Client Experience Survey 2020-21 Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Background and Objectives

• The annual Service Canada Client Experience (CX) Survey tracks the impact of service delivery change on clients’ ability to access federal programs, particularly as delivery is increasingly e-enabled over time.
• The 2020-21 Client Experience (CX) Survey Project is the fourth wave of the annual survey and the first to be administered with clients since the beginning of the COVID pandemic affected the way services are delivered, since March 2020. 
• The 2020-2021 CX Survey provides tracking of satisfaction with the client journey among Service Canada clients, tracks take-up of self-service and assisted self-service and assesses the ease, effectiveness and emotion of Service Canada clients by service channel, program and client group.
• The Client Experience Measurement Project is conducted in two phases: an initial quantitative survey followed by a qualitative phase of research.
• The qualitative phase was used to better understand the service experience among those who a experienced a barrier or expressed dissatisfaction with their overall experience. Due to the timing of the Federal Election (held Sept. 20th 2021), the qualitative phase of research was delayed into Fall 2021.

Methodology

• A telephone survey was conducted with a sample of 4,200 Service Canada clients across the six major programs.
  • Employment Insurance (EI): (n=1162) +/- 2.9 percentage points
  • Canada Pension Plan (CPP): (n=752) +/- 3.6 percentage points
  • Canada Pension Plan Disability Benefit (CPP-D): (n=692) +/- 3.7 percentage points
  • Old Age Security (OAS)/ Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS): (n=845) +/- 3.4 percentage points
  • Social Insurance Number (SIN): (n=749) +/- 3.6 percentage points
• Oversamples were collected with two client groups: those living in remote areas and Indigenous clients.
• The interviews were conducted between June 23 and Aug 9, 2021.
• Clients who completed a client journey, that received an initial decision, benefit or Social Insurance Number, in January, February or March 2021 were sampled. 
• The survey sample size has a margin of error of +/-1.5%.
• Results were weighted by age, gender, region, program and benefit receipt (approved/denied) using administrative data on clients who completed a client journey from April 2020 to March 2021 (except for CPP where the timeframe was January to March 2021). Program weights were held constant with 2017-18 to allow the results to highlight any change due to the service experience.
• Comparisons to 2019-20 results reflect service delivery changes made after October 2019, while comparisons to 2018-19 results reflect changes made after October 2018, and 2017-18 results reflect changes made after June 2017.
• A series of 3 qualitative online focus groups were conducted in English (20 participants in total), 24 in-depth interviews in English, and 6 in-depth interviews in French between November 16 and December 3, 2021. All sessions were 90 minutes in length and hosted on Ipsos’ Recollective platform.
• The 2020-21 Client Experience Survey Detailed Methodology document is available under separate cover.

Executive Summary: Change in Channel Use

• The 2020-21 CX Survey represents the first to have been administered with clients during the pandemic. For the first time, more clients self-served online with no assistance than utilized in-person service, while the proportion using assisted self-service has gradually increased over time.
• Overall, clients were considerably less likely to have used in person service compared to previous waves. The proportion of clients who utilized self-service during their client journey doubled and usage of assisted self-service increased marginally.
• Self-service online without assistance increased at the apply stage among EI and OAS/GIS clients, while fewer clients in all programs used in person when applying or following-up. EI, CPP and CPP-D also used in person less during the aware stage. EI clients more likely to have used assisted self service during the aware or apply stages and CPP and CPP-D clients mail only when applying.
  • The largest proportion of clients self-serviced online only (34%) during the client journey, while three in ten used in person service (30%) at some point and around one in ten assisted self service (13%). Fewer used touchless person to person (7%), were auto-enrolled and did not contact Service Canada (4%) or accessed service by mail only (1%).
  • Overall, clients were less likely to use in-person service at any stage during the journey, and were more likely to self serve during the apply or follow-up stages. Use of assisted self-service increased at the aware and apply stages, as did the use of mail only and auto-enroll at the apply stage.
    • EI clients were more likely to self serve at the apply and follow-up stages and less likely at the aware stage. Use of assisted self service increased at the aware and apply stages, while use of in person service declined at all stages.
    • CPP clients were more likely to apply using mail only and were less likely to self-serve or use assisted self-service at the aware stage. Like other client groups, use of in-person has declined across all stages.
    • OAS/GIS clients were more likely to self serve, be auto-enrolled or use mail only at the apply stage. Use of assisted self service increased at the follow up stage, while fewer used in person at the apply or follow up stages and self served during the aware or apply stages.
    • CPP-D clients were more likely to apply using mail only or assisted self service when applying, while use of in-person has declined across all stages.

