Introduction

• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Background
• Structure and Format of NOC 2016 Version 1.0
  • Abbreviations
  • Language
  • Modifying terms
  • Format of unit group descriptions
• Related classifications
• Relationship between NOC and ISCO-08
• Overview of the NOC 2016 Version 1.0 update
• NOC classification criteria
  • Skill level
  • Skill type
  • Issues and conventions of the NOC
• Coding to NOC 2016 Version 1.0
  • Coding and the NOC 2016 Version 1.0 classification structure
  • Coding procedures for problem responses
  • Classification rules to consider when coding
  • Sample questions for obtaining additional occupational information
• Variant for highly aggregated data
• More information on the NOC 2016 Version 1.0

Preface

The purposes for the 2016 revision of the National Occupational Classification (NOC) are: to update the classification to incorporate emerging occupations and new job titles while maintaining historical comparability; to remove redundant or obsolete job titles to optimize readability and navigation of the NOC; and to add NOC major and minor groups definitions.

The structure of NOC 2016 remains unchanged from that of NOC 2011. No major groups, minor groups or unit groups have been added, deleted or combined, though some groups have new names or updated content. Many new job titles have been added to NOC 2016, which arise as the division of labour in Canadian society evolves, creating new jobs and new specializations, and as technological change brings with it new terminology. To clarify the boundaries between occupations, a few titles have been re-assigned to a different unit group in NOC 2016. The impact of this on the comparability of data between 2011 and 2016 is negligible.

Acknowledgements

The National Occupational Classification (NOC) 2016 is published by Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and Statistics Canada. The realization of NOC 2016 was dependent on the involvement of a team of occupational research analysts and assistants from both ESDC and Statistics Canada.

Both ESDC and Statistics Canada wish to acknowledge the valuable input of many individuals and groups. Research consultants, academics, professional associations, sector organizations, educators as well as employers and workers throughout the Canadian labour market provided occupational information and advice that informed this revision process. The many stakeholders who responded to the public online consultation for the revision of the NOC, hosted by Statistics Canada, provided valuable input which is also appreciated.

Background

The National Occupational Classification (NOC) 2016 Version 1.0 updates the National Occupational Classification 2011. It is the nationally accepted taxonomy and organizational framework of occupations in the Canadian labour market. The NOC has been developed and maintained as part of a collaborative partnership between Employment and Social Development Canada and Statistics Canada. This update of the classification reflects ongoing occupational research and consultation to incorporate information on new occupations. Each ten years, structural changes that affect the classification framework, such as the addition of new classes, are considered. The NOC 2016 Version 1.0 represents an update, and uses the NOC 2011 classification structure.

The NOC is designed to classify occupational information from statistical surveys. It is also used in a range of contexts to compile, analyze and communicate information about occupations. Occupational information is of critical importance for the provision of labour market and career intelligence, skills development, occupational forecasting, labour supply and demand analysis, employment equity and numerous other programs and services. It provides a standardized framework for organizing the world of work in a manageable, understandable and coherent system.

The basic principle of classification of the NOC is the kind of work performed. Occupations are identified and grouped primarily in terms of the work usually performed, this being determined by the tasks, duties, and responsibilities of the occupation. Factors such as the materials processed or used, the industrial processes and the equipment used, the degree of responsibility and complexity of work, as well as the products made and services provided, have been taken as indicators of the work performed when combining jobs into occupations and occupations into groups.

An occupation is defined as a collection of jobs, sufficiently similar in work performed to be grouped under a common label for classification purposes. A job, in turn, encompasses all the tasks carried out by a particular worker to complete their duties.

The NOC provides a systematic classification structure that categorizes the entire range of occupational activity in Canada. Its detailed occupations are identified and grouped primarily according to the work performed, as determined by the tasks, duties and responsibilities of the occupation. The NOC 2016 Version 1.0 update incorporates emerging and new job titles and clarifies the content of unit groups. Updates to the descriptions and job titles of some unit groups reflect added information, changes in terminology to correspond with current usage and the evolution of some occupations.

NOC 2016 Version 1.0 maintains the structure of the NOC 2011 version and provides historic comparability. No major groups, minor groups or unit groups have been added, deleted or combined, though some groups have new names or updated content. Like NOC 2011, its organization is based on the dual criteria of Skill Type and Skill Level, to support relevant labour market analysis.

Structure and format of NOC 2016 Version 1.0

The National Occupational Classification 2016, is based on the NOC 2011 four-tiered hierarchical arrangement of occupational groups with successive levels of disaggregation. It contains broad occupational categories, major, minor and unit groups.

• 10 broad occupational categories
  • Each broad occupational category has a unique one-digit code number and is composed of one or more major groups.
• 40 major groups
  • Each major group has a unique two-digit^{Footnote 1} code number and is composed of one or more minor groups. The first digit of this code indicates the broad occupational category to which the major group belongs.
• 140 minor groups
  • Each minor group has a unique three-digit code number and is composed of one or more unit groups. The first two digits of this code indicate the major group to which the minor group belongs.
• 500 Unit Groups
  • Each unit group has a unique four-digit code. The first three digits of this code indicate the major and minor groups to which the unit group belongs.

For example:

• 0 - Management occupations
  • 00 - Senior management occupations
    • 001 - Legislators and senior management
      • 0011 - Legislators
      • 0012 - Senior government managers and officials
      • 0013 - Senior managers - financial, communications and other business services
      • 0014 - Senior managers - health, education, social and community services and membership organizations
      • 0015 - Senior managers - trade, broadcasting and other services, n.e.c.
      • 0016 - Senior managers - construction, transportation, production and utilities

The broad occupational category code, designated by a single digit, is repeated at all levels. Major group codes are created by adding a second digit. This digit appears in the second position at all lower levels in the structure. Minor group codes add a third digit. Finally, the 4-digit unit group codes contain the digit identifying the broad occupational group, followed by the digit identifying the major group and the digit identifying the minor group and a last digit identifying the unit group.

There are approximately 35,000 titles classified in the 500 unit groups of the NOC 2016 Version 1.0. Some titles are clearly occupations, such as librarian and chef, while others reflect specializations within an occupational area, such as music librarian and pastry chef. Still others represent a range of jobs, such as furniture assembler and sawmill machine operator.

These titles are used to describe the work performed by many individuals holding similar jobs within an occupational area. The list of titles in the NOC is not meant to be exhaustive, but attempts to cover the most commonly used and universally understood labels that identify work in the labour market.

