2018-2019 Operating context and key risks

Operating context

The Board is a micro-organization with a small, dedicated staff. The Chairperson, appointed by the Governor in Council, is the Board’s Chief Executive Officer and reports to Parliament through the Minister of Veterans Affairs.

The Board can have up to 25 full-time Members (including the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson). Members hear Veterans’ cases brought forward for redress. They then decide whether the evidence meets the requirements of the legislation to award new or increased levels of disability benefits.

Workload
The Board’s operating environment is directly influenced by the unpredictability of the nature and volume of applications. A good indicator of how many applications the Board is likely to receive in a given year, is the volume of Veterans Affairs Canada’s (VAC) disability benefits decisions from the previous year. As the table below shows, in the last five years, the Board’s Review decisions have represented between 3.9% and 8.3% of VAC decisions with appeal rights to the Board from the previous year. The reality is that more applicants have been receiving positive outcomes earlier in the process(i.e. at VAC), and no longer need to seek redress at the Board. This means that the cases that are appealed to the Board tend to be more complex and challenging.

Workload
Fiscal Year

 		 VAC
decisions*
 		 VRAB
Review
decisions		 As a % of VAC's
previous year
decisions
2018-19 41,782 1,407 3.9%
2017-18 35,949 2,017 5.5%
2016-17 36,502 2,219 6.0%
2015-16 37,004 2,507 8.5%
2014-15 29,480 2,729 8.3%

 

Even though the Board’s caseload is primarily correlated with VAC decision volumes, it can fluctuate from year to year due to other factors. One factor is that there is no time limit to bring forward an appeal, i.e. Veterans can request an independent review of their VAC or VRAB decision at any time.

 

Human Resources
The Board relies on its Members and staff to provide Veterans and their families with a fair and timely appeal process. As a small tribunal, it faces unique challenges in workforce management and makes ongoing efforts to maintain knowledgeable and skilled Members and staff to deliver its program.

Board Members are Governor-in-Council (GIC) appointees selected from a pre-qualified pool of Canadians. As the membership is dynamic, it is both a challenge and a priority for the Board to maintain a balance of experienced and new Members for expertise and knowledge transfer. The Board’s capability to effectively deliver on its mandate hinges upon an adequate complement of Members appointed through the merit-based GIC selection process.

Key risks
Risks Risk response strategy Link to the
department's
Core
Responsibilities		 Link to mandate letter
commitments and any
government-wide or
departmental priorities
(as applicable)
Service Delivery and Program

There is a risk that the Board will not be able to meet the demands for timely and transparent service delivery due to factors such as:

  • Fluctuating volume and nature of applications; and
  • Employees adapting to change and learning related to new business processes resulting from the reorganization of the Board’s operations.
  • Closely monitored the volume and types of applications.
  • Developed an adaptable hearing calendar in consultation with representative organizations to ensure applicants have options for timely hearings.
  • Monitored and prioritized cases in a comprehensive manner.
  • Focused training to deal with emerging and complex medical conditions and causations.
  • Established an implementation plan for the reorganization to support employees through the transition with a focus on clear business processes, communications and training.
  • Maintained an enhanced focus in operational units on quality and timeliness.
  • Used change management processes and training to support staff and Members with technological change.

Effectiveness:
The Board was successful in implementing its mitigation strategies. As expected, performance during the transition to the new organizational structure was affected in the short term as employees adjusted to change and learned new procedures. By the end of the reporting period, the Board began see improvements in timeliness.

 Appeals Organizational Priority:
  • Excellence in Service Delivery
  • High-Performing Organization
Human Resources
There is a risk that frequent changes in the membership may affect the Board’s ability to sustain a workforce with the necessary skills and competencies.
  • Communicated in a timely manner with the Minister on the Board’s appointment needs.
  • Promoted the Member selection process through the website and targeted outreach to generate interest and increase applications.
  • Strengthened professional development for Members at the beginning and throughout their terms.

Effectiveness:
The Board was successful in implementing its mitigation strategies. The Minister’s Office is responsible for recommending appointments to the Governor-in-Council. The Board worked with the Minister’s Office to support timely appointments.

 Appeals Organizational Priority:
  • Excellence in Service Delivery
  • High-Performing Organization

The Board’s corporate risks remain relatively static from year to year. It annually reviews its corporate risks and corresponding sub-risks. This review is informed by the Board’s Strategic Plan and is influenced by the previous year’s Corporate Risk Profile.

The Corporate Risk Profile is an important mechanism for building an overview of the challenges that could affect the Board’s ability to fulfill its Core Responsibility. The annual process:

  • builds a common understanding of the Board’s corporate risks;
  • supports discussions on priority setting for corporate and operational planning;
  • informs resource allocation choices; and
  • strengthens program delivery.

Top of Page

 

Date modified: