Survey of NEXUS Marine Pilot Members

Executive Summary

The major messages from the survey of NEXUS Marine Pilot participants are that participants are saving time using the process, that most are realizing the benefits they expected from participating in it, and that they are experiencing widespread satisfaction with most elements of it. However, some administrative difficulties are being encountered in using the process that need to be addressed.

The results suggest that the Program is attaining a key expected outcome – that of expedited entry into Canada and the United States (U.S.). On average, members reported saving close to 20 minutes using the NEXUS Marine process compared to regular processing, most said they realized the expected benefit of expedited passage while using the NEXUS Marine process, and a majority were satisfied with the time saved using the process. However, a fairly large minority (20 per cent) were dissatisfied with the time saved while using the process to enter the U.S.

Few participants were stopped by border and other law enforcement officers while using the process. Moreover, a majority of respondents were satisfied with their experience when stopped by officers. However, this positive outcome is tempered somewhat by the finding that most participants had not been stopped much by officers before joining NEXUS either.

A majority of participants were satisfied with most aspects of the NEXUS Marine application, enrolment and passage processes. Further, these levels of client satisfaction are generally higher than those reported in other similar studies conducted by the consultant.

That being said, there are aspects of the Program that may require some attention on the part of Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the U.S. Bureau of Customs Border Protection (CBP). First, with respect to the application process, a small majority of respondents were satisfied with the information provided when first using the Telephone Reporting Centre (TRC) (54 per cent) and with the application fee (63 per cent). This suggests that CBSA/CBP might consider improving information provided by the TRC when it comes to NEXUS Marine and directing marketing efforts toward extolling the benefits of the process ("getting good value for the money"), particularly at American residents who were more dissatisfied with the application fee than Canadian residents.

Second, satisfaction with the NEXUS Marine passage process was higher while entering Canada than while entering the U.S. This is particularly true in the case of calling the TRC to report a landing, the time it takes to clear customs/border processing, and the amount of time saved using NEXUS Marine. Indeed, a large minority of participants are dissatisfied with these items while entering the U.S. By addressing these issues, CBSA/CBP could increase satisfaction and presumably membership.

Third, some concern was expressed by members regarding the fact that they were repeatedly asked for the same information every time they entered the U.S. This was attributed by some respondents to the fact that data on them had not been entered in the Program database. In fact, detailed information is not maintained on the passage process entering the U.S. To correct this situation, it is suggested that CBP ensure that all information on all users entering the U.S. be properly entered into a database.

By the same token, there is evidence from this survey that participants are not properly informed of the NEXUS Marine process. Several users who had said they were users of the process later said they had actually used it zero times. This would indicate the need for greater efforts to increase an understanding of the Program.

Based on members' unprompted recommendations to expand NEXUS Marine, and in light of the findings about attainment of expected benefits and high satisfaction levels among participants with most aspects of NEXUS Marine, it is suggested that CBSA examine the feasibility of expanding the Program to other border crossing areas for boats. However, expansion should not come until authorities investigate and address administrative/delivery difficulties identified by users, particularly apparent on the American side, around the TRC and the lack of passage data, and make changes to ensure a full understanding of NEXUS Marine's procedures.

Selected Survey Results

The full detailed results are presented in chapters two and three of this report and summarized in chapter four, while selected results follow:

• Sociodemographic Traits: Compared to the Canadian population at large, survey respondents were more likely to be in higher income brackets, to be employed or self-employed, and to be middle-aged.
• Type of NEXUS Member: One-fifth of respondents said they joined NEXUS primarily for highway reasons, two-thirds for marine purposes, and 12 per cent for both marine and highway reasons. Note, however, that all members, regardless of why they signed up for, may use the process for border crossing in both marine and highway modes.
• First Learning about NEXUS Marine: Members had heard about NEXUS Marine primarily by word of mouth. The top three sources for first information about the NEXUS Marine Pilot were word of mouth (34 per cent), brochures, flyers or posters (14 per cent), and Canada/U.S. border officer (13 per cent).
• Frequency of Use: The vast majority of users (about 80 per cent) had used the process most or all of the time they crossed the border by boat into Canada and the U.S. in the Windsor/Detroit area.
  • The most frequently cited reason for using the process none or some of the time was that they were travelling with non-NEXUS members, including family (25 per cent of the respondents said this).
  • Other reasons cited for not using it or for using it only some of the time suggest difficulties with the system (such as the telephone not being answered at the TRC); misunderstanding of the rules by members (some thought that, because they were Canadian, they did not have to use it while returning to Canada); difficulties with the administrative data (members repeatedly being asked by U.S. officers to provide data on themselves); or misunderstanding on the part of members of what constitutes using the process actually means (some respondents, when asked why they had used the process some or none of the time, said they had used the process every time).
• Expected Benefits: Not having to apply for an U.S. I-68 permit and quicker border clearance were the most frequently cited reasons for participating in NEXUS Marine. These factors were identified by 73 and 61 per cent of members, respectively, as one of their top four reasons for their participation in the Program.
  • Not having to apply for an I-68 permit was more frequently cited by Canadian residents than American residents as one of their top four reasons for participating (80 versus 68 per cent), as was less frequent examinations by officers (17 versus eight per cent).
• Realization of Expected Benefits: A majority of members (84 to 90 per cent) have realized the benefits they were expecting from NEXUS Marine, at least to some extent. These benefits are quicker border clearance, reduced questioning, consideration as a low-risk traveller, and not having to apply for an I-68 permit (there were insufficient observations to measure the attainment of the other expected benefits).
• Unexpected Benefits: One-fifth said they experienced unexpected benefits of participating in NEXUS Marine. The two most frequently identified unexpected benefits were the speed of the border crossing (despite this being an advertised intended benefit of the Program) and the fact that membership covers road travel as well.
• Times Stopped: Members were rarely stopped by border officers or other law enforcement officers (such as the Windsor Police, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Detroit Police or U.S. Coast Guard) to answer questions or have their belongings examined while using the NEXUS Marine process. About nine in 10 members have never been stopped by officers and about 10 per cent have been stopped only some of the time while entering either Canada or the U.S. None have been stopped all or most of the time.
  • Still, as good a result as this is, the low incidence of being stopped by officers was not much different from the incidence before respondents became members. Only small minorities reported being stopped less often than before, with a majority being stopped about as often as before.
• Time Saved: Members saved almost 20 minutes using the NEXUS Marine process compared to regular processing. The survey results indicate that members saved 18.1 minutes entering Canada and 19.1 minutes entering the U.S.
• Satisfaction with Application Process: Most members were satisfied with all aspects of the application process, though satisfaction was lower with TRC-provided information on the Program. Members were generally pleased with the clarity of the Information Guide and Application Form (79 per cent) and the time it took to receive the letter inviting them to the Enrolment Centre to complete the process (73 per cent). Satisfaction was lower with the amount of the application fee (63 per cent) and the information provided when first using the TRC (54 per cent). Almost a quarter were dissatisfied with the latter.
  • American residents are much more likely than Canadian residents to be dissatisfied with the fee.
• Satisfaction with Enrolment Process: A large majority of NEXUS Marine members were satisfied with the enrolment process; very few were dissatisfied (four to six per cent). Specifically, 89 per cent were extremely satisfied or satisfied with officers' explanation of Program details; 86 per cent with the service received from officers; and 81 per cent with the clarity of the Participants' Guide.
  • Similarly, a majority of respondents were satisfied with the Enrolment Centre, though satisfaction is somewhat lower with its location. Specifically, the percentage of members extremely satisfied or satisfied with the time spent in the Centre was 90 per cent; 79 per cent with its hours of operation; and 64 per cent with its location. American residents were significantly more likely to be dissatisfied with the Centre's location than Canadian residents, despite it being located in Detroit.
• Satisfaction with Passage Process: Satisfaction was high and dissatisfaction low with all aspects of the passage process particularly while entering Canada. When entering Canada, a large majority of members (78 to 87 per cent) were extremely satisfied or satisfied with all aspects of the passage process. When entering the U.S., satisfaction was lower for almost all elements. This was particularly true with respect to calling the TRC to report a landing (78 versus 50 per cent satisfied while entering Canada versus the U.S., respectively); the time it takes to clear customs/border processing using NEXUS Marine (86 versus 60 per cent); and the amount of time saved using NEXUS Marine (82 versus 64 per cent). Note as well the large proportions of members dissatisfied or extremely dissatisfied with these latter three items while entering the U.S. (20 to 38 per cent).
• Overall Satisfaction: Three-quarters of respondents were satisfied with NEXUS Marine overall, and only six per cent were dissatisfied.
  • NEXUS Marine's convenience, the fact that it was considered better than an I-68 permit (easier to apply and good for five years compared to one year for the I-68 permit), the fewer hassles experienced, and the time saved were the dominant reasons cited by members for being extremely satisfied with the Program, mentioned by between 26 and 33 per cent of respondents.
  • The only major difference according to country of residence was that U.S. residents were more likely than Canadian residents to indicate convenience (40 versus 20 per cent) and being able to call ahead (18 versus three per cent) as reasons for being extremely satisfied.
• Members' Suggestions for Improvement: Expansion of NEXUS Marine to other border crossing areas or of the current designated area was the most frequently suggested improvement to the Program (cited by 17 per cent of respondents). Being able to get through on the telephone to the TRC, allowing non-NEXUS passengers on the boat, and making the application process easier were improvements cited by about 10 per cent each. Some concern was expressed regarding the fact that members were repeatedly asked for the same information every time they entered the U.S. (attributed by some to a lack of an onsite computer).