Executive Summary: Channel Use By Stage

• Online is now the most commonly used channel at the aware and apply stage, while telephone remains the preferred channel at the follow-up stage. Use of the in person channel has declined at all stages.
  • During the aware stage, clients continued to be most likely to use online government sources (75%), followed by in-person service (24%) while around one in ten used either telephone (16%) or mail (14%) and 6% eServiceCanada. Use of in-person has decreased compared to 2019-20, while use of both online and mail have increased.
  • During the apply stage, clients were most likely to use the online channel (72%), followed by in-person service (24%) while around one in ten used either telephone (13%) or mail (11%) and 5% eServiceCanada. Use of in-person service decreased compared to 2019-20, while online increased.
  • Among those clients who followed-up, they continued to be most likely to use the telephone channel (70%), followed by online (51%). One quarter (24%) utilized eServiceCanada, while one in ten followed-up by mail (15%), or in-person (13%). Use of in-person services decreased compared to 2019-20 (40% 2019-20 vs. 13% 2020-21).
• Being able to complete steps online made the process easier for the vast majority of clients and progress was made improving ease of use among EI and OAS/GIS clients.
  • Compared to three out of four clients (75%) last year, eight in ten clients (80%) agreed that being able to complete steps online made the process easier. EI clients (87%) were more likely to agree compared to all clients while CPP (62%), CPP-D (40%) and OAS/GIS (56%) clients were less likely to agree. Compared to 2019-20, reported ease has increased among EI and OAS/GIS clients.

Executive Summary: Number of Channels and Multi-Channel Use

• Consistent with previous waves, satisfaction with the service experience declines with the number of channels clients contacted during the service experience and was notably lower among those who had three or more channels used.
  • Overall, more than four in ten (44%) clients used one channel during their client journey, followed by three in ten (30%) who used two, around one in ten (13%) who used three and 6% who used 4 or more.
  • Clients who utilized more channels, in particular 3 or more, had lower overall satisfaction with their service experience than those who used fewer channels.
• EI clients were more likely to have used only one channel, while CPP-D were more likely to have two or more channels. OAS/GIS clients were much more likely to have used no channels due to the proportion who were auto-enrolled.
• The vast majority of clients continued to use only one channel during each stage of the client journey. Online has become the preferred first point of contact for the majority of clients at both the aware and apply phases while the telephone is the preferred method for following up. Use of in person has declined as the first point of contact for all stages.
  • Clients who used online or in person first were less likely to use a second channel than those who used the telephone first.  Clients were more likely to go online after beginning on the phone at the aware and apply stages but no more likely at the follow up stage.
  • Compared to 2019-20, more clients chose to use online first at both the aware and apply stage while telephone has become the preferred choice for following-up. In person is no longer the first choice for any stage of the journey.
• Fewer clients followed up with Service Canada prior to receiving a decision than last year. Among those who did, the primary reason was to check on the status of their application/payment, and, to a lesser extent to provide additional information.
  • EI or CPP-D clients were more likely to follow-up than clients of other programs, while CPP clients were less likely.
  • Compared to 2019-20, EI, CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were less likely to have followed-up.

