Mike Colledge
President
Ipsos Public Affairs
May 31, 2021
POR # 113-19 Client Grant & Applicant
Supplier name: Ipsos Public Affairs
Contract number: G9292-205211
Contract value: $137,612.77
Award delivery: 2020-03-24
Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français sur demande.
For more information on this report, please contact nc-por-rop-gd@hrsdc-rhdcc.gc.ca
© 2021 Ipsos. All rights reserved. Contains Ipsos' Confidential and Proprietary information and may not be disclosed or reproduced without the prior written consent of Ipsos.
It is available upon request in multiple formats (large print, MP3, braille, e-text, DAISY), by contacting 1 800 O Canada (1-800-622-6232).
By teletypewriter (TTY), call 1-800-926-9105.
© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2021
For information regarding reproduction rights: droitdauteur.copyright@HRSDC-RHDCC.gc.ca.
PDF
Cat. No. : Em20-148/2021E-PDF
ISBN: 978-0-660-37945-6
ESDC
Cat. No. : POR-109-07-21E
I hereby certify as Senior Officer of Ipsos that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Policy on Communications and Federal Identity and the Directive on the Management of Communications. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.
Mike Colledge
President
Ipsos Public Affairs
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to three questions about the overall service experience. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about satisfaction with the overall quality of service provided by the service channels used during the applicant process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about satisfaction with overall service experience by program. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by program.
This pie bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant received funding approval. A total of 1491 respondents answered as follows:
As a baseline, 70% of applicants were satisfied with the service experience applying for Grants & Contributions program. Overall ratings for ease (74%) and smooth movement through all steps (70%) were also reasonably high.
Email support from a program officer during the application process was by far the most positively received service channel. Ratings were comparatively lower for any form of telephone support.
Higher complexity programs generally require a greater number of contacts with Service Canada.
Satisfaction with the service experience is also influenced by whether the applicant was approved for funding. While a limited proportion of applicants were not approved, those that were not had considerably lower satisfaction and few felt the decision was well-explained.
The Government of Canada website was widely-used to learn about Gs&Cs programs and in preparing the application. Applicants found it easy to use and find the information they were looking for.
Program web portals were the most commonly used method for applying. Applicants appreciated being able to complete steps online and generally found the process easy.
Overall, applicants found most aspects of the application process easy. However, they experienced more difficultly completing the narrative questions and budget document and ratings for the amount of time it took were notably softer than other measures.
Generally speaking, completing the different project close-out tasks were found to be easy; however, experiences differed greatly by program.
Overall, a strong majority of applicants were satisfied with the service experience for the Grants & Contributions program they applied for, felt the process was easy and effective, and trusted Service Canada to deliver services effectively to Canadians.
Applicants provided the highest ratings for provision of service in choice of official language, confidence in security of their personal information and that completing steps online made the process easier.
Aspects of service with lower ratings included the amount of time it took to complete an application, that it was clear what would happen next and when, ease of getting help when needed, having to explain their situation once and that it was clear what to do if they had a problem or question.
There were notable differences in performance across service attributes by program.
How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the overall service you received from Service Canada from getting information about [PROGRAM] to receiving a funding decision?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the overall service they received from Service Canada from getting information about the program they applied for to receiving a funding decision. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale.
Q31. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means very dissatisfied and 5 means very satisfied, how satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the overall service you received from Service Canada from getting information about [INSERT PROGRAM] to receiving a funding decision? Base: All respondents.
This horizontal bar chart shows the extent to which respondents agree or disagree with a variety of statements related to the ease of the overall service experience. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale. Sample sizes vary by statement.
Q30. Thinking about the overall service you received, from getting information about [INSERT PROGRAM] to receiving funding decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements, using a 5-pt scale where 1 means strongly disagree and 5 means strongly agree.
This horizontal bar chart shows the extent to which respondents agree or disagree with a variety of statements related to the effectiveness of the overall service experience. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale. Sample sizes vary by statement.
Q30. Thinking about the overall service you received, from getting information about [INSERT PROGRAM] to receiving funding decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements, using a 5-pt scale where 1 means strongly disagree and 5 means strongly agree.
This horizontal bar chart shows the extent to which respondents agree or disagree with a variety of statements related to about the emotion of the overall service experience. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale. Sample sizes vary by statement.
Q30. Thinking about the overall service you received, from getting information about [INSERT PROGRAM] to receiving funding decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements, using a 5-pt scale where 1 means strongly disagree and 5 means strongly agree.
Overall Satisfaction (% Rated 1/2): 12%
Overall Satisfaction (% Rated 4/5): 74% (funded), 41% (not funded).
| Experienced a Problem | Funded | Not Funded |
|---|---|---|
| % Yes | 34% | 36% |
| Service Channel Satisfaction | ||
| Government of Canada website | 67% | 52% |
| Email support from SC office | 68% | 44% |
| Email support from program officer | 82% | 58% |
| Online web portal | 68% | 50% |
| Channel Used To Learn about Program | ||
| Received an email from the funding program directly | 53% | 36% |
| Widest Gap in Service Attributes (% Rated 4/5 vs. Total) | Funded | Not Funded |
|---|---|---|
| I received consistent information. | 75% | 45% |
| The amount of time it took, from when I started gathering information to when I got a decision on my application, was reasonable. | 60% | 31% |
| It was easy to get help when I needed it. | 65% | 36% |
| Overall, it was easy for me to apply for [program]. | 77% | 49% |
| I needed to explain my situation only once. | 66% | 38% |
| I was confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved. | 66% | 39% |
| Throughout the process it was clear what would happen next and when it would happen. | 61% | 35% |
| Contacted by Service Canada to provide additional information | Funded | Not Funded |
|---|---|---|
| % Yes | 42% | 35% |
| Why were you contacted? | ||
| Clarify information in my application | 53% | 47% |
| Missing documents or information in my application | 20% | 34% |
| Budget template needed modifications | 7% | 9% |
| My organization or project was not eligible | 1% | 14% |
| Other reason | 31% | 16% |
| Sector | Funded | Not Funded |
| Not-for-profit (NET) | 79% | 71% |
| Public Sector (NET) | 14% | 18% |
| Private Sector (NET) | 18% | 25% |
| Application frequency | Funded | Not Funded |
|---|---|---|
| First application | 12% | 24% |
| Applied once or twice before | 19% | 25% |
| Applied several times before | 27% | 18% |
| Apply for the same program on an annual basis | 42% | 34% |
| Role in application | ||
| I am solely responsible | 44% | 44% |
| I am part of a team of employees | 28% | 25% |
| I am part of a team of both employees and volunteers | 13% | 7% |
| Our organization is heavily dependent on volunteers | 15% | 23% |
| I am not personally involved although I oversee this, or have some awareness | 0.3% | 1% |
How much would you say you trust or distrust Service Canada and Department of Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) to deliver services effectively to Canadians?
There was a strong correlation between trust in Service Canada and overall satisfaction (0.62).
Values less than 3% not labelled.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about the extent the applicant trusts or distrusts Service Canada and Department of Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) to deliver services effectively to Canadians. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale.
Q32. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means do not trust at all and 5 means trust a great deal, how much would you say you trust or distrust Service Canada and Department of Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) to deliver services effectively to Canadians? Base: All respondents.
Satisfaction is by far the highest for email support from a program officer, followed by the program web portal, in-person service at a Service Canada office, the Government of Canada website and email support form a Service Canada office.
The number of times an applicant was in contact with Service Canada differs significantly by the channel used and the program they applied for. Those with a higher number of contacts had lower satisfaction.
How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the overall quality of service you received from each of the following?
Values less than 3% not labelled.
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the overall quality of service provided by the service channels used during the applicant process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Q26. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means very dissatisfied and 5 means very satisfied. How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the overall quality of service you received from each of the following? Base: Used channel at aware, apply or follow-up stage.
Thinking about your overall experience, how many times did you use each of the following?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how many times the applicant used each service channels during their experience. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Q25. Thinking about your overall experience, how many times did you [IF MULTIPLE SOURCES ‘use each of the following’ IF ONLY ONE SOURCE ‘use the following’]? Please provide one response per item. Base: Used channel at aware, apply or follow-up stage.
Thinking about your overall experience, how many times did you use each of the following?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how many times the applicant used all service channels during their experience. A total of 1547 respondents answered as follows:
Q25. Thinking about your overall experience, how many times did you [IF MULTIPLE SOURCES ‘use each of the following’ IF ONLY ONE SOURCE ‘use the following’]? Please provide one response per item.
One-third of applicants experienced a problem or issue during the application process primarily related to delays in receiving funding approval or an update on the status of their application. Among those who experienced an issue relatively few felt it was easily resolved.
Thinking about your overall experience getting information and applying for [PROGRAM], did you experience any problems or issues during this process?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant experienced any problems or issues during the application process.
Q27. Thinking about your overall experience getting information and applying for [INSERT PROGRAM], did you experience any problems or issues during this process? Base: All respondents.
How would you describe the problem or issue you experienced?
Mentions of less than 3% not shown.
This horizontal bar chart shows coded responses to an open-ended question about how the applicant would describe the problem or issue they experienced. A total of 517 respondents who experienced problem or issue answered as follows:
Q28. How would you describe the problem or issue you experienced? Base: Experienced problem or issue.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about the extent to which the applicant would agree or disagree that the problem or issue was easily resolved. Those who experienced problem or issue answered as follows:
Q29. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree, how much would you agree or disagree that the problem or issue was easily resolved? Base: Experienced problem or issue.
The primary driver of satisfaction in the service experience is the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable followed by the helpfulness of Service Canada phone representatives and the overall ease of applying.
Overall, the greatest opportunities to improve the service experience are improving the timeliness of service and the helpfulness of Service Canada phone reps.
This horizontal bar chart shows results of a regression analysis that was conducted to identify the primary service attributes driving overall satisfaction with the service experience. Results were reported by impact score per service attribute as follows:
Base: EAF applicants (n=56).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: NHSP applicant (n=431).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: CSJ applicants (n=942).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: SL/CF applicants (n=25*).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: OFPwD applicants (n=22*).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: CSC applicants (n=25*).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: UT&IP applicants (n=26*).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: EL&CCI applicants (n=5**).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Base: SDPP applicants (n=17*).
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the service they received from the service channels they used throughout the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a rating of 4 or 5. Sample sizes vary by service channel, only those who used each channel during their experience were asked about it.
Applicants were by far most likely to rely on the Government of Canada website or direct communication with the funding program to learn about the program they applied for. Speaking with peers in their community network or through their local MP were also among the more common channels used.
The Government of Canada website was found to be easy to use by the vast majority of applicants and virtually all found the information they were looking for.
Which of the following did you use to find out about [PROGRAM] before you applied?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about which channels the applicant used to find out about the program before they applied. All the 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q2. Which of the following did you use to find out about [INSERT PROGRAM] before you applied? Consider all the methods you used to learn about the program before filling out the application. Please select all that apply. Base: All respondents.
