Client Experience Survey 2022-23

Service Canada Client Experience Survey 2022-23

This public opinion research report presents the results of a telephone survey conducted on behalf of Service Canada with a sample of 4,200 Service Canada clients across the five major programs. The study was conducted between June 9 and July 26, 2023.

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.

© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, 2024

For information regarding reproduction rights: droitdauteur.copyright@HRSDC-RHDCC.gc.ca

PDF

Cat. No. : Em4-23/2023E-PDF

ISBN: 978-0-660-68227-3

Service Canada sondage sur l'expérience client 2022-2023

Ce rapport de recherche sur l’opinion publique présente les résultats d’un sondage téléphonique mené pour le compte de Service Canada auprès d’un échantillon de 4 200 clients de Service Canada dans les cinq principaux programmes. L’étude a été menée entre le 9 juin et le 26 juillet 2023.

Ce document offert sur demande en médias substituts (gros caractères, MP3, braille, fichiers de texte, DAISY) auprès du 1 800 O-Canada (1-800-622-6232). Si vous utilisez un téléscripteur (ATS), composez le 1-800-926-9105.

© Sa Majesté le Roi du Chef du Canada, 2024

Pour des renseignements sur les droits de reproduction : droitdauteur.copyright@HRSDC-RHDCC.gc.ca

PDF

Nº de cat. : Em4-23/2023F-PDF

ISBN : 978-0-660-68228-0

Political Neutrality Statement

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

Additional information

Supplier Name: Ipsos Limited Partnership

PSPC Contract Number: CW2303967 (G9292-23-3716)

Contract Award Date: 2023-05-05

Executive Summary

Service Canada CX Survey 2022-23 – Results at a Glance

4,200 interviews conducted (between 750 and 1035 per program)

Methodology: Telephone survey

Fieldwork: June 9 and July 26, 2023 Client experiences that reached initial decision: Jan to Mar 2023

+Ref. Service Canada CX Survey report 2022-23 / Overall Priority Matrix: Impact vs. Performance

Background and Objectives

• The annual Service Canada Client Experience (CX) Survey measures the end-to-end service experience delivered by Service Canada and tracks the impact of service delivery change on clients’ ability to access federal programs and satisfaction with the federal programs. 
• The 2022-23 Client Experience (CX) Survey is the sixth annual wave. This provides trend data to contribute to monitoring the service delivery performance of Service Canada.
• The CX Survey provides tracking of satisfaction with the client journey among Service Canada clients, measures changes in use and satisfaction of service channels and assesses the ease, effectiveness and emotion of Service Canada clients by service channel and program. It also tracks up-take and use of self-service and assisted self-service among Service Canada clients.
• The Client Experience Survey project is conducted in two phases: an initial quantitative survey followed by a qualitative phase of research. 
• The qualitative phase was used to explore service channel preference, barriers, and opportunities for improvement to service delivery and channel use.
• The contract value ($299,851.15 [including HST]) for this research includes both the qualitative and quantitative phases.
• To comply with the Treasury Board Secretariat’s Policy on Service and Digital, the Chief Client Experience Officer (CCXO) conducts the Client Experience (CX) Survey to collect client feedback to assist in effectively managing service delivery across the service channels and to help ensure client-centric service design and delivery that is accessible and inclusive.
• The CCXO launched the annual Client Experience (CX) Survey in 2017 as part of a structured approach to collecting feedback from clients to track how well Service Canada was delivering federal programs through its service channels. The CX Survey was conducted again in 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22.
• The CX Survey in 2022-23 collected trend data to contribute to monitoring the service delivery performance of Service Canada, and to report annual satisfaction to meet service standards on the client experience. 
• Results from the 2022-23 CX Survey project will be used to:
  • Improve service delivery and access to programs;
  • Respond to clients’ evolving service needs;
  • Measure performance and impacts of service changes over time (e.g., pre-pandemic vs. pandemic vs. post-pandemic);
  • Contribute to evaluating the overall success of the client experience management function and service delivery; and,
  • Inform service management decisions as reported to Treasury Board Secretariat under the Management Accountability Framework.
• The research objectives for the quantitative phase were to:
  • Track overall satisfaction with end-to-end service experience of Service Canada clients, including clients of Employment Insurance (EI), Canada Pension Plan (CPP), Canada Pension Plan – Disability (CPP-D), Old Age Security/Guaranteed Income Supplement (OAS/GIS), and Social Insurance Number (SIN); 
  • Track changes over time on the use of and satisfaction with the service channels; and,
  • Use the Client Experience Measurement Model and assess ease, effectiveness, emotion and trust in Service Canada of clients accessing the five major programs.

Methodology

• A telephone survey was conducted with a sample of 4,200 Service Canada clients across the five major programs.
  • EI: (n=1035) +/- 3.0 percentage points
  • CPP: (n=768) +/- 3.5 percentage points
  • CPP-D: (n=752) +/- 3.6 percentage points
  • OAS/GIS: (n=862) +/- 3.3 percentage points
  • SIN: (n=783) +/- 3.5 percentage points
• Oversamples were collected with two client groups: those living in remote areas and Indigenous clients. A minimum of 400 completed questionnaires was achieved for each of these smaller groups.
• The interviews were conducted between June 9 and July 26, 2023. 
• Clients who were sampled had completed a client journey and received an initial decision, benefit or Social Insurance Number in January, February or March 2023.
• 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 2022 to March 2023. Program weights were held constant with 2017-18 to allow the results to highlight any change due to the service experience.
• The 2022-23 Client Experience Survey Detailed Methodology document, which includes the research instruments, is available under separate cover.
• The qualitative research, which comprised a mix of in-depth interviews (37) and online focus groups (7), was conducted between September 21^st and November 6th, 2023. Participants who were screened into the focus groups or in-depth interviews were those who had lower satisfaction and/or experienced a barrier to accessing service. A total of 85 clients participated in the qualitative research. The findings presented are qualitative in nature, meaning that they provide an in-depth exploration of the research issues and at no point is the intention to produce results that are statistically representative of the population at large. The results of the qualitative research are also available under separate cover.

Glossary

Throughout the report, subgroup results have been compared to the average of all clients (i.e., total) and statistically significant differences at the 95% confidence level noted using green and red boxes.

Where subgroup results are statistically higher than the total a green box has been used and where results are statistically lower than the total a red box has been used. Where applicable, yellow boxes are used to indicate drivers of satisfaction which are in the top five most impactful.

Additionally, arrows have been used to identify where results in 2022-23 are statistically higher or lower than 2021-22.

Small sample sizes of less than n=40 have been identified throughout the report using an asterisk symbol (*) and caution should be used when interpreting these results. Sample sizes less than n=25 are considered very small and results for these measures have not been included in the report and have been identified using a double asterisk (**) where applicable.

Where applicable, “-” is used in tabulations to indicate that an attribute or statement was not asked/did not exist during the given year.

Throughout this report, the term “overall” is used to describe the specific attribute related to satisfaction with service received from Service Canada as a whole (“overall satisfaction”), or to refer to results for the total sample/all client groups (“Trust in Service Canada: Overall”), where indicated.

Executive Summary: Overall Satisfaction

• Satisfaction with the overall service experience has increased compared to 2021-22. Satisfaction among EI clients increased compared to last year and remained consistent among clients of all other programs, however ratings among CPP-D clients have declined directionally for the second consecutive year and were lower compared to 2021-22. Satisfaction was higher among SIN clients compared to all clients, lower among EI clients and, consistent with historic trends, remained the lowest for CPP-D clients. 
  • At more than eight in ten, the vast majority of clients were satisfied with their experience overall (83%) and found it easy (87%) and effective (84%). Three-quarters of clients (75%) were confident that any issues or problems would be easily resolved. Compared to 2021-22, ratings on satisfaction (83% vs. 81%), and ease (87% vs.85%) have increased. Effectiveness (84% vs.82%) and emotion (75% vs. 73%) and were on the cusp of statistical significance.
  • At more than nine in ten (94%), SIN clients were most satisfied with the service experience overall. Over eight in ten CPP (85%) and OAS/GIS clients (84%) were satisfied, followed by just under eight in ten EI clients (78%), while nearly six in ten CPP-D clients (58%) were satisfied, lower than other programs. Satisfaction has increased among SIN clients from last year (94% vs. 89%). Satisfaction was stable for all other programs, however ratings have declined directionally among CPP-D clients for the second consecutive year and were lower compared to ratings in 2020-21 (58% vs. 60% in 2021-22 and 63% in 2020-21).
  • More broadly, there has been a return to pre-pandemic satisfaction ratings across most programs, channels and client groups. However, some longer-term trends are reversing. For example, overall satisfaction among E-vulnerable clients had been in a trend of decline over the past five years (87% satisfaction in 2017-18 compared to 79% in 2021-22), though this has rebounded this year (84% satisfaction).

Executive Summary: Trust

• Trust in Service Canada to deliver services effectively has increased overall and among CPP and OAS/GIS clients compared to 2021-22. EI and OAS/GIS clients provided higher ratings for overall ease this year, while EI clients also provided lower ratings for timeliness of service. 
  • SIN clients were more likely to express trust (92%), to have found the process easy (93%), effective (93%) and to have had confidence in issue resolution (86%) compared to all clients. They were also more likely to have felt the timeliness of service was reasonable (87%) and to have reported their client journey took two weeks or less (73%); notably a higher proportion said it took only one day compared to 2021-22 (37% vs. 30%).
  • CPP-D clients were less likely to express trust (65%), to have found the process easy (54%) and effective (56%) and to have confidence in issue resolution (52%) compared to all clients. They were also much less likely to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable (45%) and continued to report the longest client journey of any program with CPP-D clients much more likely to say it took more than eight weeks (65%). Compared to 2021-22, a higher proportion reported their client journey took more than six months (32% vs. 25%) and ratings on timeliness experienced a directional decline and are at the lowest level observed. 
  • OAS/GIS clients were less likely to express trust (76%) compared to all clients, while ratings on the ease (87%) and effectiveness (84%) of the process and confidence in issue resolution (73%) were consistent with overall levels. They were more likely to have felt the timeliness of service was reasonable (81%) and to report their client journey took more than eight weeks (34%) compared to all clients, however most said it took less than eight weeks (54%). 
  • EI clients were less likely to express trust (78%), to have found the process effective (79%) and to have confidence in issue resolution (70%) compared to all clients. They were also less likely to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable (66%) and to have reported their client journey took between two to four weeks (31%) or between six to eight weeks (9%). 
  • CPP clients’ ratings on trust (81%), ease (85%), effectiveness (83%) and confidence in issue resolution (75%) were consistent with overall levels. They were more likely to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable (79%) and to have reported their client journey took four weeks or longer (55%).

Executive Summary: Service Attribute Performance

• There have been a number of positive shifts for service attributes related to effectiveness and emotion year over year, while a higher proportion reported that they were able to complete the application in a reasonable time.
  • Clients were more likely to agree that it was clear what to do if they had a problem or question, that it was easy to get help when they needed it, that Service Canada in-person representatives were helpful and that they travelled a reasonable distance to access service.
  • A higher proportion agreed that they were able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time and that it was easy to get help on their application when needed, compared to 2021-22. Ratings for the ease of finding information about the program on the Government of Canada website were consistent year over year.
• Overall, clients provided the highest ratings for helpfulness of in-person representatives, feeling respected throughout the process, confidence in information security, and overall effectiveness of the process, including ease of completing the application form.
  • At over nine in ten, the vast majority of clients provided high ratings for the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives (92%). Well over eight in ten:
    • Felt respected throughout the process (89%);
    • Were confident their personal information was protected (88%);
    • Found it easy to apply (84%), including that it was easy to complete the application form (85%) and to complete the application in a reasonable time (84%); and
    • Were able to move smoothly through all steps (84%).
• Service attributes with lower ratings were ease of follow-up, ease of deciding the best age to start their pension, ease of getting help on the application when needed and ease of figuring out program eligibility.
  • Six in ten provided high ratings for the ease of following-up on their application (60%) and ease of deciding the best age to start their pension (62%). Closer to seven in ten provided high ratings for ease of getting help on the application when needed (68%) and just over seven in ten for ease of figuring out program eligibility (73%).
• The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives, being respected throughout the process and protection of personal information were rated consistently high across all programs. While ease of follow-up and ease of getting help on the application when needed were consistently rated low.

Executive Summary: Service Attribute Performance by Program

• SIN clients continued to provide the highest ratings across nearly all service attributes except for being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time, the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada representatives and travelling a reasonable distance to access service, where ratings were consistent with all clients.
  • At well over eight in ten, the vast majority of SIN clients provided high ratings for all service attributes and, in particular, ease of applying; aspects of the effectiveness and emotion of the process; helpfulness of Service Canada in-person and specialized call centre representatives; and being respected throughout the process. 
• EI, CPP and OAS/GIS clients provided generally high ratings across most service attributes. However, ratings were lower for several aspects of the effectiveness of the process compared to all clients and, to a lesser extent, ease and emotion. EI clients also provided lower ratings for the ease of nearly all components of the application process specifically.
  • EI clients were less likely to provide high ratings on all aspects of the ease of the application process and most service attributes related to effectiveness. They were also less likely to feel it was easy to figure out eligibility; it was clear what would happen next and when; that they needed to explain their situation only once; that the in-person representatives were helpful; and they were confident any issues or problems would be easily resolved. EI clients provided higher ratings for being able to complete steps online that made the process easier.
  • OAS/GIS clients were less likely to feel it was easy to understand information about the program, find out the steps to apply and to get help on their application when needed. They were also less likely to provide high ratings on the ease of getting help in general; being able to complete steps online made the process easier; clarity of the issue resolution process; that they were provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic; ease of accessing service in a language they understand well; confidence their personal information was protected; and that they felt respected throughout the process.
  • CPP clients were less likely feel it was easy to get help on their application when needed; being able to complete steps online made the process easier; it was clear what would happen next and when; they were provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic; it was clear what to do if they had a problem or question; it was easy to get help in general; that Service Canada in-person or eServiceCanada representatives were helpful; they travelled a reasonable distance to access service; and to have confidence their personal information was protected. CPP clients were more likely to feel it was easy to figure out eligibility and follow-up on their application and that the timeliness of service was reasonable.
• Consistent with historic trends, CPP-D clients continued to experience the most challenges during the application process and provided lower ratings across nearly all service attributes.
  • The lowest rated service attributes included the ease of figuring out eligibility, gathering the information needed to apply, and getting help on the application when needed, timeliness of service and that it was clear what would happen next and when.
  • The CPP-D service experience was rated highest for the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person and specialized call centre representatives and for confidence in protection of personal information.
• Satisfaction among OAS/GIS clients who were Auto-Enroll and Non Auto-Enroll was consistent. Non Auto-Enroll clients were directionally more satisfied, reversing much of the declines observed last year, and provided higher ratings for the ease of aspects of applying and overall timeliness of service.
  • Overall satisfaction was consistent among Auto-Enroll and Non Auto-Enroll clients compared to all clients. Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction has increased directionally among Non Auto-Enroll clients and returned to levels observed in 2019-20.
  • Non Auto-Enroll clients provided lower ratings for online compared to all clients.
  • Compared to all clients, both Auto-Enroll and Non Auto-enroll clients provided lower ratings for the ease of getting help when needed and confidence that personal information is protected, and higher ratings for the timeliness of service.
    • Non-Auto Enroll clients also provided lower ratings for feeling respected throughout the process, being able to complete steps online made the process easier and getting help on the application. Non Auto-Enroll clients also provided higher ratings for the clarity of the issue resolution process.
    • Auto-Enroll clients also provided lower ratings for clarity of the issue resolution process and being protected during the COVID-19 pandemic. 
    • Compared to 2021-22, Non Auto-enroll clients provided higher ratings on ease of getting help, clarity of the issue resolution process, timeliness of service, being able to complete steps online made the process easier, the ease of completing the form, getting assistance on the application and overall ease of applying.
• Results were largely consistent among SIN and eSIN clients, although SIN clients were more likely to be very satisfied compared to eSIN clients and compared to results among this group in 2021-22. As observed with results for the program, both client groups were more satisfied overall with their experience compared to all clients.
  • Overall satisfaction was consistent among SIN and eSIN clients, although a higher proportion of SIN clients provided a rating of 5 out of 5. Consistent with overall results for the program, satisfaction was higher among SIN and eSIN clients compared to all clients.
  • Results were directionally higher among both groups compared to 2021-22, and notably a higher proportion of SIN clients provided a rating of 5 out of 5 compared to last year.
  • SIN clients provided higher ratings for the quality of service provided in person, online and through specialized call centres, while eSIN clients provided higher ratings for online. Results were consistent compared to 2021-22.
  • SIN and eSIN clients provided higher ratings across several service attributes compared to all clients.
    • Gaps were consistently larger among SIN clients, with the widest gaps for ease of getting help in general and on the application, the helpfulness of specialized call centre representatives and timeliness of service.
    • The largest gaps among eSIN clients were for ease of understanding information about the program, ease of getting help on the application, ease of figuring out eligibility and timeliness of service.
  • Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased among SIN clients for ease of getting help and receiving consistent information, while eSIN clients provided higher ratings for ease of getting help on the application.