Abbreviations

Few abbreviations are used in this classification. Particular attention should be given to the abbreviation n.e.c. (not elsewhere classified). As an occupational qualifier it is occasionally used in the labels of major, minor and unit groups to refer to occupations not elsewhere classified ( e.g., 065 Managers in customer and personal services, n.e.c.).

Language

The NOC is available separately in both official languages. It is important to note that the French version includes only titles commonly used in French and proper to the milieu and, therefore, these are not normally translations of the English titles. The classification structure is the same in both languages.

Unit group labels are presented in gender-neutral format in French identifying the masculine and feminine titles separated by a slash. Where relevant, this structure is used in English as well. The illustrative example titles and inclusions are also presented in gender-neutral format. The NOC descriptions are written using the masculine form as they refer to all workers within the included occupations. This has been done in order to lighten the text and to reduce reading burden.

Modifying terms

Modifying terms have been added to several job titles, as extensions, to designate the industrial sector or the domain of expertise. If applicable, this information is preceded by a dash at the end of the title (cashier supervisor – retail trade) to distinguish between similar titles. These modifying terms may also specify where the titles appear in the classification structure (painter – visual arts; painter – manufacture of motor vehicles). This information should be considered when coding job titles.

Format of unit group descriptions

Each NOC unit group description consists of several standardized sections which define and describe its content.

Class definitions^{Footnote 2} / Lead statement^{Footnote 3}

This section provides a general description of the content and boundaries of the unit group and indicates the main activities of occupations within the unit group. It also indicates the kinds of industries or establishments in which the occupations are found. The list of places of employment is not always exhaustive, but can assist in clarifying the occupations described and in differentiating them from occupations found in other groups.

Illustrative examples^{Footnote 2} / Example titles^{Footnote 3}

This section is a list of titles commonly used in the labour market. The titles are intended to illustrate the contents and range of the occupational group. This is not an exhaustive list of job titles.

Inclusions

This section provides a list of borderline job titles belonging to a particular NOC unit group. Inclusions are examples in classes where it might not be clear from reading both the class text and title that the example belongs in the class.

Exclusions^{Footnote 2} / Classified elsewhere^{Footnote 3}

This section clarifies the boundaries of the unit group by identifying related unit groups and similar occupations that are classified elsewhere. Unit groups or individual occupations are cited in this section when they bear a functional similarity to the unit group or when similar titles occur.

Main duties

This section lists some of the tasks or duties performed in the occupations in the unit group. Depending on the contents of the unit group, one of three formats is used.

• A series of statements that can be applied to all occupations in the unit group. This format was selected for unit groups that contain a single core occupation, such as 1242 Legal administrative assistants and 2146 Aerospace engineers. This format was also selected for unit groups that contain a range of related titles that nevertheless share a set of common duties, such as 1411 General office support workersand 9417 Machining tool operators.
• Two or more sub-sets of occupations with a series of statements that apply to each component. This format was selected for unit groups that consist of two or more sub-components which, while similar enough to be in the same unit group, can be described separately. Examples of unit groups with this format are 3141 Audiologists and speech-language pathologists and 5125 Translators, terminologists and interpreters.
• A series of brief descriptive statements that are linked to specific occupations within a group. This format was selected for unit groups that contain a series of occupations which, while similar enough to be in the same unit group, can be described separately. Examples of unit groups with this format include 4423 By-law enforcement and other regulatory officers, n.e.c. and 5226 Other technical and co-ordinating occupations in motion pictures, broadcasting and the performing arts.

For some unit groups, a statement appears at the end of the tasks performed or main duties section, identifying specializations that exist within the occupational area encompassed by the unit group.

Employment requirements

This section describes the employment requirements for the unit group. Several types of requirements are identified in this section and are listed in the following order.

• Type and level of formal education: for example, secondary school, college diploma, university degree. Efforts were made to be as specific as possible, though many unit groups have a range of acceptable educational requirements.
• Specific training: for example, apprenticeship training, on-the-job training, training courses specific to an occupation.
• Experience in another occupation: for example, supervisors usually require several years of experience in the occupation that they supervise.
• Licences, certificates or registration: for example, regulatory requirements to practice in a regulated profession, special licenses to operate certain kinds of vehicles.
• Other requirements: for example, athletic ability or artistic talent.

Note: Some occupations are designated as regulated professions and trades. Regulations are subject to change and may vary across jurisdictions. The most reliable information on regulatory requirements for occupations is found on the Web sites of provincial regulatory organizations and licensing authorities.

The Employment requirements section does not attempt to describe personal suitability requirements that are assessed by employers as part of the hiring process.

Some occupations have very definite employment requirements while for others, there is no consensus or a range of acceptable requirements exist. To reflect this variation in the labour market, this section describes employment requirements using the following terminology:

• "... is required" - to indicate a definite requirement;
• "... is usually required" - to indicate something that is usually required by the majority of employers, but not always required by all employers; and
• "... may be required" - to indicate something that may be required by some employers, but on a less frequent basis.

Note: For reasons of brevity, in this section the term college includes the following types of post-secondary institutions: community colleges, CÉGEPS, technical institutes, trade schools and agricultural colleges. Where relevant, in some provinces, it may also include private training organizations, music conservatories and other non-degree granting institutions.

Additional information

This section appears in some unit group descriptions. It provides information on the following:

• progression to other occupations (such as supervisory or management positions) based on transferability of skills from acquired occupational experience;
• mobility patterns, such as inter- and intra-occupational transferability of skills (for example, identifying occupations that are part of internal lines of progression or specializations within a subject matter area);
• trends and forthcoming changes in the unit group's employment requirements; and
• other information to clarify and define the unit group.

Related classifications

The classification of occupations does not stand alone but must be understood as being related to other classifications, such as the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and that of Class of Worker. Each of these classifications supplements the NOC 2016 Version 1.0 in presenting a rounded picture of the nature of a person's job.

North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)

The industrial qualifier which may accompany the job title:

1. Indicates the type of economic activity with which the job is usually associated. (It is important to note that the assignment of an industrial qualifier does not necessarily limit a job to that industry. These qualifiers are merely indicative of the possible areas of activity in which the job may be found.)
2. Permits the assignment of similar titles to different occupation groups where the duties vary between industries.
3. Aids in defining the specific occupations and helps the coder grasp the underlying principles of this classification.