Did you find what you wanted from the Government of Canada website when you were looking for information before you applied?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant found what they wanted from the Government of Canada website when they were looking for information about the program before they applied. Respondents who used Government of Canada website responded as follows:
Q3. Did you find what you wanted from the Government of Canada website when you were looking for information before you applied? Base: Used Government of Canada website.
You indicated you weren’t able to find the information you want from the Government of Canada website. Did you take any of the following steps to find what you were looking for?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant contacted any other service channels to find what they were looking from the Government of Canada website. All 50 respondents who didn't find the information they wanted on the Government of Canada website answered as follows:
Q4. You indicated you weren’t able to find the information you want from the Government of Canada website. Did you take any of the following steps to find what you were looking for? Please select all that apply. Base: Didn't find the information they wanted on the Government of Canada website.
How difficult or easy was it to find the following information about [PROGRAM] on the Government of Canada website?
Values less than 2% not labelled.
Q5. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how difficult or easy was it to find the following information about [INSERT PROGRAM] on the Government of Canada website? Select one response per item Base: Used Government of Canada website.
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how difficult or easy it was for the applicant to find different types of information about the program they applied for on the Government of Canada website. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale. All 902 respondents who used government of Canada website responded as follows:
Applicants were by far most likely to rely on the Government of Canada website when preparing their application (up until they submitted). Speaking with peers in their community network or communicating directly with a program officer were also among the more common channels used.
Overall, the vast majority of applicants submitted their application online through the program’s web portal and found it relatively easy to do so. Notably, application method differed significantly by program and use of the web portal was driven primarily by CSJ applicants.
Applicants found it easiest to understand and meet the requirements of the application and complete the project timeline. Completing the narrative questions and budget document were considered more difficult.
The majority of applicants took one week to complete their application and found the amount of time reasonable. However, the length of time to complete differs significantly by program and overall ratings are driven heavily by CSJ applicants who required less time than applicants to other programs.
Most applicants were motivated to submit their application through the method they found easiest or were most familiar with.
Overall, a sizeable minority of applicants were contacted to provide information to support their application, in most cases to clarify details of their application. Notably, the majority of NHSP and OFPwD applicants were contacted.
To prepare and complete your application (up until when you submitted) did you consult with any of the following?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about which channels the applicant used to prepare and complete their application (up until when they submitted). All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q6. To prepare and complete your application (up until when you submitted) did you consult with any of the following? Please select all that apply. Base: All respondents.
How would you rate the following elements of the application for [PROGRAM]?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how difficult or easy the applicant found different elements of the application process. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q7. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how would you rate the following elements of the application for [INSERT PROGRAM]? Select one response per item. Base: All respondents.
How long did it take you to prepare and complete your application overall?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how long it took the applicant to
prepare and complete their application. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q8. How long did it take you to prepare and complete your application overall? If you are uncertain, please provide you best guess. Base: All respondents,
Please rate the following statement: The application took a reasonable amount of time to complete.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about the extent to which the applicant would agree or disagree that the application took a reasonable amount of time to complete. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale.
Q9. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree, please rate the following statement. The application took a reasonable amount of time to complete. Base: All respondents.
Please rate the following statement: The application took a reasonable amount of time to complete.
Values less than 2% not labelled.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about the extent to which the applicant would agree or disagree that the application took a reasonable amount of time to complete broken out by the length of time the application took to complete. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale.
Q9. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree, please rate the following statement. The application took a reasonable amount of time to complete. Base: All respondents.
Which of the following methods did you use to submit your application?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about the channel the applicant used to submit their application. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q10. Which of the following methods did you use to submit your application? Please select only one. Base: All respondents.
Why did you choose this method to submit your application?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about the reasons the applicant used the channel they identified to submit their application. A total of 1537 respondents answered as follows:
Q11. Why did you choose this method to submit your application? Please select one reason only. Base: Excluding ‘None of the Above’ at Q10.
Why did you choose this method to submit your application?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about the reasons the applicant used the channel they identified to submit their application. A total of 1537 respondents answered as follows:
Q11. Why did you choose this method to submit your application? Please select one reason only. Base: Excluding ‘None of the Above’ at Q10.
How difficult or easy was it to submit your application online?
Values less than 2% not labelled.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how difficult or easy it was for the applicant to submit their application using an online web portal. Only those who submitted their application using an online web portal were asked this question. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale.
Q12. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means very difficult and 5 means very easy. How difficult or easy was it to submit your application online? Base: Submitted application using 'Online application using [PROGRAM] web portal'.
After you submitted your application, were you contacted by Service Canada (ESDC) to provide additional information to support your application?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant was contacted by Service Canada after they submitted their application to provide additional information to support their application.
Q13. After you submitted your application, were you contacted by Service Canada (ESDC) to provide additional information to support your application? Base: All respondents.
Why were you contacted by Service Canada (ESDC)?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about the reasons the applicant was contacted by Service Canada to provide additional information to support their application. A total of 721 respondents who were contacted by Service Canada after submitting their application answered as follows:
Q14. Why were you contacted by Service Canada (ESDC)? Select all that apply. Base: Were you contacted by Service Canada to provide additional information to support application.
The majority of applicants contacted Service Canada before receiving a decision, primarily to get an update on the progress of their application/timelines. Most found it easy to do so, however, ratings were comparatively lower than other aspects of service.
Nine in ten applicants report having received funding and most were notified by email. Notably, satisfaction with the service experience was considerably higher among those who were approved for funding.
Half of applicants who did not receive approval were offered an explanation and satisfaction with the reasons provided was low.
Awareness of being required to sign a funding agreement before accepting funding is near universal. The majority of applicants approved for funding had to make changes to their project before finalizing the agreement.
Did you contact Service Canada for any of the following reasons before receiving your funding decision?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant contacted Service Canada for any reason before receiving their funding decision. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q15. Did you contact Service Canada for any of the following reasons before receiving your funding decision? Select all that apply. Base: All respondents.
How was your experience following up with Service Canada about your application?
Values less than 2% not labelled.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how difficult or easy the applicant found the experience of following up with Service Canada about their application. Only those who indicated following up with Service Canada were asked this question. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale.
Q16. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how was your experience following up with Service Canada about your application? Base: Followed-up with Service Canada.
How were you notified of the funding decision about your application for [PROGRAM]?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how the applicant was notified of the funding decision about their application for the program they applied. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q17. How were you notified of the funding decision about your application for [INSERT PROGRAM]? Please select one. Base: All respondents
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the overall service they received from Service Canada broken out by those who were approved or denied funding approval. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale and results were grouped by those who provided a 4 or 5. A total of 1491 respondents answered as follows:
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant received funding approval. A total of 1491 respondents answered as follows:
Q18. After you submitted your application to [pipe: Q1], did your organization receive approval for funding?
Q31. How satisfied were you with the service you received from Service Canada related to your [insert abbrev] application? please use a 5-pt scale, where 1 means very dissatisfied, and 5 means very satisfied.
You indicated that your organization did not receive an approval for funding. Did you receive an explanation why?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether applicants who were denied funding received an explanation why. Only applicants who were denied funding approval were asked this question.
Q19. You indicated that your organization did not receive an approval for funding. Did you receive an explanation why? Base: Did not receive funding approval.
How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the explanation of the reasons for the decision?
Values less than 2% not labelled.
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how satisfied or dissatisfied the applicant was with the explanation provided for why their organization did not receive funding approval. Only applicants who were denied funding approval and provided an explanation why were asked this question. Respondents were asked to provide ratings on a 5-pt scale
Q20. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very dissatisfied and 5 is very satisfied. How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the explanation of the reasons for the decision? Base: Did not receive funding approval and received an explanation why.
Were you aware that you would have to sign a funding agreement with conditions and reporting requirements before accepting the funding?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether applicants approved for funding were aware that they would have to sign a funding agreement with conditions and reporting requirements before accepting the funding. Only applicants approved for funding were asked this question.
Q21. Were you aware that you would have to sign a funding agreement with conditions and reporting requirements before accepting the funding? Base: Received funding approval.
Once your program began and the details of the funding agreement were finalized with [PROGRAM], did you have to make changes to your project and/or submit an amendment to the funding agreement?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant had to make changes to their project and/or submit an amendment to the funding agreement when details of the funding agreement were finalized. Only applicants approved for funding were asked this question.
Q22. Once your program began and the details of the funding agreement were finalized with [NSERT PROGRAM], did you have to make changes to your project and/or submit an amendment to the funding agreement? Examples could include changes to project timelines, project description, budget etc.
How long did the process take to complete?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how long the process the make changes to their project or submit an amendment to the funding agreement took to complete. Only applicants who had to made changes to project or submit an amendment to the funding agreement were asked this question. Sample sizes vary by task.
Q23. How long did the process take to complete? If uncertain, please provide your best guess. Base: Had to make changes to project or submit an amendment to funding agreement.
A strong majority of applicants found it easy to complete and submit the final project report and budget. Among those who had to resolve any outstanding issues with funding, a strong majority found it easy to do so.
How would you rate the following tasks to close your funding agreement with [PROGRAM]?
Values less than 3% not labelled.
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how difficult or easy the applicant found different tasks required to close out their funding agreement. All 1304 who received funding approval answered as follows:
Q24. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how would you rate the following tasks to close your funding agreement with [INSERT PROGRAM]? Select one response per item. Base: Received funding approval.
Awareness of service standards is limited. Notably, those aware of either of the service standards had higher levels of satisfaction with the service experience than those who were not.
Before today, were you aware of these service standards?
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant was aware of service standards related to the time to acknowledge the submission and time to issue payment. Results were reported based on those who said yes they were aware.
Q33. Before today, were you aware of these service standards? Base: All respondents.
Acknowledge Submission: 80% Aware, 64% Not aware
Issue Payment: 78% Aware, 65% Not aware
| Experienced a Problem | Acknowledge Submission | Issue Payment | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aware | Not | Aware | Not | |
| % Yes | 26% | 39% | 26% | 40% |
| Service Channel Satisfaction | ||||
| Government of Canada website | 75% | 61% | 75% | 61% |
| Email support from SC office | 74% | 60% | 75% | 59% |
| Email support from program officer | 87% | 77% | 85% | 78% |
| 76% | 53% | 79% | 50% | |
| Online web portal | 74% | 63% | 73% | 63% |
| Widest Gap in Service Attributes (% Rated 4/5 vs. Total) | Acknowledge Submission | Issue Payment | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aware | Not aware | Aware | Not aware | |
| It was clear what to do if I had a problem or question. | 75% | 54% | 76% | 54% |
| Throughout the process it was clear what would happen next and when it would happen. | 74% | 50% | 74% | 50% |
| I was confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved. | 75% | 57% | 76% | 56% |
| It was easy to get help when I needed it. | 73% | 55% | 74% | 54% |
| The amount of time it took, from when I started gathering information to when I got a decision on my application, was reasonable. | 71% | 49% | 69% | 49% |
79% of applicant organizations support at least one of the identity-based groups outlined. The most common groups supported are those who identify as women or a racial/ethnic minority.