Executive Summary: Change in Client Experience by Program

• SIN clients were more satisfied with certain aspects of service including the timeliness of service, overall ease of applying, helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and the reasonableness of the distance travelled to access service compared to 2021-22.
  • Compared to 2021-22, SIN clients provided higher ratings for the overall ease of applying (93% vs. 90%), the timeliness of service (87% vs. 82%), the ease of getting help in general (88% vs. 84%) and on the application specifically (83% vs. 78%), the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives (96% vs. 92%) and that they travelled a reasonable distance to access service (79% vs. 73%). SIN clients provided lower ratings for being provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic (85% vs. 90%).
• OAS/GIS clients were more satisfied with the overall ease of applying and with the ease of getting help and completing the form.
  • Compared to 2021-22, OAS/GIS clients provided higher ratings for the overall ease of applying (87% vs. 80%), the ease of getting help in general (64% vs. 57%) and on the application specifically (62% vs. 54%) and the ease of completing the application form (83% vs. 73%).
• CPP clients provided generally consistent ratings across most aspects of service and were more satisfied with the ease of follow-up.
  • Compared to 2021-22, CPP clients provided higher ratings for ease of following up on the application (73% vs. 64%). CPP clients provided lower ratings for being provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic (77% vs. 84%) and the helpfulness of eServiceCanada representatives (63% vs. 84%).
• Ratings among EI clients were largely consistent year over year.
  • Compared to 2021-22, EI clients provided higher ratings for being able to complete steps online made the process easier (89% vs. 86%) and that it was easy to get help when needed (70% vs. 63%) and lower ratings for being provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic (81% vs. 88%).
• CPP-D clients provided consistent ratings across nearly all aspects of service. 
  • Compared to 2021-22, CPP-D clients provided lower ratings for being provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic (75% vs. 81%).

Executive Summary: Key Drivers of Satisfaction

• Key drivers of satisfaction represent the aspects of service which have the greatest impact on the clients’ overall impressions of their experience. The top most important driver of satisfaction continued to be the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable. Prominent secondary drivers included the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives, receiving consistent information, confidence in issue resolution, understanding the requirements and getting help on the application. 
• Year over year, performance has improved on the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and getting help on the application when needed. 
  • To improve the service experience for Service Canada clientele as a whole, focus should continue to be placed primarily on improving the timeliness of service. Areas of secondary importance for improvement include the ease of getting help on your application and to a lesser extent confidence in the issue resolution process.
  • The top-most important driver remained consistent this year, while receiving consistent information, understanding the requirements of the application, getting help on your application when needed and ease of completing the application form have taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction. The helpfulness of call centre representatives was less impactful than last year.
  • Ratings for timeliness of service and reported duration of the client journey were consistent with last year; three-quarters (75%) of clients found the amount of time it took reasonable and nearly two-thirds (63%) reported that their client journey took four weeks or less.

Executive Summary: Drivers of Satisfaction by Program

• The aspects of service that had the greatest impact of satisfaction continued to differ significantly by program. Timeliness of service remained the most common key driver for all programs except OAS/GIS, while ease of follow-up was the top driver for CPP and OAS/GIS. The helpfulness of call centre representatives was also among the most prominent drivers of satisfaction for CPP and CPP-D clients.  The helpfulness of in-person representatives was a prominent driver for SIN clients. 
  • Current areas that were performing strongly and were correlated to satisfaction include the helpfulness of in-person representatives for SIN and EI clients, timeliness of service for SIN and OAS/GIS clients and the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives for CPP and EI clients. Performance in these areas should be protected in order to maintain satisfaction given the strong impact they have on impressions of the overall client experience. 
  • The greatest opportunities to improve service across programs which represent areas strongly correlated to satisfaction where performance was lower to other areas differed significantly by program. 
    • For all programs except SIN and OAS/GIS, it will be important to improve the timeliness of service.
    • For CPP and OAS/GIS clients, it will be important to improve the ease of follow-up and the ease of finding what information you need to provide when applying.
      • For CPP clients, it will also be important to improve the ease of finding information on the program.
      • For OAS/GIS clients, it will also be important to improve ease of finding the steps to apply and information on the program and travelling a reasonable distance to access service.
    • For EI, OAS/GIS and CPP-D clients, it will be important to improve the ease of getting help on the application.
      • For EI clients, it will also be important to improve receiving consistent information.
    • For CPP-D clients, it will also be important to improve moving smoothly through all steps, the ease of gathering the information needed to apply and ease of follow-up. 

Executive Summary: Change in Channel Use

• Channels used, in particular in-person and online, has not returned to pre-pandemic levels, possibly indicating the longer-term impacts of service transformation changes and evolving service channel preferences. Overall, in 2022-23, channel use among clients sees more use of in-person but is still far off levels observed prior to the pandemic. Clients were more likely to utilize in-person service during the entire client journey and less likely to have used self-service only for the second consecutive year. Use of in-person service, while still considerably lower than in 2019-20 or earlier, was utilized more than self-service only this year. 
  • At nearly four in ten, the largest proportion of clients used in-person service (39%) at some point, followed by those who used self-service online only (25%), while just under two in ten used assisted self-service (17%). Six percent utilized the touchless person-to-person service, while 4% were auto-enrolled only and 1% used mail only.
  • Clients were more likely to have used in-person service at the aware and apply stages compared to 2021-22. Clients were also more likely to have used assisted-self-service at the aware stage and less likely to have used self-service only at the apply stage.
    • EI clients were more likely to have used in-person service or assisted self-service at the aware and apply stages and less likely to have used self-service only at the apply stage.
    • SIN clients were more likely to have used in-person or mail only at the aware and apply stages and less likely to have used self-service only or assisted self-service. Service levels remained consistent at the follow-up stage compared to last year.
    • CPP-D clients were more likely to have used in-person service at the apply stage and less likely to have used mail-only. They were also more likely to have used self-service only at the follow-up stage.
    • OAS/GIS clients were less likely to be auto-enrolled this year which meant more OAS/GIS clients overall engaged in the aware or apply stages. OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used mail only at the apply stage, while service levels remained consistent at the aware and follow-up stages.
    • Service levels among CPP clients remained consistent across all stages of the client journey.

Executive Summary: Channel Use by Stage

• Channel use was largely consistent across all stages of the client journey and online continued to be the most commonly used channel at the aware and apply stages and telephone at the follow-up stage. Use of the in-person channel increased at the aware and apply stages, but continued to be much lower than in 2019-20 or earlier, while a higher proportion used the telephone channel at the apply stage and fewer the online channel at the apply stage.
  • During the aware stage, clients continued to be most likely to use online government sources (74%) followed by in-person service (30%), the telephone channel (18%), mail (15%) or eServiceCanada (5%). Use of in-person and telephone service increased compared to last year.
  • During the apply stage, clients were most likely to use the online channel (67%), followed by in-person service (31%), telephone (17%), mail (13%) and eServiceCanada (4%). Use of in-person service increased compared to last year, while use of the online channel declined.
  • Among clients who followed-up, telephone (71%) continued to be the most common channel, followed by online (57%). Two in ten used in-person service (20%) or eServiceCanada (19%), while one in ten followed-up by mail (11%). Channel use remained consistent with last year.
• Clients were more likely to feel that being able to complete steps online made the process easier than last year. Progress has been made among clients of all programs, however CPP-D clients in particular and to a lesser extent CPP and OAS/GIS clients continued to experience more challenges with the ease of digital services.
  • More than eight in ten clients (84%) agreed that being able to complete steps online made the process easier, higher than in 2021-22 (82%).
  • EI clients were more likely to agree that being able to complete steps online made the process easier compared to all clients, while CPP, OAS/GIS and CPP-D clients were less likely.
  • Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased overall and among clients of all programs.
• A higher proportion of clients followed up before receiving a decision this year and felt it was easy to do so. The most common reasons for follow-up remained to check on the status of their application/payment, followed by to provide additional information.
  • EI and CPP-D clients were more likely to have followed-up compared to all clients, while CPP, OAS/GIS and SIN clients were less likely. Compared to 2021-22, EI clients were more likely to have followed-up to provide additional information, while OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have followed-up to check on the status of their application/payment.
  • Among those who followed-up, six in ten (60%) found it easy to do so, higher overall and among CPP clients than last year. CPP-D        clients were less likely to have felt it was easy to follow-up compared to all clients, while SIN and CPP clients were more likely.

Executive Summary: Number of Channels and Multi-Channel Use

• The greater the number of channels a client used during the service experience, the lower their satisfaction was with the overall experience. Those who used three or more channels were less satisfied, while those who used one channel were more satisfied.
  • Overall, just under four in ten clients used one channel during their client journey (38%), followed by one-third (33%) who used two, just under two in ten (16%) who used three and 7% who used four or more. SIN clients were more likely to have used only one channel, and OAS/GIS clients no channels, while EI clients were more likely to have used three channels and CPP-D clients three or more channels.
  • Compared to 2021-22, EI and SIN clients were less likely to have used one channel, with EI clients more likely to have used three channels and SIN clients two channels. OAS/GIS clients were less likely to have used no channels (due to a higher proportion who were non-Auto enrolled this year).
  • Clients who utilized three or more channels had lower overall satisfaction with their service experience compared to all clients, while those who used one channel had higher satisfaction. Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction has increased among those who used two channels.
• The majority of clients used only one channel during the aware and apply stages, while most of those who follow-up before receiving a decision continued to use more than one channel. The online channel remained the first point of contact for most clients at the aware and apply stages while telephone was used slightly more for following up. Use of in-person has increased as the first point of contact for the aware and apply stages, while fewer used online at the apply stage.
  • Clients who used telephone first at the aware or apply stages continued to be more likely to use a second channel than those who started online or in-person. Online was the most common second channel among those who began on the phone at all stages and those who used in-person at the aware stage. Among those who used online first, clients were more likely to have used phone as a second channel at the follow-up and apply stage.
  • Compared to 2021-22, use of in-person as the first point of contact increased at the aware and apply stages, while use of online decreased at the apply stage.
    • Among those who used the online channel first at the aware stage, clients were more likely to use phone or in-person as a second channel, while those who used online first at the apply stage were more likely to use phone as a second channel.
    • Among those who used in-person first at the follow-up stage, clients were more likely to use online as a second channel.
    • Among those who used telephone first at the aware stage, clients were more likely to use online as a second channel and less likely to use in-person. Use of online also increased as a second channel at the apply stage.

Executive Summary: Service Channel Assessment

• Satisfaction with the quality of service by channel remained largely consistent this year and was highest for the in-person service experience and lowest for both telephone channels and eServiceCanada. Ratings have increased for specialized call centres, while satisfaction with eServiceCanada has declined directionally continuing the downward trend observed last year.
  • Satisfaction with in-person service remained the highest (83%), followed by online (75%), MSCA (73%), specialized call centres (72%), eServiceCanada (72%) and 1 800 O-Canada (70%). Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction increased for specialized call centres and 1 800 O-Canada. Satisfaction with all other service channels remained consistent, however ratings for eServiceCanada declined directionally for the second consecutive year and were statistically lower than in 2020-21.
  • Among those who used in-person service, the vast majority felt that Service Canada representatives were helpful (92%) and that it was easy to get help when they needed it (84%) and ratings have increased across both measures compared to 2021-22.
  • Among those who used eServiceCanada, a higher proportion rated their satisfaction 1 out of 5 this year and ratings for the ease and effectiveness of the process and ease of finding information about the program, while relatively strong, were lower compared to all clients.
• CPP-D clients rated their satisfaction with in-person service, specialized call centres and online lower compared to all clients, EI clients for in-person service and OAS/GIS clients for online and MSCA. SIN clients provided higher ratings for in-person and online.
  • Compared to 2021-22, EI clients provided higher ratings for their satisfaction with specialized call centres, CPP-D clients provided higher ratings for eServiceCanada and SIN clients for in-person service.
• The vast majority of self-serve clients continued to find the online application process easy and improvement has been made on getting assistance when needed.
  • Between eight to nine in ten self-serve clients found it easy to understand the requirements of the application (85%), put together the information needed (82%) and to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time (87%). Closer to six in ten clients found it was easy to get help on their application when they needed it (61%) and ratings have improved among self-serve clients overall compared to last year (56%). Results were consistent among EI and CPP-Retirement (RTR) clients.
• The vast majority of EI and CPP clients and half of CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients used MSCA at some point during their service experience. Use of MSCA has increased among CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients but registration continued to pose more difficulties for clients of both programs. Ease of registering has rebounded among EI clients after declining last year, while CPP clients found it easier to sign-in. 
  • Three-quarters of CPP clients (74%), seven in ten EI clients (70%) and half of CPP-D (48%) and OAS/GIS clients (50%) used MSCA during their experience. Compared to 2021-22, a higher proportion of CPP-D (48% vs. 41%) and OAS/GIS clients (50% vs. 43%) used MSCA. 
  • Nearly three-quarters (73%) of clients who used their MSCA were satisfied with the overall quality of service they received. OAS/GIS clients were less likely to be satisfied with the service received through MSCA (59%) and satisfaction was also lower among clients with no devices (53%), those who are E-vulnerable (52%), those with a language barrier (41%) and non-English or French speakers (37%). 
  • Six in ten clients (59%) who registered for their MSCA for the first time found it easy to do so, higher than in 2020-21 (51%) due to an increase in ratings among EI clients. Two-thirds (66%) agreed that the registration process took a reasonable amount of time, consistent with 2021-22. CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were less likely to feel it was easy to register for their MSCA in a reasonable amount of time.
    • Among those who had difficulty registering, the most common reasons were that they experienced problems with their personal access code or creating their profile, followed by problems verifying their identity using their online banking information. 
  • Just over seven in ten (72%) of those with an existing MSCA found it easy to sign into their account. CPP clients were more likely to find it easy to sign in compared to all clients and ratings have increased compared to 2021-22. 
    • Among those who had difficulty, the most common reasons were problems with their security code, followed by they forgot their username or password, their account was locked or MSCA was unavailable. 
• Use of 1 800 O-Canada at the aware stage continued to be limited and, on par with past years, was generally consistent among most client groups. Satisfaction with the quality of service has improved directionally this year and ratings were notably higher among certain client groups. 
  • Overall, 6% of all clients used 1 800 O-Canada at the aware stage to learn about the program they were applying for, consistent with 2021-22. Usage at the aware stage was higher among clients with a high school education or less, Indigenous clients, E-vulnerable and clients with restrictions.
  • Seven in ten (70%) were satisfied with the quality of service provided through 1 800 O-Canada, directionally higher than 2021-22 (59%). Satisfaction was higher among remote clients, newcomers and Racialized clients compared to all clients who used 1 800 O-Canada and lower among those with a language barrier or clients with restrictions. Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction has increased among Indigenous clients, those who live in an urban area, clients with restrictions and Racialized clients. 