Executive Summary: Overall Satisfaction

• Satisfaction with the overall service experience has increased compared to 2019-20, returning to levels observed in 2017-18. Satisfaction among EI clients increased compared to the previous wave and declined among SIN clients. Satisfaction continues to be lower for CPP-D clients.
  • The vast majority of Service Canada’s clientele continue to be satisfied with the service experience (86%) and found it easy (86%) and effective (85%). Compared to 2019-20, satisfaction (86% vs. 84%) and effectiveness (85% vs. 82%) have increased, while ease has remained stable (86% vs. 84%). Satisfaction has returned to levels observed in 2017-18 (86%) and effectiveness has rebounded after declining last year (85% vs. 82% in 2019-20 and 84% in 2018-19).
  • A strong majority of clients expressed a high degree of trust (84%) in Service Canada to deliver services effectively to Canadians, had confidence in the issue resolution process (77%) and felt the timeliness of service was reasonable (81%). Year over year, ratings for the timeliness of service have improved (81% vs. 77% in 2019-20).
  • Nine in ten (89%) SIN clients expressed satisfaction with the service experience, the highest of any program but lower than in 2019-20 (94%). Nearly nine in ten OAS/GAS clients (88%) were satisfied, followed by CPP (86%) and EI clients (84%), while closer to six in ten CPP-D clients (63%) were satisfied, lower than other programs. EI clients were more satisfied than they were in 2019-20 (77%).
  • SIN clients were more likely to express trust (90%), to have found the process effective (91%), to have had confidence in issue resolution (84%) and to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable (85%), while OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have had confidence in issue resolution (82%) and to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable (85%).
  • CPP-D clients were less likely to express trust (67%), to have found the process effective (58%), that it easy to apply (56%), to have confidence in issue resolution (56%) or to have to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable (57%). EI clients were less likely to have confidence in issue resolution (73%), while CPP clients were less likely to have found the process effective (80%).
  • Compared to 2019-20, EI clients were more likely to express trust (82% vs. 77%), to have found the process effective (83% vs. 76%), and to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable (80% vs. 68%). OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have had confidence in the issue resolution (82% vs. 77%), while CPP-D clients were more likely to agree that the timeliness of service was reasonable (57% vs. 49%). CPP clients were less likely to express trust (81% vs. 86%) and to have confidence in issue resolution (80% vs. 85%).
  • Overall satisfaction was consistent between those clients who had applied for CERB (85%) and those who did not (84%) and there was very little variation in performance across specific service attributes. These findings are consistent across all programs.

Executive Summary: Service Attribute Performance

• Service Canada clients provided the highest ratings for the helpfulness of staff (in person, 1 800 O-Canada, specialized call centre and eServiceCanada), confidence in information security, the process being easy and effective.
  • The vast majority found Service Canada staff helpful including in-person (91%), 1 800 O-Canada (88%), specialized call centres (85%) and eServiceCanada (85%), were confident their personal information was protected (87%), found it easy to apply (86%) and were able to move smoothly through all steps (85%).
• Service attributes with lower ratings were ease of follow-up, ease of getting help on the application when needed, confidence the application would be processed in a reasonable amount of time and ease of getting help in general.
  • Fewer than three quarters provided high ratings for the ease of following-up on their application (63%), confidence the application would be processed in a reasonable amount of time (68%), ease of getting help on the application when needed (65%) and ease of getting help in general (71%).
• The helpfulness of Service Canada staff and protection of personal information were rated consistently high across all programs, while ease of follow-up was consistently rated low.
  • The helpfulness of Service Canada staff whether in-person, 1 800 O-Canada, specialized call centre or eServiceCanada and confidence their personal information was protected were consistently the highest rated areas. Ease of follow-up was consistently the lowest rated area.
• There have been a number of positive shifts for service attributes related to ease, effectiveness and emotion year over year.
  • Clients were more likely to agree that it was clear through the process what would happen next and when, that they were able to move smoothly through all steps, received consistent information, timeliness of service was reasonable, Service Canada call centre staff were helpful and that they travelled a reasonable distance to access service (in person), ease of figuring out if you are eligible for benefits, .
  • There was a notable decline in the ease of getting help in general and ease of finding out the steps to apply.

Executive Summary: Service Attribute Performance By Program

• SIN clients continue to provide the highest ratings across all service attributes except for confidence their application would be processed in a reasonable time.
  • The vast majority of SIN clients provided positive ratings for all service attributes and found the service experience easy and effective; Service Canada staff helpful and the timeliness of service reasonable. Lower scoring areas include confidence their application would be processed in a reasonable time and ease of follow-up.
• EI, CPP and OAS/GIS clients provided similar ratings across several service attributes and strong majorities rate most areas highly. OAS/GIS clients were more likely to provide higher ratings for aspects of effectiveness, while EI clients provided lower ratings for aspects of ease and confidence.
  • The consistently strongest performing areas included the ease of applying and helpfulness of 1800 O-Canada staff.
    • EI clients also performed more strongly for confidence their personal information was protected and helpfulness of Service Canada in person staff.
    • CPP clients also performed more strongly for and helpfulness of Service Canada in person and specialized call centre staff.
    • OAS/GIS clients also performed more strongly for overall effectiveness, receiving consistent information and helpfulness of Service Canada specialized call centre staff.

