore, for the purposes of this evaluation, we did not have complete access to the costs of PD and its management, initiated at the portfolio, sector and regional office level. Despite some data limitations, a triangulated approach of using multiple lines of evidence has helped mitigate the concerns.

4. Key Findings

4.1. Effectiveness

Impact of Professional Development

Justice Canada employees reported generally positive impacts of PD. A majority of respondents also noted that they have been able to apply their knowledge and skills to their work, especially with external training. Although LPD and CLEP post- training survey data does exist, there is no permanent process in place to reliably evaluate and communicate PD impacts, particularly in the long term.

Meeting the Needs of Employees

The majority of departmental employees reported that they get the training they need, although some barriers to accessibility were noted, including budget and operational constraints. Challenges delivering training tailored to regional realities and needs were also noted, including limits to virtual participation related to technological issues and time zone differences. In the absence of a systematic departmental training needs assessment, an objective assessment of the degree to which employees’ needs are met is not possible.

Alignment with Priorities

The evaluation found that there is an informal approach to planning and alignment with departmental and federal government priorities across the main providers, portfolios, sectors and regional offices. There is no strategic approach to planning and priority setting at a departmental level.

4.2. Efficiency

Governance and Coordination

There is no overarching governance of the departmental PD function. There is insufficient communication and coordination of PD activities across portfolios, sectors, regional offices and the main PD providers. The majority of key informants stated that roles and responsibilities are unclear across the Department. The lack of a clear governance framework has led to unreliable mechanisms to identify training needs and set annual departmental priorities. Despite these challenges, efforts have been made within Justice Canada to coordinate planning and delivery of training.

Efficient Use of Resources

The absence of a coordinated approach to drive alignment of limited resources with departmental and governmental needs and priorities may limit efforts to deliver training to departmental employees in a cost-effective manner. The decentralized nature of PD offered internally, externally and through CSPS poses a risk of overlap and budgetary inefficiencies if the availability and prioritization of PD activities are insufficiently coordinated and communicated. Despite the Department’s annual transfer of funds to CSPS, Justice Canada employees are accessing CSPS products at a lower rate than the public service more generally.

5. Recommendations

The evaluation made the following recommendations concerning the PD function:

Management has agreed with the recommendations and has prepared an action plan to respond to each of them.