Executive Summary: Barriers to Accessing Service

• Clients with restrictions have lower satisfaction compared to clients without restrictions. The most prominent challenges faced by this client group include the ease of being able to find the information needed when learning about the program within a reasonable amount of time and the ease of finding out the steps to apply.
  • Clients who experienced a restriction to accessing service (41% of the client population) had lower satisfaction with the service provided in-person, online, through specialized call centres and 1 800 O-Canada. There were also many significant gaps in service attributes between clients with restrictions and clients overall. The largest gaps were for finding needed information in a reasonable amount of time, finding out what information was needed to apply, ease of completing the application form, ease of understanding the requirements of the application, ease of understanding information about the program and ease of figuring out eligibility.
  • Restrictions to accessing service were more prevalent among several client groups, in particular clients with no devices, E-vulnerable clients, mobile only clients and clients with disabilities.
  • Compared to 2021-22, ratings increased for a number of measures including ease of completing the application form, ease of finding out the steps to apply, receiving consistent information, being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time, it being clear what to do if there was a problem, clarity of process, confidence that problems could be resolved, it being easy to get help when needed, getting help on the application specifically, being confident that one’s personal information was protected and ease of accessing service in a language clients could speak and understand well.
  • Clients who self-identify as having a disability (10% of the sample population) provided lower ratings for service provided in-person, online and through specialized call centres. There were also many significant gaps on service attributes between clients with disabilities and clients overall. The largest gaps were for ease of putting together the information to apply, being able to move smoothly through all steps, ease of finding information about the program, needing to explain one’s situation only once and being confident any issues or problems would be easily resolved.
  • Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased across several measures, including ease of figuring out eligibility, ease of application overall, agreement that completing the steps online made things easier, ease of getting help when needed, it being clear what to do if there was a problem, ease of finding out the information needed to apply and ease of finding out the steps to apply.

Executive Summary: Client Groups

• Satisfaction continued to be high among most client groups, and ratings of overall satisfaction have increased among many year over year. 
  • The vast majority of clients in nearly all client groups continued to be highly satisfied with the service experience and notably satisfaction among youth, seniors, newcomers, and Racialized clients was higher compared to all clients. Satisfaction was lower compared to all clients among those with a language barrier, clients with disabilities and clients with restrictions to accessing service. 
  • Clients with a language barrier continued to provide considerably lower ratings across all aspects of their experience. The largest gaps on service attributes compared to all clients were for the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada and specialized call centre representatives, ease of finding out the information needed to apply and ease of finding and understanding information about the program.
  • In 2022-23, overall satisfaction with the service experience increased among several client groups compared to 2021-22, including:
    • Youth (85% vs. 79%)
    • Those with a high school education or less (83% vs. 80%)
    • Urban clients (84% vs. 81%)
    • E-vulnerable clients (84% vs. 79%)
    • Clients with no devices (83% vs. 71%)
    • Clients with restrictions (77% vs. 72%)
    • Newcomers (94% vs. 90%)
    • Racialized clients (89% vs. 84%)
  • The definitions of the noted client groups can be found in Annex A of this report. 

Service Canada Client Experience Survey Model

Service Canada Client Experience (CX) Survey Measurement Model

• Service Canada developed the survey model below as a consistent framework for assessing the service experience of its clients.
• The methodology for the Client Experience Survey was initially implemented in 2017-18. In the 2018-19 wave of the survey, the questionnaire was limited to the overall experience to allow for measures to gather data to inform service transformation. In the 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23 waves the questionnaire took the approach utilized in 2017-18 to allow for assessment of tracking of each stage of the client journey.

Note: The Model was drawn from a combination of existing models to suit Service Canada context and validated through consultation with internal stakeholders. The existing models include: The Common Measurements Tool (CMT), owned and licensed by the Institute for Citizen-Centred Service (ICCS), the client survey model used by the Government of Quebec, and Forrester’s approach to client experience measurement.

Service Canada CX Survey Measurement Model: Service Attributes

The following was the full set of detailed service attributes in the model that guided the development of the baseline questionnaire.

Research Approach

Overview: Quantitative Approach

• A telephone survey was conducted with a sample of 4,200 Service Canada clients across the five major programs, with between approximately 750 and 1035 respondents interviewed about their experience with each program. The interviews were conducted from June 9 to July 26, 2023.
• In order to examine the overall service experience, including how clients used the various channels to complete the steps of their client journeys, the clientele was defined as clients who had recently completed a client journey, up to initial decision.
• The sample of clients who had received a service outcome during January, February and March 2023 were randomly selected from program administrative databases. Comparisons of findings to the baseline data must take into account that the 2017-18 survey wave largely sampled clients who received a service outcome in April, May or June 2017.
• The sample was stratified by program. Weighting adjustments were made to bring the sample into proportion with the universe by age, gender and region within each program and to bring the over-sampled groups back to their proportion among clients.
• Data based on the total population have a margin of error of +/-1.5% at the 95% confidence interval, while data based on sub-groups have a larger margin of error. For example, the margin of error for data for each program was between +/-3.0% to +/-3.6%.
• The data were weighted in proportion to age, gender, region and program volume.

Data Collection: Quantitative Approach

• The 2022-23 questionnaire was developed based on the Service Canada Client Experience Survey Measurement Model. The 2021-22 CX Survey was used as the basis for developing the questionnaire design. Slight modifications were made to incorporate a new statement about the overall feeling of being respected throughout the application process.
• The questionnaire was pretested from June 2 to June 8, 2023, and fieldwork took place between June 9 and July 26, 2023.
• Experienced, trained interviewers were specifically briefed on the requirements of this study. A minimum of 10% of each interviewer’s calls were monitored by a team leader.
• Respondents were interviewed in their choice of English or French. For those who could not respond in either language, a proxy respondent (who had assisted them in contacting Service Canada) could respond on their behalf (65 surveys were completed through a proxy respondent this wave). In addition, respondents who could not speak either official language were provided an option of using an on-demand translation service (23 respondents utilized the service this wave). 
• To better reach Deaf or Hard of Hearing clients, those clients were actively offered the SVR Canada VRS telephone service to complete the survey. No respondents utilized the SVR Canada VRS service.
• Oversamples were conducted with two client groups: those living in remote areas and Indigenous clients (see Appendix A for the definitions of client groups). This was done to provide a minimum of 400 completed interviews with each group.

Calibration of the Data: Quantitative Approach

• A multi-tiered approach has been used to weight the data from the sample for the Client Experience Survey into proportion with the universe of ESDC clients. Steps in the weighting comprised:
  • Adjust to the universe proportions of age, gender, and region for each program;
  • Weight over-sampled populations back into proportion to their presence in the universe;
  • Weight the number of respondents in each program in proportion to the total number of clients;
  • Weight the number respondents by each region in proportion to the total number of clients; 
  • Adjust to the universe proportions of benefits received for each program.
• OAS and GIS have been combined into one client group and weights according to age, gender, region and benefit receipt were applied based on combined program figures. The results were then weighted by the proportion of clients in each of OAS and GIS.
• The universe proportions used to develop the targets were based on data extracts provided by Service Canada. 
• Detailed methodology, including a description of the sampling strategy, weighting and limitations, are provided under separate cover, together with the survey questionnaire.
• To ensure comparability of results between 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21 and 2021-22, the proportions of clients by program were held consistent and are based on the composition of the clientele in May 2017.

Qualitative Approach

• A mix of 37 in-depth interviews and seven (7) online focus groups were conducted between September 21 and November 6, 2023. 
• Participants were Service Canada clients receiving an initial decision on their application between January and March 2023, and who responded to the CX Survey from June 6 to July 26, 2023, meeting one of the following screening criteria: rated their overall satisfaction as low (survey question #38); experienced difficulties applying because of barriers to accessing service (survey question #45).
• A total of 85 clients participated in the qualitative research (hereafter referred to as participants), of which 34 participants indicated they had a disability during the recruitment screening process.
• The value of qualitative research is that it allows for the in-depth exploration of factors that shape public attitudes and behaviours on issues of interest. 
• The 2022-23 Client Experience Qualitative Research Detailed Findings Report, which includes the research instruments, is available under separate cover.

Detailed Findings

End-to-End Client Experience By Program

Impact of Service Changes on the Client Experience by Program

Overall Satisfaction

Satisfaction, Ease, Effectiveness and Emotion Over Time

• At more than eight in ten, the vast majority of clients were satisfied with their experience overall and found it easy and effective. Three-quarters of clients were confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings on satisfaction and ease have increased. Directional increases have been observed on effectiveness and emotion (i.e., on the cusp of statistical significance).

Overall Satisfaction with Service Experience

• Overall, the majority of clients remained satisfied with the service experience and ratings have increased compared to 2021-22, returning to levels observed in 2019-20. A higher proportion of clients provided a rating of 5 out of 5, while fewer provided a rating of 4.
• According to the weighting scheme used by program, nearly half of respondents in the sample were EI clients, and nearly a third were SIN clients.

Ease, Effectiveness and Emotion: Overall

• A strong majority of clients found the process easy, effective and had confidence in the issue resolution process.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased for ease, and increased directionally across effectiveness and emotion (i.e., on the cusp of statistical significance).
• Across each measure, a directionally higher proportion provided a rating of 5 out of 5, while directionally fewer provided a rating of 2 or 3.

+ The overall ease metric was first asked to SIN clients in 2021-22 and is included in calculations for 2021-22 and 2022-23

× The questionnaire was improved to pose ‘You were confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved’ to all survey respondents in 2018-19 and 2019-20, whereas in 2017-18 it was posed only to clients who did not experience a problem, therefore comparable data are not available.

Q36b. Thinking about the overall service you received, from getting information about [INSERT ABBREV] to receiving a decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements, using a 5-point scale (where 1 means strongly disagree, and 5 means strongly agree)?

Base: All respondents/answering (n= Base varies)

Ease, Effectiveness and Emotion: by Program

• CPP-D clients were less likely to have found the process easy, effective or to have had confidence in the issue resolution process compared to all clients, while EI were less likely to have felt the process was easy and effective and to have had confidence in issue resolution. SIN clients were more likely to have found the process easy, effective and to have had confidence in issue resolution.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI and OAS/GIS clients provided higher ratings for ease.

Overall Satisfaction by Region (% Rated 4 or 5)

• Overall satisfaction was higher among clients in Atlantic Canada compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction increased among clients in Ontario and Atlantic Canada.

Emotion – Overall and by Channel, Program and Region

• Three-quarters of clients agreed that they were confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved. Client agreement that they were confident that any issues or problems would have been easily resolved has remained statistically consistent but increased directionally compared to 2021-22 with a slightly higher proportion of clients providing a rating of 5 out of 5.
• Compared to all clients, EI and CPP-D clients were less likely to have had confidence in the issue resolution process, while SIN clients were more likely. Ratings remained consistent across programs compared to 2021-22.
• Clients who used in-person service at some point during their client journey provided higher ratings for confidence in issue resolution, while those who used the telephone channel or eServiceCanada provided lower ratings.
• Clients in Atlantic Canada provided higher ratings for confidence in issue resolution and agreement has increased compared to 2021-22.

Trust in Service Canada

• At just over eight in ten, the vast majority of clients express trust in Service Canada to deliver services effectively to Canadians. EI, OAS/GIS and CPP-D clients were less likely to express trust compared to all clients, while SIN clients were more likely.
• Compared to 2021-22, trust ratings have increased overall and among CPP, CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients.
• This measure remained strongly correlated to overall satisfaction.

Trust in Service Canada: Overall

Just over eight in ten clients expressed trust in Service Canada to deliver services effectively to Canadians. Ratings on trust have increased compared to 2021-22 and returned to levels observed in 2019-20. A directionally higher proportion of clients provided a rating of 4 out of 5 and fewer provided a rating of 3. 

Assessment of Duration of End-to-End Journey

• At three-quarters, the majority of clients found the timeliness of service reasonable, unchanged from 2021-22.
• SIN, OAS/GIS and CPP clients were more likely to have rated the timeliness of service as reasonable, while EI and CPP-D clients were less likely.
• Compared to 2021-22, SIN clients were more likely to agree that the timeliness of service was reasonable.

• Three-quarters of clients agreed that the amount of time from when they started gathering information to when they got a decision was reasonable. Ratings on timeliness of service were unchanged compared to 2021-22. 
• Compared to 2021-22, a higher proportion of clients provided a rating of 5 out of 5. A higher proportion of OAS/GIS clients also provided a rating of 5 out of 5, while fewer provided a rating of 4.

Reported Duration of End-to-End Journey

• Roughly two-thirds of clients reported that their client journey took four weeks or less, approximately one-quarter said it took between one day to two weeks or between two to four weeks and just over one in ten took one day. Roughly one in ten reported their client journey took between four to six weeks or between eight weeks to six months, while slightly fewer took between six to eight weeks. Reported duration of the client journey was consistent with 2021-22.
• SIN clients were more likely to have reported their client journey took two weeks or less (and most notably that it took one day) compared to all clients. For EI clients, more were likely to have reported their client journey took between two to four weeks or between six to eight weeks, and for CPP clients that number was four to six weeks or longer. OAS/GIS and CPP-D clients (in particular) were more likely to report it took more than eight weeks.
• Compared to 2021-22, SIN clients were more likely to report it took one day, while CPP-D clients were more likely to report it took more than six months.

Highlights By Program

Satisfaction with Service Experience by Program

• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction among SIN clients increased. Satisfaction was stable for all other programs, however ratings have declined directionally among CPP-D clients for the second consecutive year.
• Satisfaction was higher among SIN clients compared to all clients, lower among EI clients and, consistent with previous years, remained lower for CPP-D clients.

CX Performance and Service Attributes – EI

Qualitative Highlights on the EI Client Journey

There were several negative emotions expressed by participants who had lower satisfaction and/or experienced a barrier during the application process for EI. Specifically, these participants felt confused, angry, disappointed, helpless and painful.

These emotions were a result of difficulties encountered including: receipt of conflicting information from different Service Canada representatives; needed to repeat their story; delayed payments and/or being “ignored”, i.e., having to wait several weeks for answers.

Some participants expressed gratitude for having access to the EI program in a time of need; relief for the ease of applying and connecting with a helpful Service Canada representative.

A few participants had accessed EI on several occasions and therefore were very familiar with the process and felt that it was easy owing to their repeated experiences.

I was just thankful that we were able to apply for EI. Just for the fact that, you know, there’s no income coming in, but you have that option. You put into it and you’re able to collect something, right. Something’s better than nothing while you’re unemployed.