The industry in which the individual is employed is determined by the kind of economic activity of the establishment. The establishment is usually a factory, mine, farm, store, other place of business or an institution for which a number of basic production variables can be compiled.

It is important to note the conceptual differences between an industry classification and an occupation classification. An establishment can employ individuals performing completely different occupations, and these are classified to appropriate occupational groups, but the industrial classification of each individual employed in the establishment should be the same and is determined by the nature of the product made or service rendered. In other words, the nature of the factory, business or service in which the person is employed does not determine the classification of the occupation, except to the extent that it enables the nature of the duties to be more clearly defined.

Class of Worker

Class of worker refers to an individual's employment relationship to the business in which he or she works, as employee or self-employed, including unpaid family worker, and thus provides another means of describing the work. The NOC 2016 Version 1.0 does not indicate the class of worker classification for each occupation since many occupations contain both jobs held by employees and jobs of self-employed individuals. However, a general rule has been established for coding purposes and is discussed in full under the section on Coding.

Relationship between NOC and ISCO-08

The NOC is comparable to the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) published by the International Labour Organization (ILO). While the NOC was originally developed in Canada in the 1980s, ISCO was also being reviewed and updated to produce ISCO-88. Communication between the NOC and ISCO research teams led to similarities, such as a similar conceptual framework that includes the Skill Type and Skill Level dimensions. The similarities between the NOC and ISCO increased in latest structural revisions (ISCO-08 and NOC 2011) cycle. However, certain conceptual differences between the NOC 2016 Version 1.0 and ISCO-08 limit comparability. For instance, differences in skill level definitions and classification structure exist between NOC 2016 Version 1.0 and ISCO-08, especially in the trades occupations. Subsistence occupations included in ISCO are not part of the NOC. For countries and regions in which subsistence activities are virtually non-existent, the ILO affirms that such activities may be excluded without loss of international comparability.

The concordance between NOC 2011 and ISCO 2008 can be used for purposes of showing the relationship between NOC 2016 Version 1.0 and ISCO 2008 since the structure is the same in both NOC 2011 and NOC 2016 Version 1.0.

Overview of the NOC 2016 Version 1.0 update

The purposes for the 2016 revision of the National Occupational Classification (NOC) are: to update the classification to incorporate emerging occupations and new job titles while maintaining historical comparability; to remove redundant or obsolete job titles to optimize readability and navigation of the NOC; to incorporate editorial changes; to integrate the concept of Inclusions at the unit group level; and to add NOC major and minor groups definitions.

The structure of NOC 2016 Version 1.0 remains unchanged from that of NOC 2011. No major groups, minor groups or unit groups have been added, deleted or combined, though some groups have new names or updated content.

Job titles changes at the unit group and minor group levels and updates to the definitions of some unit groups reflect added information, correction of terminology to correspond with current usage and the evolution of some occupations and where they are classified.

Many new job titles have been added to NOC 2016 Version 1.0, which arise as the division of labour in Canadian society evolves, creating new jobs and new specializations, and as technological change brings with it new terminology. Some of the titles added to reflect such changes are: geodesist, medical archivist, crime scene examiner, corrosion technologist, video game tester and biomass plant technicians. Other added titles are modified versions, or alternatives, that appeared in previous versions of the NOC and have been added to help users find particular occupations. For example, power plant stationary engineer appeared in earlier versions of the NOC; operating engineer - power plant has been added.

To clarify the boundaries between occupations, a few titles have been re-assigned to a different unit group in NOC 2016. The impact of this on the comparability of data between 2011 and 2016 Version 1.0 is negligible. For example, Admission director – health care has been moved from Managers in health care (0311) to Other administrative services managers (0114). This change will have a minimal impact on the unit groups affected, and provides a more appropriate placement. In all other cases where titles have been moved, this was done to clarify the boundaries and improve content description of these unit groups. For example, the titles 'tax collector' and 'collector of taxes' were being coded in Employment insurance, immigration, border services and revenue officers (1228) rather than in Collectors (1435).

With the transition to a paperless environment and content digitalization, significant format changes were made to the list of job titles contained in the NOC. To optimize the use of the NOC, redundant or obsolete job titles were removed. In the past, titles appeared in both in natural order (e.g., travel agent) and in inverted order (e.g., agent, travel). Inverted titles used a comma as a separator in the title string making it easier to find titles in a paper publication. As this concept became outdated and redundant in web publications and data files, more than 4000 quasi-duplicates entries were removed for the NOC 2016 Version 1.0.

The NOC is structured in accordance with the Generic Statistical Information Model (GSIM): Statistical Classifications Model. In order to comply with the demands of GSIM, the NOC was revised with the addition of Inclusions, to supplement the existing Illustrative examples and Exclusions. Inclusions are borderline cases for the unit group. They are presented separately in order to clarify the contents of the class. Note that creation of Inclusions do not change the boundaries of any NOC unit group. Moreover, definitions were developed for the NOC major and minor groups. They facilitate the use of the major and minor groups within the matrix of the classification criteria: skill level and skill type. Minor group definitions are significantly more detailed than the Major group definitions.

More information on these changes is available in the following tables which summarize the changes of note between NOC 2011 and NOC 2016 Version 1.0.

Some job titles were moved from one unit group to another to better define the content of the unit groups.

NOC classification criteria

The two major attributes of jobs used as classification criteria in developing the NOC are skill type and skill level. A description of skill levels is presented first as the definitions of skill types incorporate some information related to the concept of skill level. Other factors, such as industry and occupational mobility, are also taken into consideration.

Skill level

Skill level is defined first of all by the amount and type of education and training required to enter and perform the duties of an occupation. In determining skill level, the experience required for entry, and the complexity and responsibilities typical of an occupation are also considered in relation to other occupations.

Four skill level categories are identified in the NOC. Each major, minor and unit group is assigned to one of the skill levels.

The skill level categories are broad aggregates, reflecting four commonly accepted educational, training or preparatory routes for entering employment. Requirements for individual unit groups or occupations may overlap between the boundaries of the skill levels. For example, some occupations can be entered with either a university degree or a college diploma. When the entry requirements for a unit group or occupation reflect a range of possible educational and training specifications, skill level placement of the group was determined by considering several factors. These include the requirements most generally demanded by employers, the minor group context, complexity of overall responsibilities and knowledge requirements as well as further training and specialization acquired on the job.

The classification describes the educational and training requirements for occupations. However, the education and experience of particular job incumbents may not correspond exactly to the level described. Individuals may be over-qualified for their work or they may work in occupations for which the entry requirements have changed after they became employed.

It is important to note that the skill level categories are not intended to designate socio-economic status or prestige. Rather they are intended to reflect actual occupational entry requirements. These requirements are expressed in terms of the formal educational system and other types of training specified by employers.

Management occupations, while considered a skill type, are assigned to the skill level A category. These occupations are at the top of organizational hierarchies and as such, are characterized by high levels of responsibility, accountability and subject matter expertise gained through either formal education or extensive occupational experience. Management occupations span the entire classification structure and are found in all sectors or areas of the labour market. A range of factors are taken into consideration as determinants for employment in management occupations.

The skill level categories of the NOC are outlined and defined below.

NOC skill level criteria - education/training and other criteria

Skill level A

• University degree (bachelor's, master's or doctorate)

Skill level B

• Two to three years of post-secondary education at community college, institute of technology or CÉGEP
  or
• Two to five years of apprenticeship training
  or
• Three to four years of secondary school and more than two years of on-the-job training, occupation-specific training courses or specific work experience
• Occupations with supervisory responsibilities are also assigned to skill level B.
• Occupations with significant health and safety responsibilities (e.g., fire fighters, police officers and licensed practical nurses) are assigned to skill level B.

Skill level C

• Completion of secondary school and some short-duration courses or training specific to the occupation
  or
• Some secondary school education, with up to two years of on-the-job training, training courses or specific work experience

Skill level D

• Short work demonstration or on-the-job training
  or
• No formal educational requirements

Skill level is referenced in the code for all occupations with the exception of management occupations. For all non-management occupations the second digit of the numerical code corresponds to skill level. Skill levels are identified as follows: level A – 0 or 1; level B – 2 or 3; level C – 4 or 5; and level D – 6 or 7.

Skill type

Skill type is defined as the type of work performed, although other factors related to skill type are also reflected in the NOC. One of these factors is similarity with respect to the educational discipline or field of study required for entry into an occupation. Another factor is the industry of employment where experience within an internal job ladder or within a specific industry is usually a prerequisite for entry. The 10 skill types, 0 to 9, are presented below and are also identified in the first digit of the NOC numerical code for all occupations.

The ten broad occupational categories of the NOC are based on skill type.

Industry

Industry and occupation are separate variables which can be cross-tabulated to provide detailed information on employment. However, many occupations are found almost solely within one particular industry. For example, mining and automobile assembly occupations occur each within their respective industrial sectors.

During the original research and development of the NOC, it was realized that in many industries, occupational mobility is determined more by internal job ladders than by functional specialization. In consequence, some unit groups include workers of a particular skill level within a specific industry. Although the occupational breakdown resembles in part an industrial breakdown, the variables remain separate and distinct.

Industry was used in the development of classification categories for senior management occupations, for occupations in natural resources, agriculture and related production and for occupations in manufacturing and utilities.

Occupational mobility

In developing the NOC, an effort was made to consider mobility or transferability of skills between occupations. The objective was to develop unit groups where the potential for mobility, or substitution of workers, would be greater within the group than between groups. Movement within groups usually follows when the group is homogeneous in skill level and skill type, indicating increased potential for transferability of competencies and development of specialization. Movement between groups, or inter-occupational mobility, usually reflects a change in skill level (e.g., vertical mobility) or a change in skill type (e.g., acquisition of new responsibilities and diversified skills).

The degree of occupational mobility that exists for unit groups varies. Many unit group descriptions include a statement that indicates the potential for, and type of, mobility that characterizes the unit group.

Other classification considerations

In addition to the previously mentioned criteria, other factors were considered in determining the boundaries between unit groups and the contents of each group. These additional factors were the size of the unit groups and the codability or operational feasibility of the groups. Codability relates to the ease of accurately coding or assigning reported job titles from survey respondents to the occupational groups of the classification.

The size (or estimated number of workers) of the unit group was considered for reasons of statistical reliability and confidentiality. Generally, unit groups which contain fewer than 1,000 Canadian workers have not been delineated.

Because the NOC structure is used to code responses to Census of Population, Labour Force Surveys and other surveys, it must provide a set of unit groups that can be used for this operational application. The insufficient precision of some survey responses and ambiguities of language were given consideration in finalizing the unit groups.

Issues and conventions of the NOC

Some of the many issues that were encountered in the development of the NOC and the conventions adopted in response are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Management occupations

Management occupations present a special problem for reliable coding of occupational survey responses. In many cases there is little indication of the level of responsibility, the size of the enterprise or division managed, or the field of specialization.

To be of practical use, a classification of managers must be a compromise between the theoretically optimal and the practical solutions.

Senior management occupations (in major group 00) have been divided on the basis of industry of employment into six unit groups.

Middle and other management occupations are divided into three major groups, 18 minor groups and 42 unit groups on the basis of specialization (e.g., Purchasing managers) or industry of employment (e.g., Postal and courier services managers). In certain cases (e.g., Managers in transportation) groups defined by industry also contain managers in that specialization regardless of their industry of employment.

Supervisors

Supervisors and foremen/women have generally been classified in skill level B.

In most cases, professional and technical occupations are supervised by managerial or professional personnel respectively. However, where supervisors are identified for professional and technical groups, they are generally classified in the same unit groups as the occupations supervised.

Supervisors in the following occupational categories have been classified in supervisor unit groups or minor groups separate from the workers supervised:

• administrative services occupations
• nursing occupations
• sales and service occupations
• trades and transport and equipment operators
• occupations in natural resources and agriculture
• occupations in manufacturing and utilities.

Most minor and unit groups in the occupational categories listed above have a corresponding supervisory group. Occasionally, as in minor group 431, Occupations in front-line public protection services, supervision is provided by managers and there are no corresponding supervisory groups in major group 43.

Trades

All apprenticeable trades are included in skill level B. Their inclusion does not imply an exact equivalence of skill between all trades, but rather that they occupy a range that lies within the boundaries of this skill level category. Information on entry requirements is provided within each unit group description.