Key Findings: Service Attribute Performance By Program

• The consistently lowest rated areas were the ease of getting assistance when needed, ease of getting help on their application and ease of follow-up.
  • EI and OAS/GIS clients also provided lower ratings for confidence their application would be processed in a reasonable time and travelling a reasonable distance to access service (in person).
  • CPP and OAS/GIS client also experienced more difficult deciding the best age to start their pension, while OAS/GIS clients also provided lower ratings for the helpfulness of specialized call centre staff.
• Consistent with previous years, CPP-D clients continued to experience the most difficulty during the service experience.
  • CPP-D clients provided considerably poorer ratings across nearly all service attributes. Lowest rated service attributes included the ease of gathering the information needed to apply, getting assistance on the application when needed, ease of figuring out eligibility and confidence the application would be processed in a reasonable time.
  • The CPP-D service experience was rated highest for confidence in protection of personal information and helpfulness of Service Canada in-person and eServiceCanada staff.
• For the OAS and GIS programs, overall satisfaction among Auto-Enroll and Non Auto-Enroll clients was consistent compared to all clients. However, Auto-Enroll clients were more likely to have been completely satisfied due to increases across a number of service attributes.
  • Compared to 2019-20, Auto-Enroll clients were more likely to express trust in Service Canada and provided higher ratings for several measures related to ease, effectiveness and confidence, while Non Auto-Enroll clients were less satisfied with the timeliness of service and provided lower ratings for aspects of ease and confidence.
  • Similar trends were observed when comparing clients receiving both OAS and GIS and those receiving only OAS. While overall satisfaction is consistent between clients receiving both OAS and GIS and those receiving only OAS, there were increases across a number of service attributes. OAS/GIS clients were predominantly non auto-enrolled while the majority of OAS clients were auto-enrolled.

Key Findings: Change in Service Experience By Program

• EI clients were more satisfied with a number of aspects of service year over year.
  • Compared to 2019-20, EI clients were more likely to express trust (82% vs. 77%) and to be satisfied with the effectiveness (83% vs. 76%), the timeliness of service (80% vs. 68%), receiving consistent information (82% vs. 76%), clarity of process (77% vs. 65%), helpfulness of specialized call centre staff (83% vs. 73%), being able to complete steps online made it easer (87% vs. 82%), ease of figuring out if you’re eligible for benefits (73% vs. 66%), ease of putting together the information needed to apply (81% vs. 75%) and confidence application would be processed in reasonable amount of time (67% vs. 59%).
  • EI clients were less satisfied with the ease of getting help in general (65% vs. 70%) and the ease of finding out the steps to apply (74% vs. 82%).
• CPP clients expressed lower trust in Service Canada and rated aspects of ease and effectiveness lower than previous years.
  • Compared to 2018-19, CPP clients were less likely to express trust (81% vs. 86%) and to be satisfied with the effectiveness (80% vs. 85%), ease of understanding info about program (76% vs. 84%), ease of deciding the best age to start your pension (65% vs. 72%), needing to explain your situation only once (76% vs. 83%) and confidence any issues or problems would be easily resolved (76% vs. 81%).
  • CPP clients were more likely to be satisfied with the helpful of specialized call centre staff (85% vs. 72%) and the ease of understanding requirements of the application (85% vs. 80%).
• OAS/GIS clients were more satisfied with aspects of service related to effectiveness and emotion year over year while declines were also observed related to the ease of the application stage.
  • Compared to 2019-20, OAS/GIS clients were more likely to express confidence in the issue resolution process (82% vs. 77%) and to be satisfied with receiving consistent information (87% vs. 82%) and confidence their personal information was protected (85% vs. 79%) and to agree that completing steps online made it easier (56% vs. 48%).
  • OAS/GIS clients were less likely to be satisfied with the ease of completing the application form (76% vs. 85%), confident your application would be processed in a reasonable time (70% vs. 82%), being able to find info needed in reasonable amount of time during aware stage (83% vs. 90%) and the helpfulness of Service Canada in person staff (72% vs. 92%).
  • Overall satisfaction among clients receiving OAS and GIS has declined marginally year over year and declines have been observed on trust in Service Canada, timeliness of service and a number of aspects of ease, effectiveness of confidence. Similar shifts were observed among the subgroup of non-auto enroll clients due to the high proportion of overlap between the two groups- 71% of the OAS/GIS clients were non-auto-enrolled.
• CPP-D clients were more satisfied year over year with the timeliness of service however ratings on other measures have changed little over time.
  • Compared to the 2019-20, CPP-D clients were more likely to be satisfied with the timeliness of service (57% vs. 49%), the ease of understanding information about the program (60% vs. 48%) and confidence their application would be processed in a reasonable time (40% vs. 34%).
  • CPP-D clients were less satisfied with the ease of accessing service in a language they could speak and understand well (85% vs. 91%).
• SIN clients were more satisfied with certain aspects of service while fewer were satisfied with the ease of getting help in general.
  • Compared to the 2019-20, SIN clients were more likely to be satisfied with the clarity of process (88% vs. 83%), being able to find info needed in reasonable amount of time during aware stage (87% vs. 80%), ease of understanding requirements of the application (90% vs. 85%) and the helpfulness of specialized call centre staff (92% vs. 74%).
  • SIN clients were less satisfied with the ease of getting help in general (83% vs. 89%).