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the funding the applicant applied for would support any identify-based communities, clients or people. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
EAF, NHSP and OFPwD applicant organizations were more likely to support those with a disability, SL/CF those who identify as Indigenous, while CSC and UT&IP applicant organizations were more likely to support multiple groups.
70% Assist GBA+, 69% Do Not
Satisfaction is consistent among applicants who assist GBA+ communities, however, they did experience more challenges with certain aspects of their experience.*
*the first figure in brackets relates to organizations that assist GBA+ communities, the second relates to organizations that do not.
2%: Very few applicants reported having felt discriminated against on the basis of identity during application process. Among those who felt discriminated, the most common grounds were race (30%) or religious identity (28%).
Would the funding you applied for assist any of the following communities, clients or people?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the funding the applicant applied for would support any identify-based communities, clients or people. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
Q34. Would the funding you applied for assist any of the following communities, clients or people?
70% Assist GBA+, 69% Do Not
Thinking about your experience with Service Canada, through out the entire application process, have you ever felt discriminated against on the basis of your identity? On which grounds did you feel discriminated against?
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about whether the applicant felt discriminated against on the basis of their identify through the application process and on which grounds they felt discriminated against.
Q43. Thinking about your experience with Service Canada, through out the entire application process, have you ever felt discriminated against on the basis of your identity?
Q44. On which grounds did you feel discriminated against?
Note: these questions were optional and applicants were not required to provide a response.
Note: Applicants were asked about the province or territory where their organization operates to better understand regional variation in results.
Service Canada operates in 5 regions however given applicants would be unaware of where their applications were processed it is difficult to capture regional satisfaction at that level.
Q31. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means very dissatisfied and 5 means very satisfied, how satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the overall service you received from Service Canada from getting information about [INSERT PROGRAM] to receiving a funding decision? Base: All respondents.
| Experienced a Problem | TOTAL | AB | BC | MB | NB | NL | NT | NS | NU | ON | PE | QC | SK | YT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Yes | 35% | 32% | 37% | 33% | 36% | 20% (significantly lower than total) | 23% | 25% (significantly lower than total) | 42% | 45% (significantly higher than total) | 26% | 30% | 32% | 40% |
| Funding Approval | ||||||||||||||
| % Approved | 90% | 91% | 87% | 88% | 93% | 90% | 90% | 90% | 87% | 88% | 83% | 91% | 88% | 90% |
| Service Channel Satisfaction | ||||||||||||||
| Email support from SC office | 65% | 67% | 58% | 61% | 69% | 70% | 58% | 77% (significantly higher than total) | 49% | 58% (significantly lower than total) | 60% | 66% | 60% | 53% |
| Government of Canada website | 66% | 66% | 59% | 64% | 63% | 67% | 70% | 73% | 75% | 64% | 75% | 68% | 69% | 69% |
| Email support from a program officer | 80% | 89% | 82% | 80% | 81% | 90% | 100% | 91% | 100% | 74% | 92% | 80% | 89% | 100% |
| Web portal | 67% | 63% | 63% | 69% | 72% | 76% | 74% | 72% | 83% | 64% | 83% | 72% | 70% | 69% |
| Widest Gap in Service Attributes (% Rated 4/5 vs. Total) | TOTAL | AB | BC | MB | NB | NL | NT | NS | NU | ON | PE | QC | SK | YT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I received consistent information | 72% | 68% | 67% | 65% | 71% | 73% | 65% | 78% | 39% (significantly lower than total) | 61% (significantly lower than total) | 63% | 83% (significantly higher than total) | 67% | 66% |
| It was easy to get help when I needed it | 61% | 62% | 54% | 60% | 56% | 67% | 64% | 71% (significantly higher than total) | 53% | 53% (significantly lower than total) | 54% | 70% (significantly higher than total) | 61% | 65% |
| I needed to explain my situation only once. | 62% | 67% | 62% | 61% | 60% | 72% | 72% | 73% (significantly higher than total) | 48% | 54% (significantly lower than total) | 64% | 69% (significantly higher than total) | 62% | 63% |
| I was confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved | 63% | 60% | 55% (significantly lower than total) | 56% | 58% | 67% | 42% | 77% (significantly higher than total) | 35% (significantly lower than total) | 55% (significantly lower than total) | 61% | 67% (significantly higher than total) | 61% | 43% |
| Throughout the process it was clear what would happen next and when it would happen | 58% | 56% | 50% (significantly lower than total) | 42% (significantly lower than total) | 56% | 59% | 33% | 62% | 11% (significantly lower than total) | 51% (significantly lower than total) | 34% (significantly lower than total) | 66% (significantly higher than total) | 47% | 35% |
| Total Number of Times of Contacting SC | TOTAL | AB | BC | MB | NB | NL | NT | NS | NU | ON | PE | QC | SK | YT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-3 times | 12% | 11% | 8% | 10% | 8% | 3% | 2% | 12% | - | 10% | 12% | 17% (significantly higher than total) | 9% | - |
| 4-6 times | 19% | 13% | 18% | 21% | 17% | 35% (significantly higher than total) | 16% | 23% | 21% | 15% (significantly lower than total) | 19% | 24% (significantly higher than total) | 23% | 17% |
| 7-9 times | 15% | 19% | 13% | 22% | 16% | 10% | 3% | 15% | 4% | 15% | 13% | 12% | 12% | 23% |
| 10+ times | 41% | 46% | 47% | 34% | 42% | 38% | 68% (significantly higher than total) | 38% | 62% | 48% (significantly higher than total) | 41% | 34% (significantly lower than total) | 40% | 48% |
| Length Of Time To Complete Application | TOTAL | AB | BC | MB | NB | NL | NT | NS | NU | ON | PE | QC | SK | YT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 to 7 days / one week | 70% | 66% | 64% | 70% | 60% (significantly lower than total) | 87% (significantly higher than total) | 72% | 78% | 74% | 62% (significantly lower than total) | 64% | 75% | 75% | 78% |
| 8 to 14 days / two weeks | 20% | 23% | 26% (significantly higher than total) | 21% | 26% | 9% | 25% | 18% | 19% | 24% | 27% | 17% | 17% | 15% |
| 15 to 21 days / three weeks | 6% | 6% | 8% | 4% | 11% | 1% | 3% | 3% | 4% | 7% | 7% | 5% | 4% | 5% |
| 22 to 31 days / one month | 3% | 4% | 2% | 3% | 2% | 2% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 4% | 3% | 1% (significantly lower than total) | 4% | 2% |
| More than 31 days / more than one month | 2% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | 1% | - | 1% | 2% | 3% | - | 2% | 1% | - |
| CLUSTER / PROGRAM COMPLEXITY LEVEL | DESCRIPTION (PROGRAM EXAMPLES) | BASE SIZE | |
|---|---|---|---|
| CSJ | Canada Summer Jobs | n= 942 | |
| Cluster 1 | Low complexity programs | Grant programs in the 112 days/16 week review period (e.g., Enabling Accessibility Fund, New Horizons for Seniors Program) | n=487 |
| Cluster 3 | Moderate delivery-complexity programs | Contribution streams in the 126 days/18 week review period (e.g., Canada Service Corps, Skills Link/Career Focus (Youth Employment and Skills Strategy (YESS)), Union Training and Innovation Program, Social Development Partnerships Program) | n=93 |
| Cluster 4 | High-delivery complexity programs | Contribution streams in the 154 days/22 week review period (e.g., Early Learning and Child Care Innovation, Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities) | n=27* |
| Service Channel Satisfaction | TOTAL | CSJ | CLUSTER 1 | CLUSTER 3 | CLUSTER 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Government of Canada website | 66% | 65% | 71% (significantly higher than total) | 50% (significantly lower than total) | 58% |
| Email support from a Service Canada office | 65% | 64% | 71% (significantly higher than total) | 58% | 42% (significantly lower than total) |
| Email support from a program officer | 80% | 80% | 82% | 82% | 57% (significantly lower than total) |
| Widest Gap in Service Attributes (% Rated 4/5 vs. Total) | TOTAL | CSJ | CLUSTER 1 | CLUSTER 3 | CLUSTER 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Completing the budget document (in the application) | 77% | 68% | 62% | 44% (significantly lower than total) | 41% (significantly lower than total) |
| Completing the final budget (post-agreement) | 70% | 71% | 67% | 50% (significantly lower than total) | 48% (significantly lower than total) |
| Meeting the requirements of the application | 77% | 79% | 70% (significantly lower than total) | 57% (significantly lower than total) | 59% (significantly lower than total) |
| Understand the information about the program | 76% | 76% | 80% | 58% (significantly lower than total) | 43% (significantly lower than total) |
| Completing the final project report | 72% | 73% | 63% | 55% (significantly lower than total) | 43% (significantly lower than total) |
| Determine if your organization is eligible for funding | 83% | 83% | 84% | 69% (significantly lower than total) | 57% (significantly lower than total) |
| Total Number of Times Contacting SC | TOTAL | CSJ | CLUSTER 1 | CLUSTER 3 | CLUSTER 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-3 times | 12% | 12% | 17% (significantly higher than total) | 9% | 7% |
| 4-6 times | 19% | 19% | 23% (significantly higher than total) | 9% (significantly lower than total) | 3% (significantly lower than total) |
| 7-9 times | 15% | 15% | 16% | 4% (significantly lower than total) | 6% |
| 10+ times | 41% | 42% | 29% (significantly lower than total) | 60% (significantly higher than total) | 65% (significantly higher than total) |
| Length of Time to Complete Application | |||||
| 1 to 7 days / one week | 70% | 76% (significantly higher than total) | 32% (significantly lower than total) | 16% (significantly lower than total) | 13% (significantly lower than total) |
| 8 to 14 days / two weeks | 20% | 18% | 34% (significantly higher than total) | 33% (significantly higher than total) | 28% |
| 15 to 21 days / three weeks | 6% | 4% | 19% (significantly higher than total) | 27% (significantly higher than total) | 19% (significantly higher than total) |
| 22 to 31 days / one month | 3% | 1% | 10% (significantly higher than total) | 15% (significantly higher than total) | 28% (significantly higher than total) |
| More than 31 days / more than one month | 2% | 1% | 5% (significantly higher than total) | 10% (significantly higher than total) | 13% (significantly higher than total) |
| Funding Approval | TOTAL | CSJ | CLUSTER 1 | CLUSTER 3 | CLUSTER 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Approved | 90% | 92% | 79% (significantly lower than total) | 79% (significantly lower than total) | 75% (significantly lower than total) |
| Service Channel Satisfaction | TOTAL | NONE | 1-9 | 10-49 | 50+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Email support from a Service Canada office | 65% | 80% (significantly higher than total) | 66% | 61% | 56% (significantly lower than total) |
| Telephone support from a Service Canada office | 61% | 75% (significantly higher than total) | 66% | 55% | 47% |
| Widest Gap in Service Attributes (% Rated 4/5 vs. Total) | TOTAL | NONE | 1-9 | 10-49 | 50+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Service Canada phone representatives were helpful | 72% | 73% | 77% | 75% | 40% (significantly lower than total) |
| It was easy to get help when I needed it | 61% | 63% | 62% | 63% | 52% (significantly lower than total) |
| It was clear what to do if I had a problem or question | 62% | 70% (significantly higher than total) | 62% | 61% | 53% (significantly lower than total) |
| The amount of time it took was reasonable | 56% | 62% | 57% | 56% | 48% (significantly lower than total) |
| I was confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved | 63% | 73% (significantly higher than total) | 64% | 59% | 58% (significantly lower than total) |
| I needed to explain my situation only once | 62% | 70% (significantly higher than total) | 63% | 60% | 56% |
| Experienced a Problem | TOTAL | NONE | 1-9 | 10-49 | 50+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| % Yes | 35% | 33% | 33% | 35% | 43% (significantly higher than total) |
| Length of Time to Complete Application | |||||
| 1 to 7 days / one week | 70% | 55% (significantly lower than total) | 72% | 75% | 58% (significantly lower than total) |
| 8 to 14 days / two weeks | 20% | 26% (significantly higher than total) | 19% | 19% | 23% |
| 15 to 21 days / three weeks | 6% | 12% (significantly higher than total) | 5% | 4% | 11% (significantly higher than total) |
| 22 to 31 days / one month | 3% | 4% | 3% | 1% | 4% |
| More than 31 days / more than one month | 2% | 3% | 1% | 1% | 4% (significantly higher than total) |
| Application Frequency | TOTAL | NONE | 1-9 | 10-49 | 50+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First application | 13% | 20% | 15% | 10% | 7% (significantly lower than total) |
| Applied once or twice before | 20% | 25% | 20% | 19% | 16% |
| Applied several times before | 26% | 24% | 26% | 26% | 26% |
| Apply for the same program on a annual basis | 41% | 32% (significantly lower than total) | 39% | 45% | 50% (significantly higher than total) |
| Role in application | |||||
| I am solely responsible | 44% | 30% (significantly lower than total) | 48% | 48% | 32% (significantly lower than total) |
| I am part of a team of employees | 27% | 1% (significantly lower than total) | 19% (significantly lower than total) | 39% (significantly higher than total) | 55% (significantly higher than total) |
| I am part of a team of both employees and volunteers | 12% | 1% (significantly lower than total) | 17% (significantly higher than total) | 10% | 12% |
| Our organization is heavily dependent on volunteers | 16% | 67% (significantly higher than total) | 17% | 3% (significantly lower than total) | 0% (significantly lower than total) |
| I am not personally involved although I oversee this, or have some awareness | 0.4% | 1% | 0.2% | 0.4% | 0.8% |
| Sector | TOTAL | NONE | 1-9 | 10-49 | 50+ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Not-for-profit (NET) | 77% | 94% (significantly higher than total) | 82% (significantly higher than total) | 69% (significantly lower than total) | 67% (significantly lower than total) |
| Public Sector (NET) | 14% | 10% | 9% (significantly lower than total) | 17% | 34% (significantly higher than total) |
| Private Sector (NET) | 19% | 12% (significantly lower than total) | 20% | 23% | 13% |
| Service Channel Satisfaction | TOTAL | Not-for-Profit | Public | Private |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Email support from a Service Canada office | 65% | 65% | 67% | 63% |
| Government of Canada website | 66% | 66% | 62% | 62% |
| Web portal | 67% | 68% | 62% | 66% |
| Email support from a program officer | 80% | 80% | 83% | 78% |
| Widest Gap in Service Attributes (% Rated 4/5 vs. Total) | TOTAL | Not-for-Profit | Public | Private |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I was able to move smoothly through all of the steps | 70% | 70% | 57% (significantly lower than total) | 68% |
| It was easy to get help when I needed it | 61% | 63% | 60% | 54% (significantly lower than total) |
| Overall, it was easy for me to apply for program | 74% | 75% | 66% (significantly lower than total) | 69% |
| I received consistent information | 72% | 72% | 74% | 65% (significantly lower than total) |
| Understanding the requirements of the application | 73% | 74% | 65% (significantly lower than total) | 70% |
| Putting together the information you needed to apply for program | 69% | 70% | 68% | 62% (significantly lower than total) |
| Completing the narrative questions | 64% | 66% | 56% (significantly lower than total) | 54% (significantly lower than total) |
| Understand the information about program | 76% | 77% | 65% (significantly lower than total) | 73% |
| Determine if your organization is eligible for program funding | 83% | 85% | 74% (significantly lower than total) | 76% (significantly lower than total) |
| Determine the steps to apply for funding | 78% | 79% | 70% | 70% (significantly lower than total) |
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about how often the applicant uses online services such as online banking, shopping, and bill payments. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about which official language the applicant’s organization prefers to receive service in. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This horizontal bar chart shows the proportion of surveys completed by applicants in English and French. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about the role the individual who responded to the survey played as it relates to completing the application for funding. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about whether this was the applicant organization’s first application or if they had applied to the program in the past. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how many employees work (full-time or part-time) for the applicant’s organization. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This vertical bar chart shows responses to a question about how many volunteers work (full-time or part-time) for the applicant’s organization. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
This horizontal bar chart shows responses to a question about what sector the applicant’s organization operates in. All 1549 respondents answered as follows:
ESDC programs enable a range of projects for a variety of applicants.
Satisfaction with awareness and information was driven by ease and having ESDC be proactive and/or responsive.
Awareness: There were various channels through which applicants found out about available programs – many heard directly from ESDC, having applied in previous years for the same program. Otherwise, applicants typically found out about programs through a mix of internal or external resources, previous experience, and internet searches.
Highlights were that hearing from ESDC directly was appreciated. Hearing directly was a timely and accurate reminder for applicants.
Challenges were a lack of awareness of available programs and a lack of proactive outreach to first-time applicants.
Information: Applicants found information directly on the ESDC website, through an information webinar with ESDC, through a local ESDC program officer, through their MLA or MP office, or through calling 1-800 OCANADA.
Highlights were easily finding the required information needed to fill out the application online or through a consistent ESDC program officer.
Challenges were being unable to find the required information on the ESDC website, and/or attempting to make contact with someone at ESDC and being unable to do so.
There were a wide range of client service experiences in applying for a grant or contribution from ESDC.
Application Process: Applying to a program can be a time-consuming pursuit that can take place over a period of several weeks including information gathering/consulting with colleagues and partners, filling out the application, and submitting it.
There were differences in experiences across various factors including:
Confidence levels varied and this was not necessarily tied to these factors and was more whether their applications were ultimately successful; even those with more experience can feel uncertainty from year to year depending on whether they were funded or not the previous year.
Highlights:
Challenges:
Confidence in receiving a timely decision and clarity in where their application was in the process were contributing factors to their satisfaction.
Follow-Up and Decision: General perceptions were that there is currently no means through which to know the status of their application. Levels of confidence and certainty varied – while some were fine to wait for an extended period to hear about a decision, others expressed a desire to receive regular updates or “track” their application as it is being processed.
Most were unaware of the published service standards for acknowledgment of application and payment. When these were read, experiences aligned with standards for most, although there were a few for whom they did not align.
Highlights were in being given a second chance to optimize or address sections in their application. The responsiveness of local Service Canada officers was appreciated although they were unable to provide an update or decision. Most were satisfied with the channel through which they received a decision – typically by phone or email.
Challenges were in the timing of the decision and any effect this may have – such that their vendor quotes had expired/changed, or they did not feel they had sufficient time to hire a student or kept a student waiting to let them know. Additionally, general disappointment and uncertainty about why their application was unfunded and not being provided with any information such that it could be improved for future submissions was also a challenge.
Monitoring and close-out is typically straightforward.
Comfort with monitoring and close-out was most positive among those familiar with funding processes and in the role of program managers in their organization. They were not asked for more information than for any other performance measurement requirements and understood the need for accountability from a taxpayer’s perspective.
There was mention that the process has become more onerous and bureaucratic over time due to an increasing amount of requirements for these phases of the program.
For GBA+, the general feeling was that applications for funding, both at an organizational and personal level, were unaffected by their identities.
Some were conscious of their privilege and so this question did not feel relevant to them; a few had difficulty understanding the question and this appeared common amongst older participants; mention was made about whether their identities were a factor in being unfunded; and there were a few instances where tension with the funding application process arose from a specific identity.
There were two distinct themes that emerged in shaping an ideal client experience.
An ideal client experience typically involves communication with a representative by telephone or online chat and being able to reach an actual person. Some participants preferred one central point of contact to turn to with questions rather than having a different person each time.
“Being able to speak to an officer in real time or even using chat function, while interacting online.”
« Je dirais qu'idéalement, ce serait d'avoir "un être humain à l'autre bout de la ligne" et peut-être un dossier pré-rempli avec nos informations de base. »
There was general agreement that a user-friendly platform improves a client’s experience with services. When asked about examples of an ideal client experience, some mentioned their experiences with financial services companies, such as Stripe and online banking apps. Other features and functions mentioned by participants were:
“A user-friendly portal, for sure. If you have to do it online, I think simplicity in the technology you use is important, that everyone should be able to submit the application.”
“I would say most financial institutions with their, online banking. They understand that the way of their future is online transactions, so they need to make it as user-friendly as possible. So, being able to download your own PAD form or update your information on your own or transfer money between various accounts, print your statements – they make it pretty clear.”
Clear communications in terms of written correspondence and forms needing to be completed
Timely and regular follow-up and updates to avoid any confusion or frustrations
Online tools that are easy to access and navigate
Foster an environment where people feel valued and ensure customers have adequate resources and support
The importance of ensuring timelines in the anticipated decision process are respected was mentioned by many as predictability is key for internal planning processes.
« Connaître le calendrier des échéanciers de manière transparente, justement. On le sait que c’est à peu près en avril, mai, à peu près, mais ça varie beaucoup! »
While some preferred digital services, some asked for some human interaction in order to help them with questions or concerns, and to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their application development.
“Ideal – to be able to talk to someone to answer questions about the application process.”
Based on participants’ experience with private sectors, there was demand for easy-to-use digital tools developed by government in order to simplify the application process and to enhance their application experience.
“In terms of the customer service that would be helpful is less reliance on complicated platforms. We are still struggling with this.”
There were some suggestions for improving web accessibility in order to promote equal opportunity to people with accessibility to apply.
“So there’s different ways to apply and I think …you want to remove barriers to applications. Really making it, all the ways of communication accessible, be they online or in person.”
Small organizations and businesses became aware of available programs by accident or searching on Google.
“It was all internet research, so mostly Google research. I didn’t know what you needed to qualify for them, so that was more just Google self-research than it was specifically targeted advertising or anything like that.”
Participants in rural or remote communities speak of their reliance on their local MP to provide direction on upcoming opportunities that might best fit their needs - MPs who proactively reach out to constituents suggesting grants and contributions that might be of interest.
“We always receive the application from them or from our MP or other community partners.”
Newer applicants found out through “word of mouth.” Colleagues in their organization or in other organizations let them know about the program.
“Somehow, I heard about it from an NGO, I think it was a literacy NGO.”
Past year applicants spoke of receiving ESDC alerts (newsletters and emails), or info pushes on social media.
“When programs open it's getting announced on social media…there was just actually a call for proposals open and because I had applied last year and got rejected, I actually got an email to apply again this year.”
Email: There were several applicants who have contacted Service Canada by email and received no response or found it slow to respond.
Website: Others have tried to obtain more information through the website, but they were required to visit GCOS, which they found was difficult to navigate.
“I’m emailing any address of any human at the Service Canada that has been involved in the New Horizons program, saying, can you be of help? … I got no answer for a length of time.”
“You are ultimately required to go through GCOS and it is not user friendly.”
Awareness of 1-800 OCANADA was low.
Amongst those who had tried it, they found it less efficient/useful.
“It's too general. I think the last time I called in for something, I like literally put in these search terms and then I'm like, it's not helpful.”
“I've tried both and email tends to be more efficient. I think they even ask you to email rather than leave a message....”
Local MP: Amongst French speaking participants, their levels of familiarity with the process and ability to access information required in order to apply were largely dependent on their local MP office’s involvement.
« Ils [son député]ont communiqué avec moi, mais ils savent qu’on fait des demandes à Nouveaux Horizons de ce temps-ci. Mais on cherchait un programme d’accessibilité. Quand ils en ont vu passer un, ils nous l’ont fait parvenir. »
In terms of the experience of applying, there was a mix of responses – everything from being really comfortable with the application having applied and being funded for many years, to feeling stressed and frustrated with the application process and everything in between. Differences emerged across a few factors:
Non-profit applicants are much more likely to understand why all the information is needed and are used to this type of requirements.
On the other hand, business applicants expressed surprise at level of detail being asked – they were more likely to struggle with the application regardless of which program they applied to.
There were also differences by programs. Canada Summer Jobs was considered very straightforward by non-profit applicants.
Meanwhile, New Horizons Senior Program applications were more difficult to fill out for many.
First time applicants typically had a higher degree of uncertainty.
There was a sense of ambiguity and uncertainty about the application process – whether they are doing it correctly and whether or not it will result in a funded project.
There were some mentions of having a relationship with their local Service Canada office and someone there who assists them with their applications, answers questions, as well as other steps within the application process.
“I have reached out to the program officer that I know or have last been in contact with and ask questions if I have clarifying questions. And with those clarifying questions, if they aren’t able to answer, they usually will go and reach out, and get the information and come back to me to give me clarification.”
“I went into our local Service Canada representative, and she was very helpful. And then I wrote up the grant and I sent it to her to look at. She had a lot of critique, and that was great. She was very helpful, and over the years, I've met with her on a number of occasions.”
“I find strange that, for example, applications from BC are reviewed by someone in, say, Regina, or elsewhere.”
Mentions were made that the biggest challenge is in how to write the application such that it maximizes the chance of success (i.e. being funded) – whether it needs to be a business style, descriptive, level of detail, types of details, and keywords.
For those who are unsuccessful in receiving funding in one year, they will often try another approach and adapt the content the following year. This is all true even amongst those who attended a workshop for NHSP.
“I did the application a year ago and spent a lot of time on it but it wasn’t successful. The gentleman who did the current application now with Service Canada, he did that for the very first time and shared with me some of his perspective that I’ll build into my input today.”
Content and writing style is often the key area in which applicants seek assistance or support from others – either those who are experienced with similar or the same application, or amongst their internal colleagues where they collectively determine what they are going to write and how their projects will be positioned in the application. Ultimately though, the writing itself is generally a solo endeavor.
“This year I did a lot more with help, there was a teleconference which told us, you know, helped us with our wordings, there was a document writing thing attachment sent out. There was a person who is thoroughly invested in us getting the money so he gave us basically a template to work from with the adjustments for our own stuff.”
It was also evident that less experienced applicants tended to feel that the applications were repetitive or surprised when asked for more details. Even experienced applicants conceded that some of the language can be confusing for someone doing it first time e.g., different between an output and an outcome.
“Probably more around the language that’s used. It’s a legal document say, like, if this isn’t done, you risk losing funding. And I get it, because it’s easy to have the ball dropped, and people will just to expect things to kind of be handed to them, so we definitely need to do our part, but I think language like that also makes you question, well, are they gonna look for any reason to not give me funding.”
Amongst those who chose to submit their application online, some considered it easy via the G&C portal/webpage.
For others, getting onto GCOS was a significant challenge – issues encountered include:
For the actual submission and confirmation, few issues emerged. Most who applied online/by email were confident that their application had been received as they received an auto-reply confirmation.
“With the Service Canada portal, it was a little bit challenging to navigate, you have to get your business CRA login, and then you have to create, like, different IDs to get into the portal. So, it’s kind of like this long process.”
“Sometimes on this particular site things are arrowed and you click on it to reveal what's below and I would encourage, and I know that helps because it doesn't make your pages so long, but I'm actually going to highlight that. That might be a problem for screen readers.”
Others chose to print, fill and scan their applications or hand write them.
Regardless of which avenue they chose, those who applied for NHSP felt it was important that there are different options provided, especially for seniors, who may not have the technical facility, or access to a computer/internet to fill out the application online.
However those who applied by mailing their application did not receive any confirmation.
“I think in particular for a program like New Horizons for Seniors that is really it's a program that's intended to be, community facing, you want to remove barriers to applications. I think having different ways to apply for a program like this that is very much intended to directly serve the public and be very public facing, I think that's really important.”
“Federally the online process was frustrating. I ended up printing it off and sending my courier to Fredericton. The computer capability in our organization isn’t sophisticated. The application I sent the old style way, which many senior organizations in rural Canada, would probably be in that same boat.”
Having information about how many applications are being considered might be helpful in making an informed decision about whether or not to apply – if there are fewer applications and they thought their chances were better as a result, they would be more likely to consider applying.
Others also mentioned the difficulties they encountered when filling in the pricing fields. They were seen as overly complex with locked Excel sheets that makes it hard to make revisions, and asking for a lot of details (e.g. detail required from contractors on the 3 quotes requirement).
There was a mix of experiences during the follow-up phase of an application. Some mentioned that unless the program follows up, they do not wish to get in touch and create unnecessary work for project officers. They understand that these things take time and they recognized that there is only so much manpower to process applications, even though a speedier response would be more ideal.
Those who did follow up with their local ESDC/Service Canada office to find out about their decision did not generally find it very helpful. The local office does not make the decision – rather the decisions are made in Ottawa and so there was little that could be done to know more or expedite the process.
“I actually emailed to go like, hey, what's happening? And then, I'm not sure, I think likely it was delayed because COVID happened at the beginning of March and then they did a pivot for programs. The timelines were a little confusing.”
There were mentions of being given a second chance to optimize or address sections, while mention was made of an experience of not hearing for months and then being asked for follow-up information regarding the application by ESDC and being given a very short window to do so, and this was a point of frustration. Follow-ups from ESDC can result in surprise, since they perceived their first application as comprehensive.
“It was definitely, the gentleman who emailed us was very straightforward, and he just, here we go, “Missing information on your Canada Summer Jobs application. I was glad that they reached out. So, I was glad that we did get a second opportunity to kind of revamp a couple of the answers.”
Some applicants would have liked more regular and timely communication in terms of where their application was in the decision-making matrix (in order to avoid the need for unnecessary follow-ups and worry).
This could be addressed through regular updates or the ability to ‘track’ their application as it makes its way through internal ESDC channels. Having said this, most acknowledge the need for, the importance and the expectation of a thorough decision-making process – there is an understanding that these are taxpayer dollars and therefore due diligence in the decision-making process is key.
“Ensuring there are updates on the application – even if there’s no update to give. There are workflows that can be put into place to ensure people are updated. We have to, when you apply for a grant, you do have to do it through your Service Canada account. So, you can log in and check on it, but I think it would be very beneficial for that portal to be able to send regular notifications, being, like, your application is still being processed… we anticipate to have an answer to you by this day.”
Unaided mentions were made of wanting more contextual information about the number of applicants as this would be helpful in understanding what their chances were, and in general, receiving more information than just being informed of being unfunded – as having more information would inform their decision to apply in future, and if/how they would change anything within their application.
“Honestly, it would be part not knowing, I wouldn't know the volume of the applications for this program, and honestly, as I understand it, ESDC probably didn’t even know it, as being the first year that Canada Service Corps was offered. So, yeah, in terms of giving the 50/50 odds, that more reflects not really knowing how big the applicant pool would be, how big the applicant pool would be compared to the ultimate number that would be selected.”
Decisions were received by email or phone and most were satisfied with the channel through which the decision was communicated. However, timing of the decision could be problematic – for example, funded applicants for CSJ might only have a few days to hire a student where the ideal to find a suitable candidate would be a month.
Conversely, an unfunded applicant may have a suitable candidate who is waiting for funding, only to find out that their application was unsuccessful.
Receiving the goods news from an MP was a nice touch for those where this happens, this tends to skew to smaller communities.
“We get notification that we were successful, and the money comes quickly, the funding comes through quickly, I’m not concerned about any of that. But it is, the timeline from when they decide, to when the job starts with Canada Summer Jobs, is not much time, especially when you're talking about having to hire somebody, post, and hire, and interview. That’s a process.”
« On attend. Puis, la réponse devient 100 %, des fois, c’est du bureau du député!...c’est le bureau du député qui m’informe de la décision. »
There was some notable aggravation towards the perceived extended period waiting to hear back with no means to check the status of an application. For those who received quotes from suppliers to their program that expired or changed in the time it took to hear back about a decision. In the case of CSJ applicants, it meant that the available pool of students applying for a summer job starts to dwindle.
“No communication, lack of communication, right? That for me, that would be poor, and the system doesn't work, so you're frustrated because you can’t get it to work, and there’s no contact people. That would probably, I wouldn't even apply if it was that complicated.”
“That always takes a long time. It never seems to go as quickly as they say it will. It would be great if they could make decisions more quickly. I recognize they get a lot of applications, and there’s a lot of decision to be made, and so forth, but it is challenging when you're an organization, a charity, you've got to plan, say you've collected your partners, you've got everybody excited about it, you're trying to keep people interested, especially for us it was Indigenous.”