Inspectors, testers and graders

Generally, inspectors who require post-secondary education have been classified in separate unit groups in skill level B or with technicians and technologists, also in skill level B. Other non-technical inspectors, testers, graders and samplers have been included either in separate unit groups covering occupations in processing industries or in unit groups of assemblers and fabricators in manufacturing industries. This is reflective of patterns of employment found within industries and the increasing responsibility for quality control that is placed on manufacturing production workers.

Apprentices and trainees

Apprentices and trainees have been classified in the same unit groups as the occupations for which they are training. Similarly, interns, residents and articling students are classified with their respective professional groups.

This convention has been adopted of necessity to prevent a proliferation of unit groups of apprentices. It is not intended to imply equivalence or interchangeability of apprentices or trainees with fully qualified workers.

Coding to NOC 2016 Version 1.0

The NOC provides an overall structure for classifying occupations according to kind of work performed. The lists of example titles are merely indicative of the types of occupations that fit within specific unit groups. The lists of example titles are not exhaustive nor are they intended to be.

When coding an occupation, all the relevant facts about the job and its environment should be obtained. These include the kind of work performed, the most important activities or duties, the job titles, the kind of business, industry or service, and the class of worker described earlier. The more complete and comprehensive the information the coder is able to assemble about the duties performed by a worker on a particular job, the easier it will be to determine the appropriate classification.

To code an occupation, it is possible to start with either the classification structure or the search tool.

Coding and the NOC 2016 Version 1.0 classification structure

When using the NOC for coding, it is best to exploit the hierarchical nature of the classification. First the broad occupational category (skill type) which seems most likely to contain the job should be identified. Next the most appropriate major group within the broad occupational category should be found. Skill level can also provide a guide to locating major groups by considering titles with terms such as "technical", "supervisor", "helper", and "labourer". The process should be continued to find the most appropriate minor group within the major group selected. Finally the most appropriate unit group within the minor group selected should be identified. The unit group definition should be read carefully before deciding if this unit group offers the best possible classification. In addition, the example titles listed for the unit group should be examined to ensure that the choice is actually the best.

As indicated previously, the first two digits of each code convey meaning with respect to the group's skill type and skill level category.

For all occupations, including management, the first digit of each code identifies the major, minor and unit group as belonging to one of the skill type categories. However, all management occupations are also included as part of skill level A.

For all non-management occupations, the second digit of each code identifies the major, minor and unit group as belonging to one of the four skill level categories.

For management occupations, the first two digits also convey meaning. The first digit is always 0 to convey management, while the second digit conveys the skill type category in which the management occupation is found.

The following charts summarize and illustrate the meanings embedded in the coding system.

Important note:

For management, the first digit is always 0. Senior managers in major group 00 are generally managers of middle managers, therefore the second digit is also 0. For middle management occupations, the second digit represents the skill type categories, from 1 to 9, as above. All management occupations are included in skill level A.

Examples of codes and their meaning

9231

The first digit indicates skill type category 9
Occupations unique to processing, manufacturing and utilities
The second digit indicates skill level category B

6533

The first digit indicates skill type category 6
Sales and service occupations
The second digit indicates skill level category C

0212

The first digit 0 always indicates a management occupation
All management occupations are part of skill level A
The second digit indicates management in skill type category 2
Natural and applied sciences and related occupations

Coding procedures for problem responses

The procedure described above assumes responses contain sufficient information for coding. Unfortunately, depending upon the survey methods used, some responses may be problematic. This occurs when the information in the response is either vague or contradictory. Experience at Statistics Canada suggests the following approaches to resolving such problems.

1) Coding vague responses

It is suggested that vague responses be coded only to the level within the classification that is possible. Of course, before doing so, any information that is available about the respondent should be consulted.

2) Using education in coding

This is especially useful in coding occupational responses that are vague. The most reliable way of using education is as an exclusionary edit. Certain occupations require a minimum education and it is possible to exclude vague responses from being coded to such occupations if the respondent does not have the minimum education required. Great care must be taken when using education in occupational coding and it should only be used as a last resort.

3) Coding when the response contains contradictory information

Sometimes the responses will give a title and a description of work performed that are contradictory. A response "labourer, driving dump truck" is contradictory in terms of the classification, as driving a truck is not considered elemental work. This response should be coded as a truck driver in 7511 Transport truck drivers.

In general, it is best to let the description of the work performed predominate over titles when coding.

Some titles can be misleading. Titles that have manager as part of the title are sometimes not managers. For example, project managers and case managers are usually not managers and must be coded based on a description of their work. Special care must be given to responses that have manager, labourer, or consultant as part of the title as these terms have a variety of meanings in the workplace.

4) Coding responses containing two or more occupations

Where two or more occupations are reported in reply to a question on occupation, the first one mentioned should be coded unless there is additional information to suggest otherwise.

Classification rules to consider when coding

Managers

Managers are usually classified to the broad occupational category 0 Management Occupations. Within this category the senior managers that are the top of a management hierarchy as denoted by terms such as president, chief executive officer, etc. are classified in major group 00 Senior management occupations.

Managers with a management specialty, such as human resource management, are classified according to specialty in major group 01-05 Specialized middle management occupations. However, senior managers with a specialist responsibility would be classified with senior management in major group 00 Senior management occupations.

An attempt has been made to isolate many of the managers of small businesses by classifying managers of retail stores, restaurants, hotels and similar businesses in a separate major group 06 Middle management occupations in retail and wholesale trade.

All other managers are classified according to the type of business managed within major group 07-09 Middle management occupations in trades, transportation, production and utilities.

Proprietors

As a general rule, the class of worker status, that is, whether the respondent works for wages or is self-employed, is not considered for classification purposes. An exception is made for proprietors in retail trade, food and accommodation services and residential home building. These are classified as managers to the following unit groups:

• 0621 - Retail and wholesale trade managers
• 0631 - Restaurant and food service managers
• 0632 - Accommodation service managers
• 0712 - Home building and renovation managers

Contractors

Contractors are classified in several areas of the classification. General contractors in construction are classified in unit group 0711 Construction managers. Renovation contractors and home building contractors are classified in unit group 0712 Home building and renovation managers.

Contractors specializing in a specific trade such as plumbing, electrical, carpentry, etc., are classified together with supervisors to the appropriate unit group for that trade. That is, a plumbing contractor is classified to unit group 7203 Contractors and supervisors, pipefitting trades.