But for me when I left from sick benefits, and I still had weeks left and I said to myself, I'm ready to go back to work now. My doctor didn't want me to, but I said that's it. I was done. So, when I called and I transferred from sick benefits to the regular benefits, that was when my nightmare started. Every time I called…I know I had to give them a couple of weeks to get everything set up. And then it was like nothing, nothing. I escalated my claims 17 times.

EI Claimant Frequency

• Satisfaction was consistent by claimant frequency among EI clients. Consistent with overall program results, satisfaction was lower among all groups compared to all clients.
• First time EI claimants and those who have applied less than two years ago provided lower ratings for the quality of service provided in-person.
• Those who made a previous claim less than two years ago provided lower ratings for the specialized call centre.

Base: First time EI claimants (n=335); Previous claim more than 2 years (n=292); Previous claim less than 2 years (n=408)

• Consistent with overall program results, ratings on timeliness of service were lower among all claimant frequency groups compared to all clients.
• First time EI claimants also provided lower ratings for the helpfulness of in-person and 1 800 O-Canada representatives, needing to explain your situation once, clarity of process, overall ease and effectiveness, understanding information about the program and the requirements of the application.
• Those who have made a claim less than two years ago also provided lower ratings for the helpfulness of in-person representatives, needing to explain your situation once, confidence in issue resolution, understanding the requirements, ease of putting together the information needed, completing the form and getting help in general and on the application.
• Those who have made a claim more than two years ago also provided lower ratings for the clarity of process and confidence in issue resolution.
• EI clients who have applied before (either less than two year or more than two years ago) provided higher ratings for being able to complete steps online made the process easier.

CX Performance and Service Attributes – CPP

Qualitative Highlights on CPP and OAS/GIS Client Journey

For some participants, the transition to retirement is a “scary” process. Compounding this is the general belief that CPP is inadequate in covering living expenses thus creating anxiety and stress in participants.

Some participants found the process of applying cumbersome, confusing and fraught.

Feelings of uncertainty and stress were common after submitting their applications due to lack of clarity on the amount they would be entitled to.

That said, participants tended to report positive experiences. This was particularly true for participants who were less financially reliant on CPP and OAS/GIS or had others in their lives to help them (e.g., financial planner). They were more likely to view the entire process as an administrative task and experienced few issues with the application forms.

Several participants encountered Service Canada representatives that were helpful, nice and cooperative. This left them feeling confident, as well as happy and relieved when the process was done.

When my husband passed, I was very lucky that I had my financial planner, and he said to me, “just leave this with me”, because I don't think I would have been emotionally able to do it. So I think it can be a kind of a scary process, and I was happy that my financial planner knew all the processes to make it quicker.

You just had to fill out an online form and yeah, they asked us some questions and the CPP one was easy.

[Service Canada representatives] were nice and very cooperative to me. It’s got to be there for me. But I wasn’t scared or nervous.

Frustration because I did it online and they either received the papers and lost them or they didn't receive them. I had to call in, in order to get it straightened out, and I had to get the information from somebody else where to call. I didn't know where to get an application to apply in person. I didn't know where to go. I felt like it was a good thing and then I waited, and I didn't get my old age and so then I went through trying to get a hold of somebody and they got it straightened out. Loss of income on my CPP and the old age picks up a little bit of it, but it isn't enough to live on. The income on the pensions ain't high enough for seniors. You don't even meet the cost of living.

CX Performance and Service Attributes – CPP-D

Qualitative Highlights on CPP-D Client Journey

Many participants struggled with completing and gathering all the paperwork on top of the health condition they were dealing with. Several also faced challenges with accessing documentation from their doctors.

The delay in hearing back on an application and decision also contributed to frustration, fear of being denied and feeling “at the mercy” of the process.

These negative experiences reflected emotions of disappointment, feeling nervous, helpless, upset, lost and worthless.

A few participants mentioned feeling supported, lucky and thankful. One participant said they were “treated like gold” and another said they felt relieved and confident once the process was successfully completed.

I was in a traumatic head-on collision. So, when you're in a lot of pain, it was very hard to focus, very hard to remember events, especially I spread this out over I think it was a six-year time period, over the four applications. And so, trying to express how you're feeling and how it’s affecting your life is a little difficult for me anyway.

I had phoned to say, some of these questions don’t pertain to what I am going through as far as brain cancer, and what I have to deal with. The woman that answered, she was very flip and kind of just said, “Oh well, just do the best you can.” I thought, well, that’s not very helpful.

I felt… I was a bit nervous because I didn’t know if they were going to approve me or not, […] But I was lucky enough, when I did, whoever the [representative] was, she was a very nice person,[…] at the time, you know, out of job for so long and all my finances had dwindled and everything. So, it was good to hear some positivity from a [representative]. […] she came and lifted my spirit a bit. So, I was thankful for that, I must say.

CX Performance and Service Attributes – OAS/GIS

OAS/GIS – Auto-Enroll and Non Auto-Enroll Clients

• Overall satisfaction was consistent among Auto-Enroll and Non Auto-Enroll clients compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction has increased significantly among Non Auto-Enroll clients.
• Non Auto-Enroll clients provided lower ratings for online than all clients.

• Both Auto-Enroll and Non Auto-enroll clients provided lower ratings for the ease of getting help when needed and confidence that personal information is protected compared to all clients. Non-Auto Enroll clients also provided lower ratings for feeling respected throughout the process, being able to complete steps online made the process easier and getting help on the application compared to all clients. Auto-Enroll clients provided lower ratings for clarity of the issue resolution process and being protected during the COVID-19 pandemic. Both client groups provided higher ratings for the timeliness of service, while Non Auto-Enroll clients also provided higher ratings for the clarity of the issue resolution process.
• Compared to 2021-22, Non Auto-enroll clients provided higher ratings on ease of getting help, clarity of the issue resolution process, timeliness of service, being able to complete steps online made the process easier, the ease of completing the form and getting assistance on the application and overall ease of applying.

CX Performance and Service Attributes – SIN

Qualitative Highlights on SIN Client Journey

SIN clients were typically informed by those around them of the importance of obtaining a SIN number in order to gain employment. Most participants found the process easy and straightforward, with feelings of happiness and relief upon receiving their SIN.

The main negative emotion participants experienced was frustration with the long queues at Service Canada Centres.

Among a small number of participants who were unable to obtain their SIN number upon their first visit, feelings of disappointment, anxiety and anger were evident. In an extreme case, a participant’s SIN application was referred for further investigation. Follow-up calls to Service Canada for updates and to find out more about the issue with the application or how the participant could resolve the situation came to no avail, which in turn exacerbated the already frustrating situation for the participant. The case was finally resolved after 6 weeks which resulted in great relief for the participant, however, he continued to be dismayed at the lack of transparency on the reasons behind the delay. Moreover, the participant reported loss of income as a result of delays in obtaining their SIN number.

When I finally got to see somebody after waiting for two hours only to be told you don’t have the right documents, and I left and I was crying. So, my emotions were… I just wasted two and a half hours of my life, I’ll never get that back, and I still don’t have a Social Insurance Number.

It took me six weeks of many, many different phone calls. The emotions were very challenging, because without a SIN, I was not able to work, even though Service Canada would say that legally, I’m entitled to be employed, which is great. But every other company that I was applying for jobs quite clearly said, without a SIN, we cannot legally employ you. So, it was like Service Canada saying, don’t worry, you can still work. But actually, the employer is going, sorry, you can’t without a SIN. So, I spent six weeks unemployed.

It was just kind of like really straightforward, like I just went there with my health card and my birth certificate, but I went really early in the morning, so right when they opened up. So, it was pretty fast, the process.

SIN vs. eSIN

• Overall satisfaction was consistent among SIN and eSIN clients, although a higher proportion of SIN clients provided a rating of 5 out of 5. Consistent with overall results for the program, satisfaction was higher among SIN and eSIN clients compared to all clients. Results were directionally higher among both groups compared to 2021-22, and notably a higher proportion of SIN clients provided a rating of 5 out of 5 compared to last year.
• SIN clients provided higher ratings for the quality of service provided in person, online and through specialized call centres, while eSIN clients provided higher ratings for online. Results were consistent compared to 2021-22.

• SIN and eSIN clients provided higher ratings across several service attributes compared to all clients.
• Gaps were consistently larger among SIN clients, with the widest gaps for the ease of getting help in general and on the application, the helpfulness of specialized call centre representatives and timeliness of service. The largest gaps among eSIN clients were for the ease of understanding information about the program, ease of getting help on the application, ease of figuring out eligibility and timeliness of service.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased among SIN clients for the ease of getting help and receiving consistent information, while eSIN clients provided higher ratings for the ease of getting help on the application.

Ease Service Attributes: Overall (1/3)

• At more than nine in ten, clients were most likely to agree it was easy to access service in a language they could speak and understand well, followed by more than eight in ten who felt that overall it was easy to apply and that being able to complete steps online made the process easier. Three-quarters of clients agreed that it was clear what would happen next and when and that they needed to explain their situation only once.
• Compared to 2021-22, clients were more likely to agree that it was easy to apply overall.

Ease Service Attributes: by Program (2/3)

• SIN clients were more likely to provide high ratings for the overall ease of applying, clarity of process and that they needed to explain their situation once. EI clients were more likely to provide high ratings for being able to complete steps online made the process easier and were less likely to provide high ratings for clarity of process, that it was easy to apply overall and that they needed to explain their situation once. CPP-D clients were less likely to provide high ratings across all aspects of ease compared to all clients, while CPP clients were less likely to provide higher ratings for being able to complete steps online made the process easier (along with OAS/GIS clients) and clarity of process. OAS/GIS clients were also less likely to provide high ratings that it was easy to access service in a language they could speak and understand well and being able to complete the steps online making the process easier.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI clients were more likely to feel that being able to complete steps online made the process easier. SIN and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to agree that, overall, it was easy to apply.

Ease of End-to-End Client Journey (3/3)

Qualitative Highlights on Level of Effort

The level of effort varied considerably by program. CPP-D participants who had lower satisfaction and/or experienced a barrier were especially negative. They highlighted: difficulties of describing their disability in words, the length of the form being a challenge given their disability; challenges of obtaining necessary documentation from their doctors in terms of timeliness and cost of forms; and feelings of hopelessness as they had been advised or had heard from others of the difficulty of obtaining the benefit.

Participants who applied to other programs (such as EI) also reported challenges related to ambiguous question formulation, delays related to the uploading of incorrect forms, wait times at Service Canada centres and perceived lack of knowledge of Service Canada representatives at time of application.

Participants who applied to CPP, OAS/GIS and SIN tended to indicate it took less effort to complete and submit their applications, describing the process as straightforward with easy steps to follow.

It was a lot of paperwork. Like tons; tons and tons. It was very intrusive, right, like I had to give my whole soul.

Easy. You just had to fill out an online form. […] Seriously, it took like 15 minutes.

“It was easy and clearly explained, because they gave an overview about what is this and who needs a SIN number. How to apply is also there, and they mentioned how to update and how to protect our required documents. So, it's all mentioned on the website. It's clear and detailed.”

Effectiveness Service Attributes: Overall (1/3)

• At more than eight in ten, clients were most likely to agree that they were able to move smoothly through all steps, followed by closer to eight in ten who agreed they were provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic and received consistent information. Just over three-quarters of clients agreed that it was clear what to do if they had a problem or question, followed by that the amount of time from start to finish was reasonable and that it was easy to get help when they needed it.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased that it was clear what to do if they had a problem or question and that it was easy to get help when they needed it and have decreased for being provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic.

Effectiveness Service Attributes: by Program (2/3)

• SIN clients were more likely to provide high ratings for all aspects of effectiveness compared to all clients, while CPP-D clients were less likely. EI clients were less likely to provide high ratings for being able to move smoothly through all steps, receiving consistent information, timeliness of service and ease of getting help. CPP and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to provide high ratings for timeliness of service and less likely to agree that they were provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic, it was clear what to do if they had a problem or question and that it was easy to get help when needed.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI, SIN and OAS/GIS clients provided higher ratings for the ease of getting help when needed, while SIN clients also provided higher ratings for timeliness of service. EI, CPP, CPP-D and SIN clients provided lower ratings for being provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic.

Effectiveness Service Attributes (3/3)

Emotion Service Attributes: Overall (1/3)

• At well over nine in ten, nearly all clients agreed that they were provided service in their choice of English or French. Just over nine in ten agreed that the Service Canada representatives that they dealt with in-person were helpful, followed by that they felt respected throughout the process and that they were confident their personal information was protected. Closer to eight in ten agreed that the Service Canada specialized call centre and 1 800 O-Canada representatives were helpful. More than three-quarters of clients agreed that they travelled a reasonable distance to access service, followed by that the eServiceCanada representatives were helpful and that they were confident any issues or problems would have been easily resolved.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased for the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and that they travelled a reasonable distance to access service.

Emotion Service Attributes: by Program (2/3)

• SIN clients were more likely to provide high ratings across nearly all aspects of emotion, while CPP-D clients provided lower ratings. EI and CPP clients provided lower ratings for the helpfulness of in-person representatives, while EI clients also provided lower ratings for confidence any issues or problems would have been easily resolved and CPP clients for confidence their personal information was protected, travelling a reasonable distance to access service and the helpfulness of eServiceCanada representatives. OAS/GIS clients provided lower ratings for feeling respected throughout the process and confidence their personal information was protected.
• Compared to 2021-22, SIN clients provided higher ratings for the helpfulness of in-person representatives and for travelling a reasonable distance to access service. CPP clients provided lower ratings for the helpfulness of eServiceCanada representatives.

Emotion During End-to-End Client Journey (3/3)

Ease of Follow-Up with Service Canada

• Six in ten clients found it easy to follow-up with Service Canada about their application (before receiving a decision). CPP-D clients were less likely to have felt it was easy to follow-up compared to all clients, while SIN and CPP clients were more likely.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased overall and among CPP clients.

Changes That Would Have Improved Follow-up Experience: Overall

• Among the 41% of clients who followed-up with Service Canada before receiving a decision, quicker assistance by phone would have improved the experience the most, followed by clearer information on the status of their application and real-time support through an online chat with a Service Canada representative.
• CPP clients were more likely to say that none of the changes would have improved their experience.
• Compared to 2021-22, SIN clients were more likely to feel that quicker assistance by phone would have improved the experience the most. CPP-D clients were more likely to feel that real-time support through an online chat with a Service Canada representative would have improved the experience the most.

Satisfaction Drivers Analysis

Drivers of Satisfaction – Background on Analysis

• The Key Drivers Analysis was conducted by regression among all clients and by each of the five programs. Nearly all key service attributes were included in the overall or program level analysis in addition to benefit approval/denial, except for those statements with an insignificant relationship to overall satisfaction or strong inter-collinearity with another variable (in the latter instance, the variable more strongly related to overall satisfaction, or the variable asked among a larger sample size was kept).
• Compared to 2021-22, the strength of the drivers’ analysis has remained consistent (R2 of 0.69 compared to 0.70).

Summary: Drivers of Satisfaction – Overall

• The primary driver of satisfaction was the timeliness of service. It remains the top driver of satisfaction throughout client experience. The helpfulness of in-person representatives also remained among the most prominent drivers, while receiving consistent information, understanding the requirements of the application and getting help on your application when needed have taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.
  • The primary driver of satisfaction in the service experience was the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable. Prominent secondary drivers included the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives, receiving consistent information, confidence in issue resolution, understanding the requirements of the application and getting help on the application when needed.
  • Compared to 2021-22, the top most important driver remained consistent, while receiving consistent information, understanding the requirements of the application, getting help on your application when needed and ease of completing the application form have taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.
• Improving the timeliness of service continued to be the greatest opportunity for improvement for Service Canada clientele as a whole. 
  • In order to summarize what potential changes could result in an increase in overall satisfaction, the service attributes that most strongly drove satisfaction for Service Canada clients were determined and compared to Service Canada’s performance against these attributes.
  • The resulting analysis found that most common area for potential improvement was improving the timeliness of service. Areas of secondary importance for improvement include the ease of getting help on your application and to a lesser extent confidence in the issue resolution process.
  • The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and receiving consistent information are prominent strengths and areas that should be protected.