Comfort with monitoring and close-out was mostly positive among those familiar with funding processes and in the role of program managers in their organization. These participants were well versed in the field of program performance measurement and did not feel they were asked to collect or provide information above and beyond what they would normally do. Moreover, there is very little resistance in having to do this from a taxpayer accountability perspective.
Mention was also made by an experienced client who has been funded over an extended period for EAF that the monitoring process has become increasingly onerous and restrictive over the years, in that they are asked for progressively more frequent amendments or information, and that there seems to be a desire for greater accountability which has become so challenging that it is in itself a barrier to participating in the program.
“We have 30-days to prepare the final report. No problem with it.”
“I think that that’s important. I think again, these are taxpayers’ dollars, and I certainly appreciate that we’re very lucky to receive that funding, and I want to make sure that people know that we’re doing a good job.”
“Now, there’s a lot of changes to that particular fund, and a lot of rules, and a lot of things that it seems like we don’t know until we’re going along, and then they’re like, “You can’t do that, you can’t do that. No, you can’t do that.” […] Sometimes, we actually say in-house, if it wasn’t for our clients, why are we doing this? Do we want to keep doing this every year? Should we give up this time, because it’s so heavily monitored now, and the rules are very, very strict, so that we can’t do things that we used to do to help clients.”
“I’m happy with it. We probably collect more data than they ask for…And you know right from the get-go what they want you to report on, so that’s helpful. And they have a number that you can call if you need help. I do find that process is fine.”
“I sent out an email describing the problem, and they said, “Great, here’s an amended agreement, just sign on the dotted line.” So, it was very easy.”
“There have been times where they have reached out for clarification but it seems to be hit and miss whether that happens and it's usually once you've submitted.”
“I did report on time when requested, all my reports went in, but I got, initially, a lot of them back saying that they were incorrect and I filled them out wrong. Again, it’s no fault of the ESDC, it’s just the forms that I wasn’t familiar with, and a first-time use, and I found them a little confusing.”
“The Summer Student, usually they will email you saying, ‘You need to submit your final report on your student.’ And with the New Horizons, it has a timeline outlined in the grant process.”
“It was straightforward. It was reviewing what we’d applied for and knowing what we said we were going to do was on target. That was easy. It wasn’t challenging at all from my perspective.”
“The info they were looking for was to review the project and ask how it’s going and whether there are any changes. The questions were specific to what you had applied for.”
“They’re very transparent in the information that they’re looking for. They’re very accommodating in, you know, for us trying to understand the information that they want from us. We have a good working relationship, it’s a very respectful, appreciative relationship.”
The general feeling was that applications for funding, both at an organizational and personal level, were unaffected by their identities.
“I’ve never sensed that my own individual…would have anything to do with the application process.”
A few did not understand the questions about GBA+ as they were not aware of the idea of varying identities. This appeared most common with older participants – younger people were better versed in the language of personal and social identities.
“The government seems to confuse us with their requirements /or preference about helping visible minorities for funding.”
Some were conscious of their privilege – e.g. “I am a white female, the second most privileged group after white male” – and somewhat dismissed the relevance of this question to them personally.
“I would say, if anything, I'm at an advantage because I'm white Canadian and my first language is English.”
Mention was made amongst a few who have personal and social identities who were unfunded as to whether these were a factor in the decision.
“When the application gets rejected, we wonder if it was due to the social identity?”
The few instances where tension with the funding application process arose from a specific identify included:
“There are a lot of First Nations in that they, we share that area, and we are quite, quite adept in meeting, and we meet on a regular basis with First Nations people to try to get them in. And we’re very successful in having First Nations people come in and participate in our programs. We have a very high percentage of membership that are First Nations. But if you walk down our streets being in Sudbury, we don’t have that many immigrants that are, like you would see in Toronto. So, my immigration numbers are flat.”
“The biggest thing is the laws of the land do not allow us to ask personal questions on race, religion, colour, gender. We hire as they come in according to their resumes, CVs. We’re in construction, I mean it’s very difficult, I mean how would you feel if you said, “Oh, we’re hiring pilots”, and someone who unfortunately is blind showed up to apply to be a pilot?”
Would you prefer to continue the survey in English or French? Please select one.
Introduction
Ipsos, a market research firm, is conducting a survey on behalf of the Government of Canada. Through this survey we are reaching out to applicants who are currently or have recently applied for funding to a program delivered by Service Canada (part of the Department of Employment and Social Development Canada).
The purpose of the survey is for us to better understand your needs and expectations around the quality of service you received. We also want to understand what is most important to you and identify potential changes to our services that would improve your satisfaction or experience. The survey does not concern the amount of funding you received, but rather it explores your experience during the application process from beginning to end.
Your participation in the survey is voluntary. Your feedback is anonymous and confidential, and will not affect any dealings you may have with the Government of Canada. The information you provide will be used for research purposes only and will be administered in accordance with applicable privacy laws.
The survey should take approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete. By completing the survey, you agree that the information and feedback you provide will be used for service delivery improvements and research purposes.
Should you wish to verify the credibility of this survey, you can reach those responsible for the survey at Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) directly by emailing pob.ri.dgop@canada.gc.ca.
Programs [for IPSOS reference only]| English | French |
|---|---|
| PROGRAM | PROGRAMME |
| Enabling Accessibility Fund | Fonds pour l'accessibilité |
| New Horizons for Seniors Program | Programme Nouveaux Horizons pour les aînés |
| Canada Summer Jobs | Emplois d'été Canada |
| Skills Link/Career Focus (Youth Employment and Skills Strategy (YESS)) | Connexion compétences/Objectif carrière (La Stratégie emploi et compétences jeunesse (SECJ)) |
| Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities | Fonds d'intégration pour les personnes handicapées |
| Canada Service Corps | Service jeunesse Canada |
| Union Training and Innovation Program | Programme pour la formation et l'innovation en milieu syndical |
| Early Learning and Child Care Innovation | Innovation en matière d'apprentissage et de garde des jeunes enfants |
| Social Development Partnerships Program | Programme de partenariats pour le développement social |
1. To start, please confirm which funding program your organization applied to and received a funding decision for (either funded or not funded). The remainder of the survey will refer to the selected funding program. Please select one. If you applied to multiple programs, select the most recent one.
Enabling Accessibility Fund
New Horizons for Seniors Program
Canada Summer Jobs
Skills Link/Career Focus
Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities
Canada Service Corps
Union Training and Innovation Program
Early Learning and Child Care Innovation
Social Development Partnerships Program
[RESPONSES TO Q1 TO BE USED FOR PROGRAM INSERTS THROUGHOUT]
Pre-application—Information Gathering about Program
2. Which of the following did you use to find out about [INSERT PROGRAM] before you applied? Consider all the methods you used to learn about the program before filling out the application. Please select all that apply.
[RANDOMIZE. ALWAYS KEEP ‘Went online to the Government of Canada website’, ‘Went online to websites for other levels of government (provincial, territorial or municipal)’, AND ‘Went online to other websites’ GROUPED]
Went online to the Government of Canada website (servicecanada.gc.ca)
Went online to websites for other levels of government (provincial, territorial or municipal)
Went online to other websites
Used social media to get information
Called a Service Canada office directly
Called 1800 O Canada phone line
Emailed a Service Canada office
Emailed a Program Officer directly
Went to a Service Canada office
Participated in a Government of Canada information session or webinar
Talked to my local Member of Parliament (MP)
Talked to my peers/community network
Received an email from the funding program directly
NONE OF THESE [EXCLUSIVE; ANCHOR]
[IF Q2= ‘‘NONE OF THESE’/DK/REF SKIP TO Q6]
[IF Q2 ‘WENT ONLINE TO THE GOVERNMENT WEBSITE’, ASK Q3, Q4 AND Q5, OTHERWISE SKIP]
3. Did you find what you wanted from the Government of Canada website when you were looking for information before you applied?
Yes
No
[IF NO ASK Q4 OTHERWISE SKIP]
4. You indicated you weren’t able to find the information you wanted from the Government of Canada website. Did you take any of the following steps to find what were looking for? Please select all that apply
[RANDOMIZE. ALWAYS KEEP ‘Went online to websites for other levels of government (provincial, territorial or municipal)’, AND ‘Went online to other websites’ GROUPED]
Went online to websites for other levels of government (provincial, territorial or municipal)
Went online to other websites
Used social media to get information
Called a Service Canada office directly
Called 1800 O Canada phone line
Emailed a Service Canada office
Emailed a Program Officer directly
Went to a Service Canada office
Talked to my local Member of Parliament
Talked to my peers/community network
NONE OF THESE [EXCLUSIVE; ANCHOR]
5. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how difficult or easy was it to find the following information about [INSERT PROGRAM] on the Government of Canada website? Select one response per item.
[ROWS. RANDOMIZE]
Find general information about [INSERT PROGRAM]
Understand the information about [INSERT PROGRAM]
Determine if your organization is eligible for [INSERT PROGRAM] funding
Determine the steps to apply for funding
Find out what information you need to provide when applying for [INSERT PROGRAM]]
[COLUMNS]
1 – Very difficult
2
3
4
5 – Very easy
Don’t know
Application Process—Applying for Funding
6. To prepare and complete your application (up until when you submitted) did you consult with any of the following? Please select all that apply.
[RANDOMIZE][MULTIPUNCH]
Went online to the Government of Canada website (servicecanada.gc.ca)
Went to a Service Canada office
Called a Service Canada office directly
Called 1800 OCanada phone line
Used social media to get information
Went online to other websites for information
Talked to my peers/ community network
Emailed a Service Canada office
Emailed a Program Officer directly
Participated in a Government of Canada information session or webinar
Talked to my local Member of Parliament (MP)
NONE OF THESE [EXCLUSIVE; ANCHOR]
7. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how would you rate the following elements of the application for [INSERT PROGRAM]? Select one response per item.
[ROWS. RANDOMIZE]
Understanding the requirements of the application
Putting together the information you needed to apply for [INSERT PROGRAM]
Completing the narrative questions (i.e. funding objectives, description of project, scope of project, etc.)
Completing the budget document
Completing the project timeline
Meeting the requirements of the application
[COLUMNS]
1 – Very difficult
2
3
4
5 – Very easy
Don’t know
8. How long did it take you to prepare and complete your application overall? If you are uncertain, please provide your best guess.
1 to 7 days / one week
8 to 14 days / two weeks
15 to 21 days / three weeks
22 to 31 days / one month
More than 31 days / more than one month
9. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is strongly disagree and 5 is strongly agree, please rate the following statement:
The application took a reasonable amount of time to complete.
1 – Strongly disagree
2
3
4
5 – Strongly agree
Don’t know
10. Which of the following methods did you use to submit your application? Please select only one.
Online application using [INSERT PROGRAM] web portal
Downloaded application documents and submitted by email
Downloaded application documents and submitted by mail
Submitted to a Service Canada office
Submitted on my behalf by my local Member of Parliament
NONE OF THESE [EXCLUSIVE; ANCHOR]
[IF NONE OF THESE SKIP TO Q13 OTHERWISE CONTINUE.]
11. Why did you choose this method to submit your application? Please select one reason only.
[RANDONMIZE]
It was the only method available
It was the easiest/most familiar way to apply
I felt more confident my application would be submitted properly
It was the method I was directed to use
I did not know any other way to apply
Other
[IF USED ‘Online application using [INSERT PROGRAM] web portal’ AT Q10 ASK Q12, OTHERWISE SKIP TO Q13]
12. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means very difficult and 5 means very easy. How difficult or easy was it to submit your application online?
1 – Very difficult
2
3
4
5 – Very easy
Don’t know
13. After you submitted your application, were you contacted by Service Canada to provide additional information to support your application?
Yes
No
Don’t know
[IF YES TO Q13 ASK Q14, OTHERWISE SKIP]
14. Why were you contacted by Service Canada? Select all that apply.
[RANDOMIZE]
Missing documents or information in my application
Clarify information in my application
Budget template needed modifications
My organization or project was not eligible
An outstanding issue with a previous application
Other reason
Don’t know
Post-application—Decision
15. Did you contact Service Canada for any of the following reasons before receiving your funding decision? Select all that apply.
Check the status of your application
Find out timelines for receiving a funding decision
Withdraw your application
Modify application
Other reason
Don’t know
[IF “DON’T KNOW” WAS SELECTED FOR Q15, SKIP TO Q17, OTHEWISE CONTINUE]
16. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how was your experience following up with Service Canada about your application?
1 – Very difficult
2
3
4
5 – Very easy
Don’t know
17. How were you notified of the funding decision about your application for [INSERT PROGRAM]? Please select one.
[RANDOMIZE]
By mail
By e-mail
By receiving a direct deposit
Online through the [INSERT PROGRAM] web portal
By telephone
From my local Member of Parliament (MP)
I did not receive a funding decision
[IF I DID NOT RECEIVE A FUNDING DECISION, SKIP TO Q25]
18. After you submitted your application to [INSERT PROGRAM], did your organization receive approval for funding?
Yes
No
[IF NO TO Q18, ASK Q19 AND Q20, AND SKIP Q21-24]
[IF YES TO Q18, SKIP Q19 AND Q20 AND ASK Q21 AND Q22]
19. You indicated that your organization did not receive an approval for funding. Did you receive an explanation why?
Yes
No
Don’t know
[IF YES ASK Q20, OTHERWISE SKIP]
20. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is very dissatisfied and 5 is very satisfied. How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the explanation of the reasons for the decision?
1 – Very dissatisfied
2
3
4
5 – Very satisfied
Don’t know
[IF YES AT Q18 ASK Q21 AND Q22, OTHERWISE SKIP]
21. Were you aware that you would have to sign a funding agreement with conditions and reporting requirements before accepting the funding?
Yes
No
22. Once your project began and the details of the funding agreement were finalized with [INSERT PROGRAM], did you have to work with a Service Canada Program Officer to make changes to your project and/or submit an amendment to the funding agreement? Examples could include changes to project timelines, project description, budget, etc.
[ROWS]
Yes
No
Don’t know
[COLUMNS]
Changes to your project
Amendment to funding agreement
[IF YES TO EITHER ITEM AT Q22 ASK Q23, OTHERWISE SKIP]
23. How long did the process take to complete? If you are uncertain, please provide your best guess.
[ROWS]
1 day
2 to 3 days
4 to 7 days / one week
More than 7 days / more than one week
[COLUMNS]
[INSERT ITEMS FROM Q22 = YES]
Post-agreement—Monitoring, Follow-up, and Close-out
[IF YES AT Q18 ASK Q24, OTHERWISE SKIP]
24. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how would you rate the following tasks to close your funding agreement with [INSERT PROGRAM]? Select one response per item.
[ROWS. RANDOMIZE]
Completing the final budget
Submitting the final budget
Completing the final project report
Submitting the final project report
Resolving any outstanding issues with funding (i.e. dealing with remaining funds, overpayment, etc.)
[COLUMNS]
1 – Very difficult
2
3
4
5 – Very easy
Not applicable
Tracking Service Channel Assessments
[PROGRAMMING FOR SERVICE CHANNEL ASSESSMENTS SECTION: EACH RESPONDENT WILL BE ASKED TO COMPLETE A SERVICE CHANNEL ASSESSMENT FOR EACH SOURCE USED BY THE RESPONDENT.]
[TO DETERMINE SOURCES:]
[CALLED SC OFFICE = Q2 or Q4 or Q6 ‘Called a Service Canada office directly’ OR Q17 ‘By telephone’]
[WENT TO A SC OFFICE = Q2 or Q4 or Q6 ‘Went to a Service Canada office’ OR Q10 ‘Submitted to a Service Canada office’]
[GOVERNMENT WEBSITE = IF Q2 OR Q6 ‘Went online to the Government of Canada website’]
[SC EMAIL = IF Q2 or Q4 or Q6 ‘Emailed a Service Canada office’ or Q10 ‘Downloaded application documents and submitted by email’ or Q17 ‘By email’]
[PROGRAM OFFICER EMAIL = IF Q2 or Q4 or Q6 ‘Emailed a Program Officer directly’]
[1-800 O’CANADA = IF Q2 or Q4 or Q6 ‘Called 1800 OCanada phone line’]
[ONLINE PORTAL = IF Q10 ‘Online application using [INSERT PROGRAM] web portal’ OR 17 ‘Online through the [INSERT PROGRAM] web portal]
[MAIL = IF Q10 ‘Downloaded application documents and submitted by mail’ OR Q17 ‘By mail’]
25. Thinking about your overall experience , how many times did you [IF MULTIPLE SOURCES ‘use each of the following’ IF ONLY ONE SOURCE ‘use the following’]? Please provide one response per item.
[INSERT ITEMS BASED ON SOURCE VARIABLE(S) SELECTED]
[ROWS][RANDOMIZE ITEMS]
[IF VISIT A SERVICE CANADA OFFICE SELECTED] Go to a Service Canada office
[IF GOC WEBSITE SELECTED] Go online to the Government of Canada website
[IF SC EMAIL SELECTED] Email a Service Canada Office
[IF PROGRAM OFFICER EMAIL SELECTED] Email a Program Officer directly
[IF 1-800 O’CANADA SELECTED] Call 1800 O-Canada
[IF CALLED A SERVICE CANADA OFFICE SELECTED] Call a Service Canada office directly
IF MAIL SELECTED] Communicate by mail with the Government of Canada
[IF ONLINE PORTAL SELECTED] Go online to the [INSERT PROGRAM] web portal
[COLUMNS]
[INSERT NUMERIC TEXT BOX BESIDE EACH ITEM]
Don’t know
26. On a scale from 1 to 5, where ‘1’ means very dissatisfied, and ‘5’ means very satisfied. How satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the overall quality of service you received from each of the following?
[INSERT ITEMS BASED ON SOURCE VARIABLE(S) SELECTED]
[ROWS][RANDOMIZE ITEMS]
[IF VISIT A SERVICE CANADAOFFICE SELECTED] Service Canada office
[IF GOC WEBSITE SELECTED] Government of Canada website
[IF SC EMAIL SELECTED] Email support from a Service Canada office
[IF PROGRAM OFFICER EMAIL SELECTED] Email support from a Program Officer
[IF 1-800 O’CANADA SELECTED] 1800 O-Canada phone line
[IF CALLED A SERVICE CANADA OFFICE SELECTED] Telephone support from a Service Canada office
IF MAIL SELECTED] Mail
[IF ONLINE PORTAL SELECTED] [INSERT PROGRAM] web portal
[COLUMNS]
1 – Very dissatisfied
2
3
4
5 – Very satisfied
Don’t know
Barriers and Issue Resolution
27. Thinking about your overall experience getting information and applying for [INSERT PROGRAM], did you experience any problems or issues during this process?
Yes
No
[IF YES ASK Q28 AND Q29. OTHERWISE SKIP]
28. How would you describe the problem or issue you experienced? [MULTIPUNCH]
[RANDOMIZE]
Application form was too long/complicated
Application requirements were difficult to understand
Information on the program was difficult to understand
Took too long to receive a funding decision
Took too long to receive an update on my application
Telephone lines were busy
I received different answers from different Program Officers
Staff were not knowledgeable/could not answer my questions
Program website information was confusing
Online application portal was confusing
Other, please specify [TEXT BOX]
29. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is ‘strongly disagree’ and 5 is ‘strongly agree’, how much would you agree or disagree that the problem or issue was easily resolved?
1 – Strongly disagree
2
3
4
5 – Strongly agree
Don’t know
Overall Satisfaction
30. Thinking about the overall service you received, from getting information about [INSERT PROGRAM] to receiving a funding decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements, using a 5-pt scale where 1 means strongly disagree, and 5 means strongly agree.
[ROWS. RANDOMIZE]
I was able to move smoothly through all of the steps related to the [INSERT PROGRAM] application.
[IF ONLINE APPLICATION USING [INSERT PROGRAM] WEB PORTAL AT Q10] Being able to complete steps online made the process easier for me.
It was clear what to do if I had a problem or question.
Throughout the process it was clear what would happen next and when it would happen.
I was confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved.
I needed to explain my situation only once.
It was easy to get help when I needed it.
Overall, it was easy for me to apply for [INSERT PROGRAM]]
I was provided with service in my choice of English or French.
I was confident that my personal information was protected.
[IF SOURCE = CALLED A GOVERNMENT OFFICE OR 1800 OCANADA] Service Canada phone representatives were helpful
[IF SOURCE = WENT TO GOVERNMENT OFFICE] Service Canada representatives that I dealt with in person were helpful
[IF SOURCE = WENT TO GOVERNMENT OFFICE] I travelled a reasonable distance to access the Service Canada Office
I received consistent information
It was easy to access service in a language I could speak and understand well
[ALWAYS LAST]The amount of time it took, from when I started gathering information to when I got a decision on my application, was reasonable.
[COLUMNS]
1 – Strongly disagree
2
3
4
5 – Strongly agree
Don’t know
31. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means very dissatisfied, and 5 means very satisfied, how satisfied or dissatisfied were you with the overall service you received from Service Canada from getting information about [INSERT PROGRAM] to receiving a funding decision?
1 – Very dissatisfied
2
3
4
5 – Very satisfied
Don’t know
32. On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means do not trust at all, and 5 means trust a great deal, how much would you say you trust or distrust Service Canada and the Department of Employment and Social Development Canada to deliver services effectively to Canadians?
1 – Do not trust at all
2
3
4
5 – Trust a great deal
Don’t know
Service Standards
[SHOW DESCRIPTION ABOVE Q36]
A service standard is a public commitment to a measurable level of performance applicants can expect under normal circumstances. Currently, Service Canada has service standards for all funding programs for the following:
Time to acknowledge the submission of a funding application: within 21 calendar days of receiving your application package.
Time to issue payment once payment claim is submitted: For contributions, within 28 calendar days of receiving your completed claim package. For grants, no later than 15 calendar days after the approved project start date.
33. Before today, were you aware of these service standards?
[ROWS]
Time to acknowledge the submission of a funding application
Time to issue payment once payment claim is submitted
[COLUMNS]
Yes
No
GBA+
Service Canada and the Department of Employment and Social Development Canada are committed to better understanding how diversity factors such as personal and social identities (e.g. gender, sexual orientation, ability, ethnicity, religious identity, etc.) may shape experiences of people or organizations applying for or obtaining federal funding.
Those who identify as women
Those who identify as non-binary or other gender
Those who identify as belonging to a minority racial or ethnic background
Those who identify as Black Canadians
Those who identify as Indigenous
Those who identify as having a mental or physical disability
Those who identify as belonging to a religious group
None of the above [MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE]
Respondent / Organization Profile
The last few questions are for statistical purposes only. All responses will remain confidential.
35. In general, how often would you say you use online services such as online banking, shopping and bill payments. Select one response.
All the time (at least once a day)
Routinely (once a week)
Sometimes (once a month)
Rarely (once a year)
Never
Prefer not to answer
36. Which province/territory does your organization operate in? Please select all that apply.
Alberta
British Columbia
Manitoba
New Brunswick
Newfoundland and Labrador
Northwest Territories
Nova Scotia
Nunavut
Ontario
Prince Edward Island
Quebec
Saskatchewan
Yukon
37. Which statement best describes your organization as it relates to completing the application for funding. Select one response.
I am solely responsible
I am part of a team of employees
I am part of a team of both employees and volunteers
Our organization is heavily dependent on volunteers
I am not personally involved although I oversee this, or have some awareness
38. Was this the first application your organization submitted to [INSERT PROGRAM], or have you applied to [INSERT PROGRAM] in the past? Select one response.
First application
Applied once or twice before
Applied several times before
Apply for the same program on an annual basis
Don’t know
Not-for-Profit [HEADER]
Community, charitable or voluntary organizations, including faith-based organizations (for example, churches, synagogues, temples, mosques)
Associations of workers or employers as well as professional and industrial organizations
Indigenous not-for-profit organizations
Non-governmental organizations
Unions
Sector councils
Not-for-profit Band Councils
Other
Public Sector [HEADER]
Public community colleges and vocational schools
Public health, including public hospitals, nursing homes, senior citizen homes, rehabilitation homes
Public degree-granting universities and colleges
Municipal governments and agencies, including regional legislative bodies and departments
School boards and elementary and secondary institutions
Territorial governments
Other
Private Sector [HEADER]
Financial Institutions
Business, incorporated or unincorporated bodies including partnerships and sole proprietorships
Indian Band corporations
Private Band Councils
Private universities or colleges
Other
40. Approximately how many employees work (full-time or part-time) for your organization? Please select one.
None
1-4 employees
5-9 employees
10-19 employees
20-49 employees
50 or more employees
Don’t know
41. Approximately how many volunteers work (full-time or part-time) for your organization? Please select one.
None
1-4 volunteers
5-9 volunteers
10-19 volunteers
20-49 volunteers
50 or more volunteers
Don’t know
42. In which of the official languages does your organization prefer to receive service in, English or French? Please select one.
English
French
Both/ Either
[END OF CORE SURVEY, ALL REMAINING MEASURES OPTIONAL]
43. Thinking about your experience with Service Canada, through out the entire application process, have you ever felt discriminated against on the basis of your identity?
Yes
No
[IF YES ASK Q44, OTHERWISE SKIP]
44. On which grounds did you feel discriminated against? Select all that apply
Race
National or ethnic origin
Religious identity
Age
Sex
Gender identity or expression
Ability
Language
Other
45. Are you interested in having a representative contact you to participate in future research opportunities, similar to this survey? For example, research could include providing feedback on changes to program application packages, operations, or service delivery methods.
Yes
No
[IF YES ASK CONTACT INFO, OTHERWISE END SURVEY]
46. You indicated you would like to participate in future research opportunities. Your feedback is important to us and your answers will always remain confidential. Please provide an email address and phone number where Service Canada and the Department of Employment and Social Development Canada may contact you. [mandatory if they indicate ‘yes’]
Full Name
Email [VALID FOR PROPER EMAIL]
Phone Number [VALIDATE FOR PROPER PHONE NUMBER]
The survey is complete. This survey is part of a larger research study. Your anonymous responses will be combined with all responses gathered during the survey, then aggregated, analyzed and published as public information.
The full detailed survey report, along with an executive summary and data tables will be posted on the Library and Archives Canada website within six months of the conclusion of this study.
Should you have any question, you can reach those responsible for the survey at Employment and Social Development Canada directly by emailing pob.ri.dgop@canada.ca.
Thank you for your participation.
| Focus Group | IDI | |
|---|---|---|
| Welcome and Introduction | 10 Minutes | 5 Minutes |
| Section 1: COVID-19 | 10 Minutes | 5 Minutes |
| Section 2: Ideal Client Experience | 5 Minutes | 5 Minutes |
| Section 3: Awareness | 25 Minutes | 10 Minutes |
| Section 4: Application | 20 Minutes | 10 Minutes |
| Section 5: Follow Up, Decision and Monitoring | 30 Minutes | 15 Minutes |
| Section 6: Ideal Client Experience | 10 Minutes | 5 Minutes |
| Section 7: GBA+, Wrap Up | 10 Minutes | 5 Minutes |
| SESSION TOTAL | 120 Minutes | 60 Minutes |
For today’s discussion: [WRITTEN INTRODUCTION; NO RESPONSE REQUIRED]
Written Question 1. I would like to spend a few minutes speaking to you about COVID-19 and its impact on your organization specifically as it relates to federal government Grants and Contributions.
Verbal Probes:
Thank you for that discussion. I would like to speak to you now about your general client experiences. Written Question 2. I would like to first understand your perception of an ideal client experience? This could be any client experience in any setting and not related to the funding application for Service Canada.
Verbal Probes:
Written Question 3. I’d like to focus now on the journey that you went on in applying to Grants and Contributions programs.
FOR ONLINE FOCUS GROUPS, MODERATOR TO SHOW A FIGURE WITH THE MODEL.
FOR IDIs, EMAIL MODEL IN ADVANCE:
Service Canada understands the overall client experience to include:
Quality of service is evaluated according to three dimensions:
Written Question 4. The first phase is awareness. How did you first become aware of available programs?
Verbal Probe:
Written Question 5. Did you try to seek more information about the programs? If so, how?
Verbal Probes (Initial):
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Written Question 6. Did you contact Service Canada to obtain more information? [CLOSED END VOTE]. If yes, was it:
[CLOSED END MULTIPLE CHOICE]
Verbal Probes (Initial):
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Written Question 7. What factors made you decide to submit the application?
Verbal Probes:
Written Question 8 Did we miss any important aspects or steps for the awareness process phase? Is there anything that could be done to improve it?
Now I would like to focus in more detail on completing the application.
Written Question 9. Please start by telling me overall, what was your experience with completing the application process, in your own words? Start by telling me which program you applied for.
Verbal Probes:
Written Question 10. Did you seek assistance to complete your application? If so, from who? For what reason?
Written Question 11. Can you tell us about your experience seeking assistance?
Verbal Probes:
Written Question 12. Do you feel you had appropriate support and resources to adequately complete the application?
Verbal Probes (Initial):
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Written Question 13. Once you applied, were you confident that you had followed the right steps? Were you confident that your application was properly received?
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Written Question 14. How did the application process made you feel? Is there anything that would have made the application process easier? If so, what?
Written Question 15. Did we miss any important aspects or steps for the application process phase? Is there anything that could be done to improve it?
Follow-up
Written Question 16. Did you do a follow-up with the program after submitting the application? If so why? How was this experience? OR, did Service Canada follow up you / your organization about your application?
Verbal Probes (Initial):
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Decision
Written Question 17. How were you notified of the decision about your Grant or Contribution application?
Verbal Probes (Initial):
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Written Question 18. Were you aware that there would be certain requirements to follow upon approval? If so, when do you become aware of this?
Written Question 19. Thinking about these requirements, what would make it easier for you / your organization to implement this?
Written Question 20. Did you receive all the information you needed to understand the decision? If so, were you satisfied with how this information was communicated?
Verbal Probes (Initial):
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Contributions Only
Written Question 21. Were you funded for a Contribution?
In the monitoring phase, the department and you work together to make sure the activities, finances and results of the project are going as intended.
IF YES:
Verbal Probes (Additional):
Close-Out
I would like to show you the journey map from earlier in the discussion again.
Written Question 22. What was your overall experience with the close-out process? By close-out process, we mean the phase where there is a final evaluation of the project. Applicants submit a final report and complete other steps to close their files (e.g., submitting a final claim, activity reports, etc.)
Written Question 23. There are many steps involved in this phase. Were you provided with what you needed to understand this process?
Written Question 24. Can you tell us about your experience completing the closeout report?
Written Question 25. If you had to submit a final reimbursement form, how did this go?
Verbal Probes:
Written Question 26: Did we miss any important aspects or steps for the follow up, decision and monitoring phase? Is there anything that could be done to improve it?
Written Question 27. Thinking back to my earlier question about ideal client experience, how did applying for a Grant or Contribution compare to this ideal?
Verbal Probes:
Written Question 28. Outside of our discussion above, do you have any suggestions for Service Canada to improve its Grants and Contributions services? I’m going to show you published service standards for Service Canada, which is available at the URL https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/services/funding/service-standard.html
Under normal conditions, the Department will acknowledge receipt of your proposal within 21 calendar days of receiving your application package.
For approved Contribution projects, the Department's goal is to process your payment within 28 calendar days of receiving your completed claim package.
For approved Grant projects, the Department's goal is to process your payment no later than 15 calendar days after the approved project start date.
Note: This Standard only measures time for processes that are within departmental control; hence, time required to issue cheques (a function not performed by the Department), or mailing time required by Canada Post is not included.
Written Question 29. Were you aware of these service standards before, during or after the application process? Did you receive your decision within these standards?
If YES - Was your experience consistent with these standards? If not, what was different?
If NO - What is the reason you were unaware of these service standards? Now that you know what they are, is this important information to know?
Verbal Probe:
As mentioned at the beginning, Employment and Social Development Canada is committed to better understanding how diversity factors such as personal and social identities (e.g. gender, sexual orientation, ability, ethnicity, religious identity, etc.) may shape experiences of people or organizations applying for or obtaining federal funding.
Written Question 30. If you work for or volunteer for an organization where personal or social identities are a focus, does this impact your experience with federal funding for social and economic development? If so, tell me in what ways.
Written Question 31. Do you think your own personal or social identities have an impact on your experience applying for or obtaining federal funding for social and economic development? If so, how?
SESSION CONCLUSION AND WRAP-UP