Key Findings: Overall Drivers of Satisfaction

• The most important drivers of satisfaction were: the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives and the amount of time it took from start and to finish was reasonable. Performance on both measures has improved since last year and have emerged as strengths for the organization.
  • To improve the service experience for Service Canada clientele as a whole, focus should be placed primarily on improving the ease of follow-up which is among the top drivers of satisfaction but an area where performance is relatively weak. Areas of secondary importance for improvement include the ease of MSCA registration, the ease of getting help on the application when needed and confidence the application would be processed in a reasonable time.
  • This year the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives has taken on increased importance and due to improved performance on this measure has become a strength for the organization. Further, the impact of the overall effectiveness of the process, the ease of follow-up and travelling a reasonable distance to access service (for in-person) have also taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.

Key Findings: Drivers of Satisfaction By Program

• Drivers of satisfaction continue to differ significantly by program. The most common top drivers were consistent with Service Canada clientele as a whole and include the timeliness of service for all programs and the helpfulness of call centre representatives for all programs except OAS/GIS clients.
  • Current areas that were performing strongly and were correlated to satisfaction include the top two drivers of satisfaction- the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives and the amount of time it took from start and to finish was reasonable. These attributes should be maintained moving forward to protect these strengths.
  • The greatest opportunities to improve service across programs which represent areas strongly correlated to satisfaction where performance was lower to other areas differ significantly by program.
    • For CPP and OAS&GIS clients, it will be important to improve the ease of finding what information is needed to apply.
    • For CPP clients, it will also be important to improve confidence the application would be processed in a reasonable time.
    • For OAS & GIS, clients it will also be important to improve the ease of completing steps online and the ease of getting help in general.
    • For EI clients, it will be important to improve the ability for clients to find the information needed (during the aware stage) in a reasonable amount of time.
    • For CPP-D clients, it will be important to improve the timeliness of service, the overall clarity of process, the helpfulness of call centre representatives and the clarity of the issue resolution process.
    • For SIN clients, it will be important to improve the ease of follow-up.

Key Findings: Service Channel Assessment

• Clients continued to be most satisfied with the in-person experience, while satisfaction remained lowest for specialized call centres, although it has increased compared to 2019-20. Satisfaction with online and 1 800 O-Canada also increased year over year. The new eServiceCanada channel sees strong satisfaction that falls between the satisfaction levels for in-person and online.
  • As in previous years, the large majority of clients remained satisfied with each service channel. Satisfaction with in-person service continued to be the highest (86%),followed by eServiceCanada (82%), online (78%), MSCA (75%), 1 800 O-Canada (72%) and specialized call centres (72%).
  • Satisfaction among those who used specialized call centres has improved following two consecutive years of decline. Clients were also more likely to express satisfaction with online and 1 800 O-Canada compared to the previous year.
• Satisfaction with service channels differed somewhat by program. CPP-D clients rated their satisfaction with in-person service, online and MSCA lower compared to all clients, while SIN clients were more satisfied with in-person, online and 1 800 O-Canada.  OAS/GIS clients rated their satisfaction with eServiceCanada lower than other clients.
  • Compared to 2019-20, EI clients provided higher ratings for online (77% vs. 71%) and specialized call centres (70% vs. 59%), while CPP (81% vs. 67%) and OAS/GIS clients (76% vs. 64%) were more satisfied with the quality of service provided by specialized call centres.
• Nearly all of Service Canada clientele agreed they were provided service in their choice of English or French (97%) or that it was easy to access service in a language they could speak and understand well (95%). 