Summary: Drivers of Satisfaction – EI Program

• EI Clients
  • Timeliness of service continued to be by far the top driver of satisfaction in the service experience. Prominent secondary drivers included the ease of getting help on your application when needed, receiving consistent information, ease of completing the form and that it was clear what would happen next and when.
  • The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for EI clients is in improving the timeliness of service. Areas of secondary importance for improvement include the ease of getting help on the application and receiving consistent information, followed by the clarity of the process.
  • The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person and call centre representatives, ease of completing the application form and being provided service in a way that protected them during the pandemic are relative strengths this year and areas that should be protected.
  • The top most important driver of satisfaction remained consistent compared to 2021-22, while the ease of getting help on your application, ease of completing the application form, that it was clear what would happen next and when and confidence in the issue resolution process have taken on increased importance.

Summary: Drivers of Satisfaction – CPP Program

• CPP Clients
  • The top driver of satisfaction in the service experience was the ease of following-up on your application. Prominent secondary drivers of satisfaction included timeliness of service, ease of finding what information you need to provide when applying, ease of finding information on the program, moving smoothly through all steps and the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives.
  • The greatest opportunities to improve the service experience for CPP clients are improving the ease of follow-up. Areas of secondary importance include the ease of finding information on the program, ease of finding what information you need to provide when applying and timeliness of service.
  • The helpfulness of Service Canada call centre representatives, ease of understanding requirements of the application, moving smoothly through all steps and confidence that personal information was protected were prominent strengths and areas that should be protected.
  • The top drivers of satisfaction for CPP clients have changed compared to 2021-22. The ease of follow-up has increased in importance and become the top driver of satisfaction, while the timeliness of service, ease of finding what information you need to provide when applying, ease of finding information on the program and moving smoothly through all steps have also taken on increased importance.

Summary: Drivers of Satisfaction – CPP-D Program

• CPP-D Clients
  • The top driver of satisfaction in the service experience was by far the timeliness of service. Prominent secondary drivers of satisfaction included whether the application was approved or denied, moving smoothly through all steps, the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives and confidence in the issue resolution process.
  • The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for CPP-D clients is improving the timeliness of service.
  • Areas of secondary importance for improvement include moving smoothly through all steps, the ease of gathering the information needed to apply, ease of getting help on their application and ease of follow-up.
  • Timeliness of service has taken on increased importance and become the top driver of satisfaction. Moving smoothly through all steps, confidence in issue resolution, and the ease of putting together the information needed to apply have also taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.

Summary: Drivers of Satisfaction – SIN Program

• SIN Clients
  • Top drivers of satisfaction in the service experience were the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and timeliness of service. Prominent secondary drivers of satisfaction included understanding the requirements of the application, being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time and confidence in issue resolution.
  • The greatest opportunities to improve the service experience for SIN clients are improving the ease of getting help on their application and ease of figuring out eligibility.
  • The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and timeliness of service in particular represent prominent strengths this year and areas that should be protected. Understanding the requirements of the application, overall ease of applying, ease of getting help when needed, being able to complete the application in a reasonable time and confidence in issue resolution are also areas of relatively stronger performance and should also be protected.
  • The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives has increased in importance and become the top driver of satisfaction. The ease of understanding the requirements of the application has also taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.

Summary: Drivers of Satisfaction – OAS/GIS Program

• OAS/GIS Clients
  • The top driver of satisfaction in the service experience was the ease of following-up on your application. Prominent secondary drivers of satisfaction included the ease of finding out the steps to apply, information on the program and what information was needed to apply and travelling a reasonable distance to access service.
  • The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for OAS/GIS clients is improving the ease of follow-up.
  • Secondary areas for improvement include the ease of finding the steps to apply, what information is needed when applying and information on the program, travelling a reasonable distance to access service and ease of getting help on their application.
  • Being provided service in their choice of English or French, accessing service in a language clients understand, moving smoothly through all steps, ease of completing the application form and timeliness of service are prominent strengths this year and areas that should be protected.
  • The ease of follow-up has taken on increased importance and become the top driver. The ease of finding information on the program, travelling a reasonable distance to access service and being able to find the information needed within a reasonable amount of time have also taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.

Drivers of Satisfaction: Overall

• The primary driver of satisfaction in the service experience was whether the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable. Secondary drivers included the helpfulness of Service Canada of in-person representatives, receiving consistent information, confidence in issue resolution, understanding the requirements of the application and getting help on the application when needed.
• Compared to 2021-22, the top-most important drivers remained consistent, while receiving consistent information, understanding the requirements of the application, getting help on your application when needed, and ease of completing the application form have taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.
• The strength of the drivers’ analysis has remained consistent compared to 2021-22 (R2 of 0.69 compared to 0.70 in 2021-22).

Priority Matrix: Overview

• READER’S NOTE: This slide was intended to assist the reader in interpreting data shown in a priority matrix. A priority matrix has been used to identify priority improvement areas with respect to service interactions with clients.
  • A priority matrix allows for decision makers to identify priorities for improvement by comparing how well clients feel you have performed in an area with how much impact that area has on clients’ overall satisfaction. It helps to answer the question, ‘what can we do to improve satisfaction?’. Each driver or component will fall into one of the quadrants explained below, depending on its impact on overall satisfaction and its performance score (provided by survey respondents).
  • The annual CX survey uses 80% satisfaction as a cut-off point for attributes falling under maintain or protect.

Overall Priority Matrix: Impact vs. Performance

• The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for Service Canada clientele as a whole is improving the timeliness of service. Areas of secondary importance for improvement include the ease of registering for MSCA and ease of getting help on your application and to a lesser extent confidence in the issue resolution process.
• The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and receiving consistent information are prominent strengths and areas that should be protected.
• Note: aspects of service that had an impact of 0.03 or lower were not included in the analysis below given their limited impact on satisfaction.

Drivers of Satisfaction: EI Clients

• The primary driver of satisfaction in the service experience for EI clients was whether the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable. Secondary drivers of satisfaction included the ease of getting help on your application when needed, receiving consistent information, ease of completing the form and that it was clear what would happen next and when.
• Compared to 2021-22, the top most important driver remained consistent, while the ease of getting help on your application, ease of completing the application form, that it was clear what would happen next and when and confidence in the issue resolution process have taken on increased importance.
• The strength of the drivers’ analysis has remained consistent compared to 2021-22 (R2 of 0.68 compared to 0.73).

Overall Priority Matrix: Impact vs. Performance – EI Clients

• The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for EI clients is in improving the timeliness of service. Areas of secondary importance for improvement include the ease of getting help on the application and receiving consistent information, followed by the clarity of process.
• The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person and call centre representatives and ease of completing the application form are relative strengths this year and areas that should be protected.
• Note: aspects of service that had an impact of 0.03 or lower were not included in the analysis below given their limited impact on satisfaction.

Drivers of Satisfaction: CPP Clients

• The primary driver of satisfaction in the service experience for CPP clients was the ease of following-up on your application. Secondary drivers included the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable, ease of finding what information you need to provide when applying, ease of finding information on the program, moving smoothly through all steps and the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives.
• Compared to 2021-22, the top drivers of satisfaction for CPP clients have changed. The ease of follow-up has increased in importance and has become the top driver of satisfaction, while the timeliness of service, ease of finding what information you need to provide when applying, ease of finding information on the program and moving smoothly through all steps have also taken on increased importance.
• The strength of the drivers’ analysis has decreased compared to 2021-22 but remains strong (R2 of 0.78 compared to 0.93).

Overall Priority Matrix: Impact vs. Performance – CPP Clients

• The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for CPP clients is improving the ease of follow-up. Areas of secondary importance include the ease of finding information on the program, ease of finding what information you need to provide when applying and timeliness of service.
• The helpfulness of Service Canada call centre representatives, ease of understanding requirements of the application, moving smoothly through all steps and confidence that personal information was protected were prominent strengths and areas that should be protected.
• Note: aspects of service that had an impact of 0.03 or lower were not included in the analysis below given their limited impact on satisfaction.

Drivers of Satisfaction: CPP-D Clients

• The primary driver of satisfaction in the service experience for CPP-D clients was the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable. Secondary drivers of satisfaction included whether the application was approved or denied, the helpfulness of Service Canada call centre phone representatives, moving smoothly through all steps and confidence in the issue resolution process.
• Compared to 2021-22, timeliness of service has taken on increased importance and become the top driver of satisfaction. Moving smoothly through all steps, confidence in issue resolution and the ease of putting together the information needed to apply have also taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.
• The strength of the drivers’ analysis has decreased compared to 2021-22 but remains strong (R2 of 0.70 compared to 0.79).

Overall Priority Matrix: Impact vs. Performance – CPP-D Clients

• The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for CPP-D clients is improving the timeliness of service.
• Areas of secondary importance for improvement include moving smoothly through all steps, the ease of gathering the information needed to apply, ease of getting help on their application and ease of follow-up.
• Note: aspects of service that had an impact of 0.03 or lower were not included in the analysis below given their limited impact on satisfaction.

Drivers of Satisfaction: SIN Clients

• The primary drivers of satisfaction in the service experience for SIN clients were the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and the amount of time it took from start to finish was reasonable. Secondary drivers of satisfaction included understanding the requirements of the application, being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time and confidence in issue resolution.
• Compared to 2021-22, the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives has increased in importance and become the top driver of satisfaction. The ease of understanding the requirements of the application has also taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.
• The strength of the drivers’ analysis has remained consistent compared to 2021-22 (R2 of 0.64 compared to 0.61).

Overall Priority Matrix: Impact vs. Performance – SIN Clients

• The greatest opportunities to improve the service experience for SIN clients are improving the ease of getting help on their application and ease of figuring out eligibility.
• The helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives and timeliness of service in particular represent prominent strengths this year and areas that should be protected. Understanding the requirements of the application, overall ease of applying, ease of getting help when needed, being able to complete the application in a reasonable time and confidence in issue resolution are also areas of relatively stronger performance and should also be protected.
• Note: aspects of service that had an impact of 0.03 or lower were not included in the analysis below given their limited impact on satisfaction.

Drivers of Satisfaction: OAS/GIS Clients

• The primary driver of satisfaction in the service experience for OAS/GIS clients was the ease of following-up on their application. Secondary drivers of satisfaction included the ease of finding out the steps to apply, information on the program and what information was needed to apply and travelling a reasonable distance to access service.
• Compared to 2021-22, the ease of follow-up has taken on increased importance and has become the top driver. The ease of finding information on the program, travelling a reasonable distance to access service and being able to find the information needed within a reasonable amount of time have also taken on increased importance in driving satisfaction.
• The strength of the drivers’ analysis has increased compared to 2021-22 (R2 of 0.94 compared to 0.71).

Overall Priority Matrix: Impact vs. Performance – OAS/GIS Clients

• The greatest opportunity to improve the service experience for OAS/GIS clients is improving the ease of follow-up. Secondary areas for improvement include the ease of finding the steps to apply, what information is needed when applying and information on the program, travelling a reasonable distance to access service and ease of getting help on their application.
• Being provided service in their choice of English or French, accessing service in a language clients understand, moving smoothly through all steps, ease of completing the application form and timeliness of service are prominent strengths this year and areas that should be protected.
• Note: aspects of service that had an impact of 0.03 or lower were not included in the analysis below given their limited impact on satisfaction.

Impact of Outcome on Satisfaction

• The proportion of EI, CPP and CPP-D who were granted benefits remained consistent compared to 2021-22.
• Satisfaction among CPP-D clients who were approved for benefits decreased year over year. The vast majority of CPP clients, just over half of EI clients and four in ten CPP-D clients who were denied benefits were satisfied with their experience.

Service Levels And Channel Use

Self-Service and Assistance

Change in Multiple Channel Use Over Time

• Overall, clients were more likely to utilize in-person service during the entire client journey compared to 2021-22, while fewer used self-service only.
• Use of in-person service has increased for a second consecutive year but remained considerably lower than 2019-20 or earlier (i.e. prior to the pandemic), while those who used self-service only has steadily declined over the same timeframe. Assisted self-service has continued to see gradual increases in usage year-over-year.
• Channels used, in particular in-person and online, has not returned to pre-pandemic levels, possibly indicating the longer-term impacts of service transformation changes and evolving service channel preferences. Overall, in 2022-23, channel use among clients sees more use of in-person but still far off levels observed prior to the pandemic.
• Six percent utilized the touchless person-to-person service, while 4% were auto-enrolled only and 1% used mail only. The balance of clients (7% indicated either using no channels throughout their experience or did not fit a defined level of service. These figures are stable with previous years.

Multiple Channel Use definitions were mutually exclusive paths that track the client journey. The Multiple Channel Use variables were used to assess whether there has been an increase or decrease in a particular method of contact with Service Canada. Please note that the definitions used are based on those set in CX3.

• In-Person: If a respondent goes into a Service Canada centre at any stage of their journey, they were considered to have used the “in person” service level.
• Self-Service Only: These respondents use online offerings including the Government of Canada website and their My Service Canada Account. They engage online at all stages.
• Assisted Self-Service: These respondents use online or mail services, but also contact Service Canada by phone, or a combination of phone and online or mail throughout their journey.
• Auto-Enroll Only: These respondents were auto-enrolled in their program/benefit and made no additional contact with Service Canada.
• Mail Only: These respondents only contact Service Canada by mail at every stage, making no use of the online, in person, or telephone services.
• Touchless Person-to-Person: These respondents used an online application and had a service interaction with eServiceCanada at any point (no in-person at any point).

Service Levels by Stage in the Client Journey: Overall

• Clients were most likely to have used self-service only at the aware and apply stages and assisted self-service at the follow-up stage.
• Compared to 2021-22, use of in-person service increased at the aware and apply stages. Clients were also more likely to have used assisted-self-service at the aware stage and less likely to have used self-service only at the apply stage.

Service Levels by Stage in the Client Journey: EI

• EI clients were most likely to have used self-service only at the aware and apply stages and assisted self-service at the follow-up stage.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI clients were more likely to have used in-person service or assisted self-service at the aware and apply stages and less likely to have used self-service only at the apply stage.

Service Levels by Stage in the Client Journey: CPP

• CPP clients were most likely to have used self-service only at the aware and apply stages, while a roughly equal proportion used self-service only, assisted self-service or in-person service at the follow-up stage.
• Compared to 2021-22, service levels among CPP clients remained consistent across all stages of the client journey.

Service Levels by Stage in the Client Journey: CPP-D

• CPP-D clients were most likely to have used self-service only at the aware stage, mail only at the apply stage and assisted self-service at the follow-up stage.
• Compared to 2021-22, CPP-D clients were more likely to have used in-person service at the apply stage and less likely to have used mail-only. They were also more likely to have used self-service only at the follow-up stage.

Service Levels by Stage in the Client Journey: SIN

• SIN clients were most likely to have used in-person at all stages of the client journey and in-particular at the apply stage.
• Compared to 2021-22, SIN clients were more likely to have utilized in-person or mail only at the aware and apply stages and less likely to have used self-service only or assisted self-service. Service levels remained consistent at the follow-up stage compared to last year.

Service Levels by Stage in the Client Journey: OAS/GIS

• Half of OAS/GIS clients were auto-enrolled and did not engage in the aware or apply stage. Non auto-enrolled clients were most likely to use self-service only at the aware stage and mail only at the apply stage (followed closely by self-service only). Among those who followed up, in-person service was used most often, followed closely by self-service only and assisted self-service.
• Compared to 2021-22, the proportion of clients auto-enrolled decreased which meant more OAS/GIS clients overall engaged in the aware or apply stages. OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used mail only at the apply stage, while service levels remained consistent at the aware and follow-up stages.

Proactive Communication with CPP-D Clients (Reported)

• Six in ten CPP-D clients reported receiving a call from Service Canada to discuss their application status and next steps prior to receiving a decision, higher than in 2021-22.
• Satisfaction continued to be considerably higher among CPP-D clients who report being contacted by Service Canada before receiving a decision, compared to those who were not. However, satisfaction declined among those who were contacted by Service Canada compared to 2021-22.

Proactive Communication with EI Clients (Reported)

• One-third of EI clients reported receiving a letter, email or telephone call from Service Canada about their application status prior to receiving a decision, higher than in 2021-22.
• Whether or not an EI client was contacted by Service Canada did not have a significant difference on their overall satisfaction. Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction ratings have increased among those who were contacted by Service Canada prior to receiving a decision.

Channel Use By Stage And Program

Channel Use: Overall

• Across all stages of the client journey, just over three-quarters of clients (76%) used the online channel at some point, while nearly four in ten used in-person (39%) and slightly fewer telephone (35%). More than two in ten (22%) used mail and around one in ten (12%) eServiceCanada at some point during their client journey.
• Compared to 2021-22, a higher proportion reported using in-person or telephone channels.

Channel Use by Stage: Overall

• Online was the most used channel at the aware and apply stages and telephone at the follow-up stage.
• Compared to 2021-22, use of the in-person channel increased at the aware and apply stages but continued to be much lower than levels observed in 2019-20 or earlier. A higher proportion also reported using the telephone channel at the aware stage, while fewer used the online channel at the apply stage.

Channel Use at Aware Stage: by Program

• Clients of all programs were most likely to have used online government sources to find out about the program they were applying for. EI clients continued to be more likely to use the online channel compared to all clients, while clients of all other programs were less likely. Telephone use was higher among EI and CPP-D clients, while CPP, CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to use the mail channel. CPP-D clients were also more likely to use eServiceCanada, while SIN clients were more likely to use in-person service.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI clients were more likely to have used in-person service, CPP-D clients were more likely to have gone online or used the mail channel, while OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used the telephone channel. SIN clients were less likely to have gone online during the aware stage.

Channel Use at Apply Stage: by Program

• EI and CPP clients were most likely to have used the online channel at the apply stage, while CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were most likely to have used mail and SIN clients in-person. EI clients were more likely to have used the online channel compared to all clients, EI and CPP-D clients the telephone channel, and CPP, CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients the mail channel. SIN clients were more likely to use in-person service compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI, CPP-D and SIN clients were more likely to have used the in-person channel, while OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used the mail channel. SIN clients were less likely to have used the online channel or eServiceCanada.

In-Person Application Completion

• More than half of those who used the in-person channel at the apply stage reported that they completed their application at the counter with a Service Canada representative, while three in ten used a computer and two in ten said they didn’t know.
• CPP and CPP-D clients, along with OAS/GIS clients, were less likely to have used a computer, and CPP and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have completed their application at the counter with a Service Canada representative. EI clients were more likely to have used a computer.

Channel Use at Follow-Up Stage: by Program

• Clients of all programs were most likely to have used the telephone channel at the follow-up stage. CPP, CPP-D, SIN and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used the mail channel compared to all clients. SIN clients were also more likely to have used the in-person channel.
• Compared to 2021-22, channel use at the follow-up stage remained very consistent across each program.

Sequence Of Channel Use

Qualitative Highlights on Channel Preferences

Decisions related to which channel to use to complete the application process were determined by following several primary main factors:

• Age
• Awareness of GoC programs in general
• Familiarity with the specific Service Canada program
• Confidence (or lack thereof) in one’s ability to successfully complete the application process on their own 
• Previous positive experiences using the chosen service channel
• Desire for convenience and expediency
• Access to and comfort with the use of a computer.

I just prefer to do everything online. I work online, I bank online. Just everything is much easier. I wouldn’t want to spend time waiting in line in person anywhere, and the phones are very difficult to get through.

I was hoping to do it online. But then I realized it wasn’t an immediate response, I wouldn’t get an immediate SIN number, so I decided to in person because it would take some time before I got the SIN number.

It was just because we had the paperwork from the doctor, the paperwork that my wife filled out. It was easier for us to fill it out manually as oppose to doing it online and stuff. It was just the old-school way of doing it. We can see it, we can look at it and see our mistakes and change stuff.

In person, sit down in person. It’s confidence. I’m very suspicious of things online or phone calls.

Multi-Channel Use: Online Channel Usage In-Depth

• Clients most often used the online channel first at the aware and apply stages, while online was the second most used channel at follow-up. Among those who used online first, clients were more likely to have used phone as a second channel at the follow-up stage and the apply stage, while use of phone and in-person was consistent as a second channel at the aware stage.
• Compared to 2021-22, those who used the online channel first at the aware stage were more likely to have use phone or in-person as a second channel. Among those who used online first at the apply stage, clients were more likely to use phone as a second channel.

Multi-Channel Use: In-Person Channel Usage In-Depth

• In-person was the second most used channel as a first point of contact at the aware or apply stage and the least used as a first point of contact at the follow-up stage. Among those who used in-person first, clients were more likely to have used online as a second channel at the aware stage and follow-up stage and to a lesser extent at the apply stage. 
• Compared to 2021-22, clients were more likely to have used the in-person channel as a first point of contact at the aware and apply stages. Among those who used in-person first at the follow-up stage, clients were more likely to use online as a second channel.

Multi-Channel Use: Telephone Channel Usage In-Depth

• Telephone continues to be the most common channel for the first point of contact at the follow-up stage and the least used first channel at the aware and apply stages. Among those who used telephone first, clients were more likely to use the online channel as a second channel at all stages.
• Compared to 2021-22, use of telephone as the first point of contact remained consistent across all stages. Among those who used telephone first at the aware stage, clients were more likely to use online as a second channel and less likely to use in-person. Use of online also increased as a second channel at the apply stage.

Multiple Channel Use Proportions

• Overall, just under four in ten clients used one channel during their client journey, followed by one-third who used two, just under two in ten who used three and 7% who used 4 or more. SIN clients were more likely to have used only one channel, OAS/GIS clients no channels (due to auto-enrolled clients who did not use any service channel), while EI clients were more likely to have used three channels and CPP-D clients three or more channels.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI and SIN clients were less likely to have used one channel, with EI clients more likely to have used three channels and SIN clients two channels. OAS/GIS clients were less likely to have used no channels (due to a higher proportion who were non-auto enrolled this year).

Impact of Multiple Channel Use

• Clients who utilized three or more channels had lower overall satisfaction with their service experience compared to all clients, while those who used one channel had higher satisfaction.
• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction has increased among those who used two channels.

Reason for Follow-Up: Overall

• A higher proportion of clients reported following-up with Service Canada before receiving a decision compared to 2021-22 (41% vs. 37%). Among those who did, the primary reason continued to be to check on the status of their application/payment, followed by to provide additional information.
• Compared to 2021-22, clients were more likely to have followed-up to check on the status of their application/payment or provide additional information.

Reason for Follow-up: by Program

• EI and CPP-D clients were more likely to have followed-up compared to all clients, while CPP, OAS/GIS and SIN clients were less likely.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI clients were more likely to have followed-up to provide additional information, while OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have followed-up to check on the status of their application/ payment.

Client Experience With Service Channels

Satisfaction by Service Channel: Overall (% Rated 4 or 5)

• Satisfaction with in-person service remained the highest, followed by online, MSCA, specialized call centres, eService Canada and 1 800 O-Canada.
• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction increased for specialized call centres and 1 800 O-Canada and returned to levels observed in 2020-21. Satisfaction with all other service channels remained consistent, however ratings for eServiceCanada declined directionally for the second consecutive year and were significantly lower than in 2020-21.

Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction increased for specialized call centres and returned to levels observed in 2020-21. A higher proportion rated their satisfaction a 5 out of 5 for specialized call centres and 4 out of 5 for 1 800 O-Canada compared to last year, while there has also been an increase in those who rated their satisfaction 1 out of 5 (“very dissatisfied”) for eServiceCanada.

Satisfaction with Service Channels: by Program

• Satisfaction with service channels continued to differ by program: CPP-D clients rated their satisfaction with in-person service, specialized call centres and online lower compared to all clients, EI clients for in-person service and OAS/GIS clients for online and MSCA. SIN clients provided higher ratings for in-person and online.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI clients provided higher ratings for their satisfaction with specialized call centres, CPP-D clients provided higher ratings for eServiceCanada and SIN clients for in-person service.

Ease of Navigating Government of Canada Website: Overall

• Clients were most likely to feel it was easy to find out the steps to apply, find information about the program and find out what information they need to provide when applying. Ratings remained lower for the ease of deciding the best age to start their pension (among relevant programs).
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have remained consistent across all aspects of the ease of navigating the Government of Canada (GoC) website.

Ease of Using Government of Canada Website

Ease of Navigating Government of Canada Website: by Program

• SIN clients were more likely to provide high ratings for all aspects of the ease of looking for information on the GoC website compared to all clients, while CPP-D clients were less likely. EI clients were less likely to feel it was easy to figure out eligibility, while CPP and OAS/GIS clients were more likely. OAS/GIS clients were less likely to feel it was easy to understand information about the program and find out the steps to apply.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings are consistent across all aspects of the ease of looking for information on the GoC website.

Reported Increased Ease Provided by Digital Services

• More than eight in ten clients agreed that being able to complete steps online made the process easier.
• EI clients were more likely to agree compared to all clients, while CPP, OAS/GIS and CPP-D clients were less likely.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased among EI clients.

Online Channel

• Among those who went online at the aware stage, more than nine in ten were able to find the information they were looking for on the Government of Canada website. Six in ten were able to completely find the information they sought and one-third somewhat.
• Results were consistent with 2021-22.

Qualitative Highlights on Online Service Channel

Participants who had visited program websites for more information reported mixed experiences. On the one hand, some felt that the websites were easy to find, provided clear information on the steps to apply and experienced no issues with navigation.

Others, meanwhile, described challenges such as reconciling the general eligibility information provided to their own unique circumstances; the verbose way of eligibility and required documentation for applications; and lack of clarity of how to apply online.

Most EI participants did not experience issues with the online application portal. The small number that did highlighted: confusing language, too many webpages and the inconvenience of having to use an online portal to apply then MSCA to check on progress.

I googled and I came up with the right place […] it said ‘income supplements’. […] I opened it and it explained everything, telling me what I could expect if I was in the right income bracket. So it was pretty helpful when I got on the site. It was quite easy

If I go on the website, I would prefer to see a simple six-point list over there that, hey, this is what you need to have in person, original, not a photocopy. That’s it, and that’s enough. But still, they mention huge paragraphs, and nobody is ready to read a huge paragraph nowadays. It just becomes too complicated.

So you go to a website and it asks you to sign in, and then it doesn't remember your password. And then you send a password, and then you get it, and then you finally sign in. And then it goes through a confirmation button, and then you have to read another thing and agree to the terms and services. Then you have to go to a website that says, okay, "What language do you want to be in?". And then you have to go to another button that then has more terms and conditions. And then you have to go to another button that says, "Describe your current situation". And none of them are exact and then you have to...like, it's just, it's not set up to say, let's do this, it's set up to be a process of data collection that's perhaps been folded together from 40 different people who clearly did not work together

Ease When Applying: Overall

• More than eight in ten clients agreed they were able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time.
• Clients were most likely to find it easy to complete the application form, followed by understand the requirement of the application and put together the information needed to apply. Ratings remained lower for the ease of getting help on their application.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increasing for being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time and the ease of getting help on their application.

Ease When Applying: by Program

• SIN clients were more likely to provide high ratings for all aspects of the application compared to all clients, with the exception of completing the application in the reasonable time where ratings were consistent. CPP-D clients were less likely to agree they were able to complete the application in a reasonable time, and along with EI clients, to provide high ratings for all aspects of the application. CPP and OAS/GIS clients were less likely to feel it was easy to get help on their application.
• Compared to 2021-22, SIN and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to find it easy to get help on their application. OAS/GIS clients also provided higher ratings for the ease of completing the application form.

Online Application Completion

Use of Online Chatbot on Canada.ca

One in ten clients used the online chat on the Canada.ca website, consistent with 2021-22. CPP-D clients were less likely to have used the chat compared to all clients. Of those who used the chat, nearly two-thirds agreed it was helpful and ratings were consistent with last year. CPP-D clients were less likely to feel the online chat was helpful.

Ease of Application Process: Self-Service Clients

• At least eight in ten or higher, the vast majority of self-serve 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. Closer to six in ten self-serve clients found it was easy to get help on their application when they needed it.
• Compared to 2021-22, self-serve clients overall were more likely to feel it was easy to get help on their application.

Use of My Service Canada Account (MSCA): Overall

• Overall, two-thirds of clients used MSCA. Just over four in ten used their MSCA which they had registered for in the past, two in ten registered and used their MSCA for the first time and 5% tried unsuccessfully to register for their MSCA.
• Compared to 2021-22, reported use of MSCA remained consistent.

Use of My Service Canada Account (MSCA): by Program

• Three-quarters of CPP clients, seven in ten EI clients and half of CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients used MSCA during their experience. CPP clients were more likely to have used their MSCA which they had registered for in the past.
• Compared to 2021-22, a higher proportion of CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients used MSCA. Notably, CPP-D clients were more likely to have registered and used their MSCA for the first time.

Ease of My Service Canada Account (MSCA) Registration: by Program

• Six in ten clients found it easy to register for their MSCA, higher than in 2021-22. CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were less likely to feel it was easy to register compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, EI clients were more likely to feel it was easy to register.

Reasons for Low Satisfaction with MSCA Registration

• Among those who rated registering their MSCA as a 1 or 2 out of 5, the most common reasons were that they experienced problems with their personal access code or creating their profile, followed by problems verifying their identity using their online banking information. CPP-D clients were less likely to cite problems verifying their identity using online banking information and more likely to cite another reason for their low rating.
• Results were consistent compared to 2021-22.

Registered for MSCA in a Reasonable Amount of Time

• Two-thirds of clients who registered or attempted to register for their MSCA agreed that they could do so in a reasonable amount of time, significantly higher than 2021-22.
• CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were less likely to feel they could register for their MSCA in a reasonable amount of time.

Ease of Signing into Existing MSCA

• Just over seven in ten of those with an existing MSCA found it easy to sign into their account, with half saying it was very easy.
• CPP clients were more likely to find it easy to sign in compared to all clients and ratings have increased compared to 2021-22.

Reason for Difficulty Signing into MSCA: Overall

• Among those who rated the ease of signing into their MSCA as a 1 or 2 out of 5, the most common reasons were problems with their security code, followed by that they forgot their username or password, their account was locked or MSCA was unavailable. Three in ten cited other reasons.
• Results were consistent by program and compared to 2021-22.