Supervisors and foremen/women

Supervisors are classified to separate unit groups for supervisors where they exist. These are found in the following minor groups for supervisors:

• 121 - Administrative services supervisors
• 621 - Retail sales supervisors
• 631 - Service supervisors
• 720 - Contractors and supervisors, industrial, electrical and construction trades and related workers
• 730 - Contractors and supervisors, maintenance trades and heavy equipment and transport operators
• 821 - Supervisors, logging and forestry
• 822 - Contractors and supervisors, mining, oil and gas
• 825 - Contractors and supervisors, agriculture, horticulture and related operations and services
• 921 - Supervisors, processing and manufacturing occupations
• 922 - Supervisors, assembly and fabrication

This unit group for supervisors is found outside of the supervisor minor groups:

• 3011 - Nursing co-ordinators and supervisors

Where a separate unit group does not exist, supervisors are classified with the workers supervised. For example, in most professional major groups there are no separate unit groups for supervisors, the one exception being unit group 3011 Nursing co-ordinators and supervisors.

Technical occupations follow a similar rule and there are no separate unit groups for supervisors in this area.

Even where separate supervisory unit groups exist, "lead hands" are not classified to them as previous research has indicated that supervision is usually only a minor part of such jobs.

Apprentices

Apprentices are classified within the groups for tradesmen/women. For example an apprentice carpenter is classified to the appropriate trade group, unit group 7271 Carpenters.

Helpers

Helpers are usually considered as labourers. Most helpers will be found in the building trades such as carpenter's helper, mason's helper, roofer's helper, etc. These jobs are not to be confused with formal apprenticeships and are not classified as tradesmen/women but are classified to unit group 7611 Construction trades helpers and labourers.

Labourers

Labourers are classified in separate unit groups in the following major groups:

• 76 - Trades helpers, construction labourers and related occupations
• 86 - Harvesting, landscaping and natural resources labourers
• 96 - Labourers in processing, manufacturing and utilities

Sample questions for obtaining additional occupational information

The following questions indicate the type of information and the format that could be used to obtain the facts necessary to classify an occupation.

1. For whom did you work?
   • Name of firm, government agency, etc.
   • Department, section or plant.
2. What kind of business, industry or service was this?
   • Give full description; for example, paper box manufacturing, road construction, retail shoe store, secondary school, dairy farm.
3. What was your work or occupation?
   • Give full description; for example, police officer, trapper, primary school teacher, community health nurse, truck driver, artisan, hairdresser.
4. In this work, what were your main activities?
   • For example, law enforcement, skinning animals, teaching Grade 2, treating patients, driving a truck, carving soapstone, cutting hair.
5. In this job or business, were you mainly:
   • Working for wages, salary, tips or commission?
   • Working without pay for your spouse or another relative in a family farm or business?
   • Self-employed without paid help (alone or in a partnership)?
   • Self-employed with paid help (alone or in a partnership)?

Variant for highly aggregated data

A variant of NOC 2011 has been developed jointly by Statistics Canada and Employment and Social Development Canada. It is based on a review of actual practices in the analysis of highly aggregated occupational data, consideration of the highest aggregation level in the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO) and consultation with potential users.

The variant consists of 10 groupings, from a. to j., that are a convenient and useful way to summarize and analyse more detailed classes. The first three classes are homogeneous on skill level. The remaining classes focus on skill type. All classes consist of entire major groups; no major group is split between classes of the variant.

More information on the NOC 2016 Version 1.0

For information on the National Occupational Classification (NOC) and its use for programs and services such as, immigrating to Canada, labour market information, job searches and working in Canada, please contact Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC).

Executive summary and Management response and action plan

September 2016

• Executive summary
• Management response and action plan

Acknowledgements

The Evaluation Project Team would like to thank the individuals who contributed to this project, particularly members of the Departmental Evaluation Committee, as well as all interviewees who provided insight and comments crucial to this evaluation.

This report was approved by the Chief Statistician of Canada.

In accordance with the accountability requirements in the Treasury Board Policy on Evaluation (2009) and its directive, this report is available to the public and posted on the agency's website in both official languages.

Statistics Canada also shared this report with its program-delivery partners and key stakeholders, including the National Statistics Council.

Prepared by the Evaluation and Performance Measurement Division, Audit and Evaluation Branch. Nanci Comtois led the Evaluation Project Team, which included Valeria Pandelieva and Sonia Demers.

List of acronyms and abbreviations

CePop

Census of Population

CH

Canadian Heritage

CMHC

Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation

CSD

Census subdivision

CV

Coefficient of variation

EPMD

Evaluation and Performance Measurement Division

ESDC

Employment and Social Development Canada

GNR

Global non-response rate

INAC

Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada

IRCC

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada

ISQ

Institut de la statistique du Québec

NHS

National Household Survey

OAG

Office of the Auditor General

PUMF

Public use microdata file

RDC

Research data centre

RTRA

Real Time Remote Access

SSC

Shared Services Canada

TB

Treasury Board

TBS

Treasury Board Secretariat

Executive summary

The Evaluation and Performance Measurement Division (EPMD) of the Audit and Evaluation Branch of Statistics Canada conducted an independent assessment of the Census of Population (CePop) Program, including the National Household Survey (NHS). The results provided objective information and recommendations to support program improvement and inform future decisions by Statistics Canada and Parliament with respect to the government's management of resources and programs.

The evaluation was designed and conducted in accordance with the Treasury Board (TB) Policy on Evaluation (2009) and associated directives and standards, and fulfills an accountability commitment set out in Statistics Canada's Risk-Based Audit and Evaluation Plan (2012/2013 to 2014/2015). The evaluation's objective is to provide credible and neutral information on the ongoing relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of the program.

This report presents the results of the evaluation of the CePop Program, including the NHS. It was presented to the Departmental Evaluation Committee and approved by the Chief Statistician of Canada.

Management response and action plan

Executive summary and Management response and action plan

April 2016

• Executive summary
• Management response and action plan

Acknowledgements

The Evaluation Project Team would like to thank those individuals who contributed to this project, particularly members of the Departmental Evaluation Committee as well as all interviewees who provided insights and comments crucial to this evaluation.

This report was approved by the Chief Statistician.

In accordance with the accountability requirements in the Treasury Board Policy on Evaluation (2009) and Directive on the Evaluation Function, this report is available to the public and posted on the departmental website in both official languages.

Statistics Canada has also shared this report with its program delivery partners and key stakeholders, including the National Statistics Council.