Key Findings: Service Channel Assessment

• Self-service clients continued to be well served by the online application process but experienced more difficulty getting assistance on their application when they needed it.
  • The vast majority of self-service clients found it easy to understand the requirements of the application, put together the information needed, and to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time. At nearly six in ten, fewer found it was easy for them to get help on their application when they needed it.
• MSCA was utilized by the vast majority of EI and CPP clients, half of CPP-D clients and four in ten OAS/GIS clients. CPP, CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used MSCA than in previous years.  CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients felt it was more difficult to register compared to all clients.
  • Three-quarters of EI clients (75%) and CPP clients (77%), half of CPP-D clients (48%) and four in ten (43%) OAS/GIS clients used MSCA during their experience. The majority of those registered for MSCA for the first time felt the process was easy (63%), although this declined since 2019-20 driven by fewer EI clients expressing ease with the process.
  • Overall, three-quarters (75%) of clients who utilized MSCA were satisfied.  Satisfaction was notably lower among CPP-D, clients who experience restrictions to service (69%), who have a disability (56%), or who experience a language barrier (42%).
  • Among those who utilized MSCA at any point during the process, one in ten (9%) used the MSCA online chat function. Two thirds (66%) of those who used the online chat function found it helpful.
• 1 800 O-Canada was utilized by a limited proportion of clients at the awareness stage and usage did not differ significantly across most at-risk client groups.
  • Fewer than one in ten (6%) clients used 1 800 O-Canada at the aware stage. Usage was consistent among most at-risk groups but was higher among e-vulnerable clients, those who have a language barrier, clients who only have a mobile phone and those with no devices (no computer, smartphone or tablet).  At seven in ten (72%), a strong majority of clients were satisfied with their experience with 1 800 O-Canada. Satisfaction with the channel was higher among newcomers.

Key Findings: Barriers to Accessing Service

• Clients with restrictions that make it more difficult to access service have lower satisfaction than other clients. Use of MSCA, the clarity of process and ease of finding information on the program to which they are applying present particular challenges for this client group.
  • Clients who experienced a restriction to accessing service (48% of the client population) had lower satisfaction with the service provided in-person, online or through MSCA. They were also less satisfied with several service attributes with the largest gaps for ease of registering for MSCA, overall clarity of process, ease of applying, ease of finding out the steps to apply and ease of finding the information needed to apply.
  • Restrictions to accessing service were more prevalent among several at-risk client groups, in particular clients with disabilities, those with a language barrier, clients with no devices and non-English for French speaking clients. Incidence of restrictions were also higher among e-vulnerable clients, mobile-only clients, clients who live in remote areas, Indigenous clients and those with a high school education or less.
  • Clients who self identify as having a disability (8% of the sample population) provided lower ratings for the level of service provided through all channels. They were also less satisfied with several service attributes with the largest gaps for being able to complete steps online made the process easier, ease of figuring out if you are eligible for benefits, the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada representatives, being able to move smoothly through all the steps and ease of finding information about the program.
  • Compared to 2019-20, lower ratings were provided for the quality of service provided in person, online and through 1 800 O-Canada. Ratings have increased for the ease of completing the application form while declines were also observed across several attributes. The largest negative shifts were for ease of getting help in general, needing to explain your situation only once, receiving consistent information, ease of deciding the best age to start your pension, the clarity of the issue resolution process, being able to move smoothly through the steps and ease of finding information about the program.

Key Findings: At-Risk Groups

• Among the 17 at-risk client groupings, most provided high ratings of the service experience. Satisfaction among rural clients and those living in remote areas increased year over year.
  • Satisfaction with the service experience remained strong and the vast majority of clients in at-risk groups rated it positively. Satisfaction among newcomers and racialized clients was higher than compared to all clients.
  • Overall satisfaction among rural clients and clients living in remote areas increased compared to 2019-20 and is consistent with all clients. There have been no significant shifts in overall satisfaction among any other at-risk groups compared to 2019-20.
  • Satisfaction was lower compared to all clients among those with a language barrier, clients with disabilities, those with restrictions to accessing service, clients with no devices and e-vulnerable clients.
  • Ratings of the service experience were considerably lower among those with a language barrier including the service provided through all channels and across all service attributes. The largest gaps on service attributes compared to all clients were for the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada phone representatives, confidence any issues would be easily resolved, clarity of process, clarity of the issue resolution process, ease of getting help in general.