Satisfaction with My Service Canada Account (MSCA)

• Nearly three-quarters of clients who used their MSCA were satisfied with the overall quality of service they received, consistent with 2021-22. OAS/GIS clients were less likely to be satisfied with the service received through MSCA.
• When looking at results by client group, Racialized clients and OLMC were more likely to be highly satisfied, while clients with no devices, those who are E-vulnerable, those with a language barrier and non-English or French speakers were less likely.

Qualitative Highlights on My Service Canada Account

OAS/GIS and CPP-D participants were among the least likely to use MSCA to complete their applications. This was largely a function of age, their health conditions and the nature of the application. Older participants of these programs did not have access to a computer or the internet and were generally more comfortable and confident in applying using the paper application form or in-person. For others, sitting at a computer was difficult due to their health condition, found it easier to express themselves by writing down their answers and in a small number of cases participants were unaware of the option to apply online.

Among those with experiences of using MSCA, participants reported few issues with registering or signing in to MSCA; most appeared to have had their accounts for several years now. Some used their GCKey out of habit. Others found the sign-in option via the bank more convenient and secure due to high levels of trust toward their banking institutions.

Most participants used MSCA to check on the status of their application. They were generally underwhelmed by the vague “status pending” message shown on MSCA. Participants explained that the status message is one reason why they proceeded to call a program's specialized call centre to ask for more detailed information.

Participants who used MSCA generally trusted that Service Canada is doing its best in protecting their personal information. There were some references to security breaches involving federal government departments, but this did not appear to affect their trust levels. Instead, participants adopted an attitude of resignation that security breaches happen and affect both private and public organizations.

I’m a one-finger typist at best. I’ve got friends that can help me out on the computer, and my daughter-in-law, she is very good on computers and things like that. But I’m not very comfortable with it. So, when I saw that I could just print it out and write things out, I thought, yeah, that’s what I’m going to do. . I’m kind of old-school.

It was pretty straightforward […] I’ve had very good service with my banking and Interac services before, so I figured if I logged in with that, because my MSCA account has all of your SIN numbers and that kind of information, it’s probably actually better to use the Interac verification because my bank has like fraud alerts and different ways to possibly protect me.

The options are "Status pending" or "Approved". And then "Status pending", like, what does that mean? And not even the people that you phone know what that means

Use of 1 800 O-Canada at Aware Stage and Channel Satisfaction: Overall and by Client Group

• Overall, 6% of all clients used 1 800 O-Canada at the aware stage to learn about the program they applied for, consistent with 2021-22. Usage at the aware stage was higher among clients with restrictions.
• Seven in ten were satisfied with the quality of service provided through 1 800 O-Canada, higher than 2021-22. Satisfaction was higher among remote clients, newcomers and Racialized clients compared to all clients who used 1 800 O-Canada and lower among those with a language barrier or clients with restrictions. Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction has increased among Indigenous clients, those who live in an urban area, clients with restrictions, clients with disabilities and Racialized clients.

* Small sample size. Results should be interpreted with caution. ** Sample sizes too small for reporting.

Q1a. Which of the following did you use to find out about [INSERT PROGRAM] or [INSERT ABBREV] before you applied? Did you ...?

Q27. How satisfied were you with the overall quality of service you received from …?

Base: All respondents (n=varies)

Satisfaction with eServiceCanada

• At just over seven in ten, the majority of clients who used eServiceCanada were satisfied with the overall quality of service received, however ratings have declined directionally and there has also been an increase in those who rated their satisfaction 1 out of 5 (“very dissatisfied”).
• Among those who used eServiceCanada, nearly eight in ten found the process easy, while roughly three-quarters found it effective and easy to find information about the program they were applying for on the GoC website; ratings across all measures were lower compared to all clients. Just over half felt it was easy to follow up.
• Ratings were consistent with 2021-22.

Q27. How satisfied were you with the overall quality of service you received from …?

Q36b. Thinking about the overall service you received, from getting information about [INSERT ABBREV] to receiving a decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements, using a 5-point scale (where 1 means strongly disagree, and 5 means strongly agree)?

Q20a. Using a 5-point scale where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how difficult or easy was it to follow up with Service Canada about your application?

Q6. When you were looking for information about [INSERT ABBREV] on the Government of Canada website, how difficult or easy was it to …? Please use a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very difficult and 5 is very easy, how would you rate …?

In-Person – Overall Satisfaction / Helpfulness / Booked Appointment

• At more than eight in ten, the vast majority of clients who used the in-person channel were satisfied with the quality of service received, consistent with 2021-22. More than nine in ten felt that Service Canada representatives were helpful and more than eight in ten found it easy to get help when they needed it; ratings have increased across both measures compared to 2021-22.
• Just over two in ten clients who utilized in person services at the aware or apply stage booked an appointment prior to their visit and fewer reported doing so at the apply stage compared to 2021-22. Clients who booked an appointment at either the aware or apply stage have consistent levels of satisfaction with their experience compared to those who did not.

Note: In-Person satisfaction results do not include the person-to-person touchless service – eServiceCanada.

Q27. How satisfied were you with the overall quality of service you received from…? Base: (n=1471)

Q36b. Thinking about the overall service you received, from getting information about [INSERT ABBREV] to receiving a decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements, using a 5-point scale (where 1 means strongly disagree, and 5 means strongly agree.) Base: All answering (n=varies)

Q1c. You indicated that you went to a government office before you applied. Did you book an appointment prior to your visit? Base: (n=845)

Q9d. You indicated that you went to a government office when completing and submitting your application. Did you book an appointment prior to your visit? Base: Those who went to a government office before applying (n=1093)

Profile of In-Person Clientele – Proportion of Client Groups

• The proportion of client groups among in-person clientele varied; with certain groups having relied more on in-person service.
• Clients with restrictions to accessing service were more prevalent among those who used in-person at the aware and follow-up stages of the client journey. The proportion of Racialized clients, mobile-only clients, urban clients, the E-vulnerable and newcomers was higher among those who used in-person at the aware or apply stages.
• The prevalence of those with a high school education or less was higher among those who used in-person service at the follow-up stage, as was rural clients. Urban clients and newcomers were least prevalent.

OLMC:

Official Language Minority Communities

In-Person Satisfaction by Region (% Rated 4 or 5)

• Overall, more than eight in ten clients who utilized in-person services were satisfied with the service provided, consistent with 2021-22.
• Clients in Atlantic Canada were more likely to be satisfied with the quality of service provided in-person and ratings have increased compared to 2021-22.

Qualitative Highlights on In-person Service Channel

SIN participants applied in-person largely due to being made aware of this channel by friends or professionals helping them with settlement in Canada. A few OAS/GIS participants also opted to apply in person as they did not have access to the internet or required additional support with their application.

The main pain point encountered by participants were long queues at Service Canada Centres. This was not a surprise for SIN participants; many had heard from their friends that wait times can be long. A small number of OAS/GIS participants believed that health measures at offices reduced the level of service during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Representatives at Service Canada Centres were the main positive highlight. They were described by SIN and OAS/GIS participants as “nice”, “professional”, “patient” and “providing excellent customer care”.

I personally preferred to go in and see somebody face-to-face. Knowing that it’s such an important piece of documentation to receive, I prefer to go in and see somebody, hand them the documentations, have a conversation, and hopefully come away with exactly what I was looking for.

I was just feeling so tired [of waiting], because there’s no appointment that I can book in advance I can only walk into that place. I went [at a Service Canada office at] 8:00 AM, so it’s really early, but there were obviously a lot of people waiting there. It took me an hour to get in, I found that there were still a really long line.

I went into the Service Canada office in Moncton, which is where I expected to go. I don’t have any internet or that sort of thing, so the office was there, there was a receptionist there and they said that they didn’t help anyone there. There were computers all turned on and all cordoned off, no one using them. I It was in the COVID thing, and they were shut down. So it was 50 kilometre trip wasted going in there.

In-Person and Telephone Experience

• More than nine in ten clients who used in-person services felt that Service Canada representatives were helpful, while nearly eight in ten agreed that they travelled a reasonable distance to access the service; ratings have increased across both measures compared to 2021-22. More than eight in ten clients who used telephone services agreed that Service Canada specialized call centre telephone representatives were helpful, consistent with last year.
• Clients who were satisfied with their overall experience provided higher ratings for the helpfulness of Service Canada in-person and specialized call centre representatives and travelling a reasonable distance to access service compared to all clients who used those services, while those who were dissatisfied provided considerably lower ratings.

Reasons for Low Satisfaction with Specialized Call Centre Service: Overall

• Among those who reported low satisfaction ratings of 1 to 3 out of 5 for the service provided by specialized call centres, the most common reason was long wait times, with nearly four in ten feeling it was too long. Other reasons included inconsistent or unclear information or that their questions were not answered.
• Results were consistent with 2021-22.

Reasons for Low Satisfaction with Specialized Call Centre Service: by Program

• CPP and CPP-D clients were more likely to report that Service Canada representatives were disrespectful compared to all clients as the reason for their lower rating.
• Results were consistent with 2021-22 by program.

Qualitative Highlights on Specialized Call Centre Service Channel

Wait times was the most common pain point experienced by participants who contacted  Specialized Call Centres. Several participants said they waited on hold for hours or were unable to reach a Service Canada representative. It was assumed there must be a high volume of calls.

A lack of information on the status of their application further contributed to negative perceptions of Specialized Call Centres.

In terms of positive comments, Call Centre representatives were described as “cordial” and “professional” by a small number of participants despite their frustration with the situation.

So when I called to help them guide me through the website, I was on hold for maybe an hour, hour-and-a-half. And then the line eventually tells you, "Call back another time", everyone's too busy

I had to phone three different times. Maybe it was more. The first time I phoned, it was no, we’re still looking into it. And then, it was they’re still looking into it, and then a month or two months later, I phoned again.

I applied and I heard nothing back for four weeks. So I was just incessantly phoning to say, "Can somebody please give me an answer?". They said, "Oh, love to help you out but nobody's started your application on this side". And they just did that over, and over, and over, and over again. By the time somebody got back to me I was already employed again.

Reasons for Low Satisfaction with Specialized Call Centre Service: by Region

• Results were generally consistent by region.
• Compared to 2021-22, clients in the West/Territories and Ontario were more likely to say their questions were not answered, while those in Ontario were also more likely to report that they did not like the outcome of the calls. However, clients in Ontario were less likely to mention telephone wait times being too long and those in the West/Territories that they did not like the outcome of the calls.

Client Groups

Barriers/Restrictions to Accessing Service

Clients with Restrictions that Affect Accessing Service: Overall

• Just over four in ten of all clients felt they had restrictions that made it more difficult to access services, lower than in 2021-22.
• The most common type of restriction experienced was not being unable to visit SC offices during business hours, followed by needing assistance from someone other than SC representatives, not living in close proximity to a SC Office and that the application form was too long or complicated.
• Compared to 2021-22, clients were less likely to report a restriction because of not living in close proximity to a SC Office.

Q45a. Some people experience difficulties applying for [INSERT ABBREV] because of barriers to accessing service. Thinking about your overall experience from getting information about, to applying for [INSERT ABBREV], did you experience difficulties for any of the following reasons …? A response of ‘yes’ means it was a barrier for you and caused difficulties applying and a response of ‘no’ means it was not a barrier.

Base: All respondents (n=Base varies)

Clients with Restrictions that Affect Accessing Service: by Program

• CPP-D clients were more likely to have nearly all restrictions, while OAS/GIS clients were more likely to say they were restricted by not having access to a computer and EI clients by not living in close proximity to a Service Canada office.
• Compared to 2021-22, CPP clients were less likely to say they were unable to visit a Service Canada office during business hours, that they do not live in close proximity to a Service Canada office and that they could not use the computer in a Service Canada centre. OAS/GIS clients were less likely to say that the application form was too long or complicated and that they do not own a smart phone.

Clients with Restrictions that Affect Accessing Service

• Clients with restrictions had lower overall satisfaction compared to all clients but were more satisfied compared to 2021-22.
• Clients with restrictions had lower satisfaction with the service provided in-person, online, through specialized call centres and 1 800 O-Canada.
• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction has increased for the service provided through My Service Canada Account, online, specialized call centres and 1 800 O-Canada.

Base: Clients with restrictions that affect accessing service (n=1938)

• There were also significant gaps in service attributes between clients with restrictions and clients overall. The largest gaps were for finding needed information in a reasonable amount of time, finding out what information was needed to apply, ease of completing the application form, ease of understanding the requirements of the application, ease of understanding information about the program and ease of figuring out eligibility.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings increased for ease of completing the application form, ease of finding out the steps to apply, receiving consistent information, being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time, it being clear what to do if there was a problem, clarity of process and confidence that problems could be resolved.

Compared to 2021-22, ratings also increased for it being easy to get help when needed, specialized call centre representatives being helpful, getting help on the application specifically, being confident that one’s personal information was protected and ease of accessing service in a language clients could speak and understand well.

Proportion of Client Groups with Restrictions That Affect Accessing Service

Client Groups

Client Groups With Lower Satisfaction

Satisfaction was lower among clients with a language barrier, clients with disabilities, those with restrictions to accessing service, remote clients and rural clients compared to all clients.

To improve the client experience among these groups, focus should be placed on the service areas with the largest gaps compared to all clients.

Proportion of Client Groups: by Program

Presence of client groups differed significantly by program due in large part to program design.

Proportion of Client Groups: by Region

• Among clients in the West and the Territories, there was a higher portion of non-English or French speaking clients, Indigenous clients, remote clients and those with a language barrier compared to all clients.
• Among clients in Ontario, there was a higher portion of youth, urban clients, Racialized clients and newcomers.
• Among clients in Quebec, there was a higher proportion of OLMC clients, those with a high school education or less, the E-vulnerable and those with mobile only.
• Among clients in Atlantic Canada, there was a higher proportion of OLMC clients, remote clients and rural clients.

Client Groups: Satisfaction

Client Groups: Proportion with a Disability

Client Groups by Channel

Proportion of Clients with Disabilities: Overall and by Program

• One in ten clients identified as a person with a disability. CPP-D clients remained most likely, OAS/GIS clients also had a higher presence of disability compared to the proportion among all clients, while SIN clients had a lower proportion.
• Compared to 2021-22, the proportion of OAS/GIS clients who identified as a person with a disability increased. 

Type of Disability: Overall and by Program

• The most common disability was a mobility restriction, followed by mental health-related and cognitive disabilities. The proportion who have a mental health-related disability decreased directionally compared to 2021-22, while the proportion who have a seeing disability increased.
• CPP and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have a mobility disability, and OAS/GIS clients were also more likely to have a seeing disability. Compared to 2021-22, OAS/GIS and CPP-D clients were less likely to have reported having a mental health-related disability while CPP-D clients were more likely to have reported having a seeing disability.

Clients with Disabilities

• Clients who identified as a person with a disability had lower overall satisfaction compared to all clients and ratings were consistent compared to 2021-22.
• Clients with disabilities were less satisfied with the service provided in-person, online and through specialized call centres.
• Compared to 2021-22, clients with disabilities provided higher ratings for the quality of service provided online, through specialized call centres and through 1 800 O-Canada.

• There were also many significant gaps in service attributes between clients with disabilities and clients overall. The largest gaps were for ease of putting together the information to apply, being able to move smoothly through all steps, ease of finding information about the program, needing to explain their situation only once and being confident any issues or problems would be easily resolved.
• Compared to 2021-22, ratings have increased for the ease of figuring our eligibility, ease of applying overall, that completing steps online made the process easier, ease of getting help when needed, clarity of the issue resolution process, ease of finding out the information needed to apply and ease of finding out the steps to apply.