Prepared by the Evaluation and Performance Measurement Division, Audit and Evaluation Branch. Khaddouj Souaid led the Evaluation Project Team, which included Sonia Ben Amor, Justin Wabgou, Mihaela Tapuc, Sonia Demers and Tony Haddad.

List of acronyms and abbreviations

AAFC

Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada

ASP

Agriculture Statistics Program

BR

Business Register 

CEAG

Census of Agriculture

CePOP

Census of Population

CFIA

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

CRMS

Client Relationship Management System 

FR

Farm Register

EPMD

Evaluation and Performance Measurement Division

NAICS

North American Industry Classification System

NHS

National Household Survey

PMRA

Pest Management Regulatory Agency

RBAEP

Risk-Based Audit and Evaluation Plan

QAF

Quality Assurance Framework

RDAS

Remote Data Access System

SSC

Shared Services Canada

TB

Treasury Board

TBS

Treasury Board Secretariat

FAO

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Executive Summary

The Evaluation and Performance Measurement Division (EPMD) of the Audit and Evaluation Branch of Statistics Canada conducted an independent assessment of the Census of Agriculture (CEAG) Program. The results provided objective information and recommendations to support program improvement and inform future decisions by Statistics Canada and Parliament with respect to the government's management of resources and programs.

The evaluation was designed and conducted in accordance with the Treasury Board (TB) Policy on Evaluation (2009) and associated directives and standards, and fulfills an accountability commitment set out in Statistics Canada's Risk-Based Audit and Evaluation Plan (2012/2013 to 2014/2015). The evaluation's objective is to provide credible and neutral information on the ongoing relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of the program.

This report presents the results of the evaluation of the CEAG. It was presented to the Departmental Evaluation Committee and approved by the Chief Statistician.

The Census of Agriculture Program

The Census of Agriculture is conducted every five years. It collects information on the state of all agricultural operations in Canada to provide Canadians with a comprehensive profile of the agriculture industry and its people. The objectives of the CEAG Program are: (1) to maintain an accurate and complete list of farms and types of farms; (2) to provide comprehensive agriculture data for detailed geographic areas; (3) to provide measurement of rare/emerging commodities; and (4) to provide critical input for the purpose of managing federal and provincial governments' expenditures in support of the agriculture sector. The budget for the 2011 cycle of the CEAG Program was $46.6 million over six years (2008/2009 to 2013/2014).

Evaluation scope and methodology

The evaluation's five-year reference period was from 2009/2010 to 2013/2014; this included the conduct of the 2011 CEAG and the planning phase of the 2016 cycle. The evaluation also examined the performance of cost-recovered customized products and services related to the CEAG. Data collection for this evaluation was completed between February and October 2015. Six lines of evidence, both quantitative and qualitative methods, were used, including document and literature reviews, an administrative data review, key informant interviews^{Footnote 1} with 60 internal and external stakeholders and data users, efficiency and economy analysis, and bibliometric and webometric studies. Data from these sources were analyzed and triangulated to develop the findings and generate recommendations based on the conclusions made.

Findings

Relevance of the program

The evaluation demonstrates a continued need for the CEAG to fulfil and support legislative and regulatory requirements under federal/provincial/municipal acts and regulations. An examination of the program relevance conducted in 2012^{Footnote 2} found that a quinquennial CEAG was necessary in order to meet the wide range of information needs of its various stakeholders and data users. The program is a unique, nationally uniform data source with complete enumeration of all Canadian farms, and meets the policy, program and research needs of various public and private data users. In some instances, the data for small geographic areas are the only source of critical information used for environmental reporting, crisis management, land planning and regulation, and food safety.

The program is aligned with the priorities of the federal government in support of its investments in the agriculture industry and its partnerships with the provinces and territories. Conducting a census of agriculture is consistent with the federal government's roles and responsibilities, as stipulated in the Statistics Act. The program supports Statistics Canada's mandate "to ensure that Canadians have access to a trusted source of statistics on Canada to meet their highest priority needs"^{Footnote 3} and contributes to its strategic objectives.

The evaluation found no evidence of viable alternatives for the collection of data of the same scope, level of detail, and quality to replace the CEAG data.

Performance of the program—achievement of expected outcomes

The 2011 CEAG program was successful in achieving its intended outcomes by providing accessible high-quality statistics and related custom-data products. It met the information needs of its various stakeholders, and its statistical information was widely used, for multiple purposes, such as academic and policy analyses and program design and evaluation. In 2014, the budget allocation for the CEAG was reduced by 9.2% and its scope limited to focus on core activities. The federal government's decision consequently reduced the CEAG outputs. It is anticipated that the discontinuation of analytical products and CEAG–CePOP-linked data for the 2016 cycle will reduce accessibility and use of CEAG data in the future. In the context of continued demand for these products, many stakeholders expressed concerns that the information gaps could lead to the use of less reliable data resources.

The evaluation examined the quality of the CEAG statistics by assessing their timeliness, accuracy, interpretability, coherence and accessibility. Evidence indicates that the 2011 CEAG core products were released according to pre-announced schedules. However, there were delays, ranging from 7 to 17 months, in the release of the analytical publications. These were due mainly to resource constraints. The 2011 CEAG had a 95.9% response rate and demonstrated improvements to Internet uptake (which increased from 5.0% in 2006 to 10.9% in 2011), and decreases in estimated net undercoverage (from 3.4% in 2006 to 1.8% in 2011). The CEAG statistics are also generally coherent with other datasets and validated by other sources (e.g., commodity and farm income and prices programs).

The CEAG continued to respond to existing and emerging data needs while maintaining content stability for data consistency and comparability over time. CEAG data were provided by theme and properly coded; up-to-date definitions and supplementary information were available for appropriate data interpretations. The 2011 CEAG provided public access to five types of statistical products free of charge, in addition to delivering over 500 high-quality cost-recovered custom-data requests, such as customized tabulations for small-area data. Accessibility appears to have been limited by significant delays in the delivery of these requests, as was reported by data users. It is notable that, in 2011/2012, the process of developing the Corporate Open Licence Agreement was taking place in the context of unrestricted access to, and free dissemination of, government data, which was introduced government-wide by the TBS. This, along with resource constraints, resulted in an overall backlog of custom-data requests.

