Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.



Office of the Auditor General

Part A: Requests carried over from the prior fiscal year (2008-2009)

1. Number of requests carried over: 3
2. Requests carried over from the prior fiscal year— in a deemed-refusal situation on the first day of the new fiscal year 0

Part B: New Requests received in fiscal year 2009-2010— Exclude requests included in Part A

3. Number of requests received during the fiscal period 19
4.A How many were completed during fiscal year 2009-2010withinthe statutory 30-day time limit? 16
4.B How many were completed during fiscal year 2009-2010 beyond the statutory 30-day time limitwhere no extension was claimed ? 1
4.C How long after the expiry of the statutory 30-day timelimit did it take to complete the requestwhere no extension was claimed ?  
  1-30 days: 0
  31-60 days: 0
  61-90 days: 1
  Over 91 days: 0
5. How many were extended pursuant to section 9? 0
6.A How many were completed during fiscal year 2009-2010withinthe extended time limit? 0
6.B How many were completed during fiscal year 2009-2010 after exceeding the extended time limit? 0
6.C How long after the expiry of the extended deadline did it take to respond?  
  1-30 days: 0
  31-60 days: 0
  61-90 days: 0
  Over 91 days: 0
7. Number of requests received in 2009-2010 that were carried over to 2010-2011? 2
8. As of April 1 st , 2010, how many requests which were received in 2009-2010 are in a deemed-refusal situation? 0

Part C: Workload

9. What is the number of pages reviewed for requests completed in 2009-2010? 2613
10. What is the number of consultations requests received in 2009-2010? 36

Part D: Contributing Factors


Please describe the most significant issues that affected your institution’s ability to respond to access to information requests in a timely manner (within 30 days and/or statutory timelines) since becoming subject to the Act. These may include:

  • Requests for large volume of records
  • Approval process of access requests
  • Difficulties to retrieve records (OPIs turnaround time)
  • Staff shortages
  • Requests filed in bulk
  • Consultations with other institutions
  • Others
The main factor that contributed to the length of delay in the Office of the Auditor General’s only deemed refusal situation was the length of time taken by a department to respond to a consultation. In this particular case, it took the department 52 days to respond to a consultation package containing 25 pages.

Please describe any practices or policies developed/undertaken by your institution to improve the timely delivery of your access to information program since becoming subject to the Act and where possible, indicate how successful these practices/policies have been. These may include:

Informal treatment of requests

Streamlined approval process

Partial release of records

Fast track process for common requests


The Office of the Auditor General (OAG) has implemented and posted general ATIP procedures on its intranet site. These procedures were recently amended following consultations with the Office of the Information Commissioner regarding the application of section 16.1 of theAccess to Information Act.

From a practice standpoint the OAG greatly benefits from the recent implementation of ATIP specific software. The manual ATIP process was quite cumbersome and by automating the process the OAG has been able to create a solid knowledge base, speed up the review process and can more easily comply with requests for records in alternative formats.

Part E: Building Capacity

As a newly-subject institution to the Act, please describe the implementation process and measures to build your institution’s capacity to respond to access to information requests. This may include resource allocation, infrastructure, internal support, and/or foundational work such as policy or planning documents.
The following steps were taken by the OAG to build ATIP capacity:
  • Defined a corporate vision and an accountability framework
  • Established the ATIP office space (reading room integrated), Set up equipment and developed forms and letter templates
  • Launched internet and Intranet presence – process, exception and exemption information, guidelines
  • Secured resources
    • 1 FTE for coordinator. Originally, this position was classified at an ASG-4 level. It has now been reclassified at an ASG-6 level because of the level of specialization that this position requires.
    • Information management system ($25,000)
  • Formalized the process and the protocols and communicated them to all internal stakeholders
  • Developed an information/knowledge sharing network with other agents of parliament ATIP coordinators
  • Trained key stakeholders – in corporate services and communication function.
  • Undertook awareness building efforts with senior management, in team presentations and ongoing orientation session.
  • Established close relationship with legal services for risk assessment and legal interpretation
  • Ensured full documentation of case management and complaints investigation
  • Adopted measures to assure paper and electronic information/Case file collection, management, storage, disposition protocols in place
  • Developed ATI and Privacy policies in consultation with legal services - currently under review by senior management

Part F: Completion Time

What is the average completion time for all requests completed in 2009-2010?
20.8 days per request

Part G: Statistical Report on the Access to Information Act

15. Please attach your institution’s completed Report on theAccess to Information(Form TBS/SCT 350-62) for 2007-2008, 2008-2009 and 2009-2010. For institutions on a fiscal year other than April 1 st -March 31 st , include any supplemental reports where available.