Clients with Disabilities: Overall Satisfaction by Program

• Among clients with disabilities, OAS/GIS and CPP clients were more likely to be satisfied while CPP-D and EI clients were less likely to be satisfied compared to all clients with disabilities.
• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction decreased among CPP-D clients with disabilities, while it increased among OAS/GIS clients with disabilities.

Indigenous Clients

• Overall satisfaction among Indigenous clients was consistent compared to all clients and compared to 2021-22.
• Compared to 2021-22, Indigenous clients provided higher ratings for the quality of service provided through specialized call centres and in-person.

• Indigenous clients provided lower ratings across certain service attributes. The largest gaps were for the ease of figuring out eligibility for benefits/SIN card, ease of finding out the steps to apply, ease of finding out the information needed to apply and ease of completing the application form. Indigenous clients were more likely to find it easy to follow-up compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, Indigenous clients provided higher ratings across a number of service attributes including the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada phone representatives, being able to complete steps online made the process easier, moving smoothly through all steps and ease of follow up. Indigenous clients provided lower ratings for the ease of figuring out eligibility compared to last year.

Urban, Rural and Remote Clients

• Overall satisfaction was consistent among urban, rural and remote clients compared to all clients and has increased among urban clients compared to 2021-22.
• Remote clients were more satisfied with service provided through 1 800 O-Canada than all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, urban clients provided higher ratings for specialized call centres and 1 800 O-Canada. Rural clients provided higher ratings for specialized call centres and lower ratings for eServiceCanada. Remote clients provided lower ratings for online.

• Urban clients provided higher ratings for receiving consistent information and finding out the steps to apply compared to all clients. Rural clients provided lower ratings for receiving consistent information and finding out the steps to apply. Remote clients provided lower ratings for clarity of process, the amount of time the application took being reasonable, ease of understanding information about the program, needing to explain the situation only once and confidence in issue resolution.
• Compared to 2021-22, urban clients provided higher ratings for clarity of process, receiving consistent information and ease of finding out the steps to apply. Rural clients provided higher ratings of being able to move smoothly through all the steps and it being clear what to do if there was a problem or question. Remote clients provided lower ratings of ease of understanding information about the program and ease of figuring out eligibility. Urban and rural clients provided higher ratings of being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time.

• Remote clients provided lower ratings for feeling respected compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, urban and rural clients provided higher ratings on traveling a reasonable distance to access the service. Urban, rural and remote clients provided lower ratings on feeling protected during the COVID-19 pandemic. Rural clients provided higher ratings on a number of items including ease of follow up, ease of application, getting help on their application and the helpfulness of Service Canada phone representatives, but provided lower ratings on the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada representatives.

Youth and Senior Clients

• Overall satisfaction was higher among seniors compared to all clients and consistent among youth and adults.
• Satisfaction has increased among youth compared to 2021-22.
• Seniors provided lower ratings for the quality of service provided in-person and higher ratings of service provided by specialized call centres compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, adults and seniors were more satisfied with the quality of service provided by specialized call centres.

• Compared to all clients, youth provided higher ratings for feeling respected during the application process, being protected during the COVID-19 pandemic, that it was easy to get help when needed, getting help on their application and clarity of the issue resolution process. Seniors provided higher ratings for the timeliness of service, while adults provided lower ratings. Seniors provided lower ratings for completing steps online made the process easier, feeling respected through the application process, getting help in general and on the application, confidence that personal information was protected and in-person service representatives being helpful.
• Compared to 2021-22, youth, adults and seniors provided higher ratings on the ease of getting help when needed, while adults and seniors provided higher ratings on completing steps online made the process easier and ease of getting help on the application. Youth and seniors provided higher ratings on the overall ease of applying, while youth also provided higher ratings for the clarity of the issue resolution process. Seniors and adults provided lower ratings on being protected during the COVID-19 pandemic.

E-vulnerable Clients

• Satisfaction among E-vulnerable clients was consistent compared to all clients and higher compared to 2021-22.
• E-vulnerable clients were less satisfied with the quality of service provided online and through MSCA compared to all clients.

• E-vulnerable clients provided lower ratings across a number of service attributes compared to all clients. The largest gaps were for completing steps online made the process easier, ease of figuring out eligibility, ease of finding out the information needed to apply and ease of finding out the steps to apply.
• Compared to 2021-22, E-vulnerable clients provided higher ratings for completing steps online made things easier, ease of understanding requirements and information about the program, ease of completing the application form, moving smoothly through the process, in-person representatives being helpful and ease of getting help when needed.

Clients with No Devices or Mobile Only

• Overall satisfaction was consistent between clients with a mobile device only and those with no devices. Satisfaction increased among clients with no devices compared to 2021-22.
• Clients with no devices were less satisfied with the quality of service provided in-person and online.
• Compared to 2021-22, clients with no devices were more satisfied with service provided from specialized call centres.

Access to Service via Mobile: Overall

• More than eight in ten clients reported owning or having access to a smartphone (86%) or a personal computer (82%), and roughly four in ten (46%) reported owning or having access to a tablet. Only 3% of clients neither own nor have access to any devices.
• Compared to 2021-22, the proportion of clients who reported owning or having access to a smartphone has increased.

Clients with a Language Barrier

• Overall satisfaction was lower among those with a language barrier compared to all clients and consistent compared to 2021-22.
• Clients with a language barrier provided lower ratings for the quality of service provided through all channels and on all service attributes compared to all clients.
• The largest gaps were for the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada and specialized call centre representatives, the ease of finding out the information needed to apply and the ease of finding and understanding information about the program.
• Compared to 2021-22, clients with a language barrier provided lower ratings on ease of finding out the information needed to apply, the specialized call centre representatives being helpful, ease of finding out the information about the program, ease of understanding the information about the program and needing to explain their situation only once.

Provision of Services in Official Languages

• Nearly all clients agreed they were provided service in their choice of English or French, and that it was easy to access service in a language they could speak and understand well. CPP-D clients and OAS/GIS clients were less likely to agree to both statements.
• Results were consistent with 2021-22.

Q36b. Thinking about the service you received, from getting information about [INSERT ABBREV] to receiving a decision, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements

Base: All respondents (n=4200)

Official Language Minority Community (OLMC)

• Overall satisfaction among OLMC clients was consistent with all clients and has increased directionally compared to 2021-22.
• Nine in ten OLMC clients were provided service in their choice of English or French, lower compared to all clients.

• OLMC clients provided higher ratings for completing the steps online making the process easier and ratings for the provision of service in their choice of English or French compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, OLMC clients provided higher ratings for completing the steps online being easier but lower ratings on ease of figuring out eligibility, ease of understanding the information about the program and ease of putting together the information needed to apply.

Newcomers (Arrived in Past 3 Years)

• Overall satisfaction among newcomers continued to be higher than all clients and increased compared to 2021-22.
• Newcomers were more satisfied with the service they received in-person, online, through specialized call centres and 1 800 O-Canada compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, satisfaction decreased for the service provided through eServiceCanada.

• Newcomers were also more likely to provide high ratings on several service attributes. The largest gaps were for ease of getting help when needed, ease of follow-up, that it was clear what would happen next and when, explaining their situation only once and ease of putting together the information needed to apply.
• Compared to 2021-22, newcomers were more likely to agree that it was easy to get help when they needed it.

Racialized and Black Clients

• Overall satisfaction and trust in Service Canada were higher among Racialized clients compared to all clients and consistent among those who identify as ‘Black’ specifically. Satisfaction has increased among Racialized and Black clients compared to 2021-22.
• Racialized clients provided higher ratings for all service channels, while Black clients provided higher ratings for in-person service and online. Both groups had higher overall trust compared to all clients.
• Compared to 2021-22, Racialized and Black clients provided higher ratings for online and specialized call centres, while Racialized clients also provided higher ratings for 1 800 O-Canada. Racialized clients were more likely to express trust compared to 2021-22.

* Small sample size. Results should be interpreted with caution. ** Sample sizes too small for reporting.

Base: Racialized clients

• Racialized clients provided higher ratings across several service attributes. The largest gaps were for the ease of getting help when needed, the Service Canada phone representatives being helpful, ease of getting help on the application and the 1 800 O-Canada representatives being helpful.
• Compared to 2021-22, Racialized clients provided lower ratings for the ease of finding information about the program and higher ratings for the ease of getting help when needed, the 1 800 O-Canada and specialized call centre representatives being helpful, receiving consistent information, completing the application in a reasonable amount of time, ease of follow up and completing the steps online being easier.

Conclusions

• Satisfaction with the service experience has increased, largely reversing the declines observed last year, and returned to levels observed prior to the pandemic. Directional improvement has been made on ease, effectiveness and emotion, and clients were more trusting that Service Canada was delivering its service effectively.
  • The overall increase in satisfaction (83% vs. 81%) was driven by higher ratings on ease (87% vs. 85%), and directionally higher ratings on effectiveness (84% vs. 82%) and emotion (75% vs. 73%), and a higher proportion of clients expressed trust in Service Canada (82% vs. 78%). Improvement has also been made in the helpfulness of in-person representatives (92% vs. 88%) and getting help on your application (68% vs.64%), both of which were among the top drivers of satisfaction this year. Notably, ratings for timeliness of service (75% vs. 75%) were unchanged.
  • The greatest opportunity to improve satisfaction continued to be in reducing the time the client journey takes; this remained by far the most prominent driver and an aspect of service where ratings were lower relative to other areas. Secondary areas of importance included the ease of getting help on your application and, to a lesser extent, confidence in the issue resolution process.
• The overall improvement in satisfaction was due primarily to higher ratings among SIN clients for the timeliness of service and quality of service provided in-person. Satisfaction provided through specialized call centres has also improved among EI clients.
  • Overall satisfaction has increased among SIN clients (94% vs. 89%), who provided higher ratings across certain aspects of service including the timeliness of service and helpfulness of Service Canada in-person representatives, which were the top two strongest drivers of satisfaction. SIN clients were also more satisfied with the overall ease of applying and the reasonableness of the distance travelled to access service.
  • Satisfaction was stable for all other programs; however, ratings have declined directionally among CPP-D clients (58% vs. 60%) for the second consecutive year and were lower compared to 2020-21 (63%). Satisfaction declined this year among those who received approval for the benefit, while approval/denial decisions were a top driver of satisfaction. A higher proportion utilized online government sources during the aware stage, which, among CPP-D clients, was the service channel with the lowest satisfaction (55%).
  • Ratings were more consistent among clients of other programs; however, there has been an increase in trust for CPP and OAS/GIS clients. Improvement has also been made among OAS/GIS clients for the overall ease of applying and with the ease of getting help and completing the form, among CPP clients for the ease of follow-up and among EI clients for the ease of getting help when needed.
  • Satisfaction with the quality of service has increased for specialized call centres, while ratings for eServiceCanada have declined directionally, continuing the downward trend observed last year. The in-person experience continued to receive the highest ratings while both telephone channels and eServiceCanada received the lowest.
• The highest rated aspects of service included the helpfulness of in-person representatives, feeling respected throughout the process and confidence in information security. The overall ease and effectiveness of the process including ease of completing the application form and being able to complete the application in a reasonable amount of time were also among the highest rated areas.
  • The lowest rated areas remained consistent year-over-year and included the ease of follow-up, ease of deciding the best age to start their pension, ease of getting help on the application when needed and ease of figuring out program eligibility.
• Channels used, in particular in-person and online, has not returned to pre-pandemic levels, possibly indicating the longer-term impacts of service transformation changes and evolving service channel preferences. Overall, in 2022-23, channel use among clients sees more use of in-person but still far off levels observed prior to the pandemic.
  • Compared to 2021-22, clients were more likely to have used in-person service at the aware and apply stages and to less likely to have used self-service only at the apply stage. Use of assisted-self-service has also increased at the aware stage.
  • Online continued to be the most commonly used channel and first point of contact at the aware and apply stages while telephone was used slightly more for following up. Use of in-person has increased as the first point of contact for the aware and apply stages, while fewer used the online channel at the apply stage.
  • SIN and EI clients were more likely to have used in-person service at the aware and apply stages and CPP-D clients when applying.
  • SIN clients were less likely to self-serve at the aware or apply stage and to use assisted self-service when applying. EI clients were more likely to use assisted self-service at the aware and apply stage and less likely to use self-service when applying. CPP-D clients were more likely to use self-service only at the follow-up stage and less likely to use mail-only at the apply stage.
  • OAS/GIS clients were less likely to be auto-enrolled this year which meant more OAS/GIS clients overall engaged in the aware or apply stages. OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used mail only at the apply stage and less likely to have used online in the apply stage, while service levels remained consistent at the aware and follow-up stages.
• While use of self-service continued to decline this year, it remained higher than pre-pandemic levels. Improvement has been made in the ease of getting assistance among self-serve clients. Use of MSCA was higher among CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients this year but registration continued to be more difficult and time-consuming for both groups.
  • A higher proportion of EI clients agreed that completing steps online made the process easier this year. However, consistent with previous results, CPP, OAS/GIS and CPP-D clients had more difficulty.
  • Three-quarters of CPP clients, seven in ten EI clients and half of CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients used MSCA during their experience. CPP-D and OAS/GIS clients were more likely to have used MSCA this year but continued to experience more difficulty registering compared to all clients and provided lower ratings for being able to register in a reasonable amount of time.
  • The ease of registering for MSCA has rebounded this year among EI clients after declining in 2021-22, while CPP clients found it easier to sign-into an existing account. The ease of signing into MSCA continued to be rated highly by the vast majority with an existing account, while impressions of the ease of registering remained lower despite improvement year over year. Among those who had difficulty registering, the most common reasons were consistent with last year and included problems with their personal access code or creating their profile, followed by problems verifying their identity using their online banking information.
• The declines in satisfaction observed among most client groups last year have largely been reversed and ratings have increased across several groups. Satisfaction was notably higher among youth, seniors, newcomers and Racialized clients compared to all clients.
  • Satisfaction was lower, compared to all clients, among those with a language barrier, clients with disabilities and clients with restrictions to accessing service.
  • Overall satisfaction with the service experience increased among several client groups including youth, those with a high school education or less, urban clients, E-vulnerable clients, clients with no devices, clients with restrictions, newcomers and Racialized clients. Ratings among all other client groups increased directionally, with the exception of those with a language barrier.
  • Consistent with previous years, clients with a language barrier continued to experience the most difficulty among all client groups although they represent a very small proportion of clients (3% overall). They provided considerably lower ratings across all aspects of their experience and the largest gaps were for the helpfulness of 1 800 O-Canada and specialized call centre representatives, the ease of finding out the information needed to apply and the ease of finding and understanding information about the program.

Demographics Of Survey Respondents

2022-23 Demographics of Survey Respondents

* Gender Reported by the client in the application form and/or during intake process. Clients who reported as non-binary were not excluded from the survey but represent a small population and their results cannot be published because of small sample sizes. The gender reported may be different from sex assigned at birth or gender at the time of responding to the survey. Not all programs have a third non-binary category.

ǂ12 respondents resided in the Territories.

Appendix A – Details On Call Disposition And Definition Of Client Groups

Call Disposition

• Up to seven calls were placed in an effort to reach a selected respondent. The overall response rate achieved was 12% which is consistent with client-supplied sample studies (10%-15%). The response rate was on par with 2021-22 (12%), which marked a decrease in the response rate achieved in 2020-21 (16%).
• Of the 4,200 completed interviews, 3,664 were conducted in English and 513 conducted in French.
• The final call outcomes are as follows:

Definition of Client Groups

• Different client groups^ǂ make up 95% of the total sample universe.z
• The CX Survey aims to better understand the client experience of Service Canada’s client groups whose levels of satisfaction are lower or who encounter barriers to service.