The introduction of the Canadian Socioeconomic Information Management database (CANSIM) in 2012 was a significant improvement with respect to accessibility, as consistently reported by stakeholders. Analysis of data monitoring of online access^{Footnote 4} to CEAG's products shows high levels of activity (4.5 million downloads and 3.5 million page views of products over three years from 2011/2012 to 2014/2015), particularly in the release years. The program has effective governance structures, longstanding partnerships with internal and external stakeholders, and comprehensive consultation processes to solicit and attain feedback from a cross-section of experts and data users (federal–provincial governments, agriculture industry, academia, and the general public). Some unmet or insufficiently met information needs were identified in some areas, such as environmental practices, organic production, and technology use. While these needs are clearly important for the program to adapt to a rapidly evolving sector, it is noted that the specific and detailed information relating to these issues may likely be within the realm of more targeted surveys (e.g., agriculture or environment) and not within the scope of the Census.

The use of the CEAG statistical information to inform public debate, research, and decision making is evidenced by the extent to which it is referenced in policy, research, and program development and evaluation documents reviewed. Evidence indicates that the CEAG products were widely cited in peer-reviewed scientific publications, on the World Wide Web, and in newspaper articles.^{Footnote 5}

Performance of the program—efficiency and economy

Overall, the CEAG program has operated efficiently and economically by achieving incremental cost savings over successive cycles. Efforts at optimization of resource utilization, including reviews and investigation studies, were made between 2011/2012 and 2013/2014 to identify and implement ways of delivering the program more cost-effectively. The CEAG is conducted concurrently with the Census of Population. The two programs share key processes and infrastructure (to ensure accurate coverage and reduce duplication); this generates significant cost savings. Financial records indicate that the CEAG's approved funds were consistently lower than the projected cost estimates in three consecutive CEAG cycles (2006, 2011 and 2016). This resulted in the application of further cost-savings to deliver the program within allocated budgets. While the budget in constant dollars^{Footnote 6} for the 2011 CEAG ($47 million) was similar to that for the 2006 cycle ($46.8 million), the program produced the same number of outputs, as well as an additional analytical publication, while yielding an overall improvement in data quality.

Building on major changes in methodology, processing, and use of technology in the 2006 cycle, the 2011 CEAG included strategic investments of $2.7 million that aimed to achieve further efficiency. They consisted of the CEAG Farm Register and the Census of Population Address Compatibility initiative (to decrease mail-out rates and reduce reliance on human resources) as well as the Multi-Model Response Development Initiative (providing respondents with an option to complete the questionnaire by telephone). These improvements resulted in a higher Internet response rate in 2011. Statistics Canada has set a target Internet response rate of 30% for the 2016 cycle, especially given the reduction in the questionnaire size.^{Footnote 7} The CEAG Program is aligned with transformations in the context of Statistics Canada's Corporate Business Architecture to ensure efficient ways of conducting statistical programs.

It is noted that the program is currently implementing the 2016 CEAG cycle as per the resources level and scope approved by the government in 2014, with a budget of $42.6 million, a 9.2% decrease from the 2011 cycle. Qualitative and quantitative evaluation evidence suggests that further resource decreases would limit the CEAG Program's capacity to produce the same level and quality of statistical information and maintain its overall quality.

Conclusions and recommendations

The evaluation reveals a demonstrable need for the CEAG Program to meet the existing information needs and adapt to emerging data requirements of a rapidly changing industry. The 2011 cycle achieved its intended outcomes efficiently and economically, by providing access to high-quality data and responding to most information needs of data users.

Some unmet or insufficiently met information needs were identified, particularly relating to environmental practices, organic production, technology use and direct marketing. These needs are known to Statistics Canada; the feasibility of meeting some of them was examined and, where appropriate, action was taken. The evaluation concludes that the use of other surveys to bridge the gap is a more appropriate and efficient approach. Leveraging resources to jointly conduct consultations for the CEAG and other agriculture surveys may lead to a more efficient use of resources. Some areas for improvement could enhance access to, and use of, the CEAG data, including the production and dissemination of analytical products for the 2016 CEAG and timely delivery of custom-data products and services.

While the evaluation found evidence of emerging information needs and trends, it also found that the CEAG may not be the most appropriate and efficient tool to address these needs. The evaluation noted as well that the CEAGs stakeholders and data users are also the primary users of the surveys of the Agriculture Statistics Program (ASP), which collect more detailed information on specific agriculture topics. It is important that a close coordination of activities between the two programs be in place, particularly planning and stakeholder consultation, to identify the most appropriate and efficient use of resources for each program.

Recommendation #1 – Performance (efficiency)

It is recommended that the Assistant Chief Statistician of Economic Statistics consider the feasibility of coordinating stakeholder consultation activities of the Census of Agriculture Program with those of the Agriculture Statistics Program. Efficiencies may be found in reducing the duplication of efforts and identifying the most appropriate and effective use of the resources of each program to best meet the information needs of stakeholders and data users, given that the latter are almost identical for the two programs.

The CEAG's analytical products are highly accessed and widely used by a variety of data users. In 2014, the government decided to focus the CEAG on core activities, consequently reducing its budget and scope. The program is currently implementing the 2016 CEAG cycle as approved. It is anticipated that the discontinuation of analytical products and the CePOP-CEAG linked data may cause significant limitations to future accessibility and use of the CEAG data as measured against previous cycles.

Recommendation #2 – Performance (accessibility and use)

Given the important value consulted users attached to analytical products, it is recommended that the Assistant Chief Statistician of Economic Statistics explore options for external sources of funding to support continued production of analytical products for the CEAG in order to maintain accessibility and use of the CEAG data.

While the evaluation evidence indicates that the program delivers high-quality custom-data products and effective client-centered services, it also identified the need for improvements in timeliness in the delivery of these products and services (as reported by data users) and in tracking and documenting performance related to these products and services.

Recommendation #3 – Performance (timeliness)

1. It is recommended that the Assistant Chief Statistician of Economic Statistics ensure that a review of lessons learned internally and externally be carried out to develop strategies/options for consideration in relation to the provision of timely cost-recovery custom-data products and services, and that improvements be made to the tracking and documenting of performance with respect to these services.
2. It is recommended that the Assistant Chief Statistician of Census, Operations and Communications ensure that improvements be made to Statistics Canada's Client Relationship Management System (CRMS) to enable documentation of performance related to timeliness in the delivery of custom-data products and services with respect to all statistical programs.

Management response and action plan