Audit of Operational Controls at
Ports of Entry (Based on the
1996 Tassé Report) – Final Report
2.2.4 Administrative Controls
Initiatives Undertaken
Even though there are observations in the field to the contrary, it should be noted that the Ontario Region has been reviewing procedures on immigration key control forms. In 1998, Ontario Region commissioned KPMG to review immigration key control forms at three sites. After this review was completed, Financial, Administrative and Informatics Services presented an action plan to the Regional Management Committee of Ontario, in spring 2000. The audit team was advised that a security unit would be established in the Region by 2002-03, which would take an active role in monitoring immigration key control forms.
As result of the Ontario Region’s efforts, some activity occurred nationally. For example, chapter SA6 was reviewed, and offices were required to record voided and deleted documents in FOSS. Activities also occurred on a regional level. For example, enclosed printers were purchased and installed.
Best Practices: Inventory Counts at Ports of Entry
Few ports of entry across the country clearly understood chapter SA6 and the responsibility that is associated with it.
The audit team would like to highlight the Ontario South Area Office’s good system for controlling its immigration key control forms. Ontario South has prepared an “in-house” Procedures Document for the Management of Controlled Forms. The salient aspects of chapter SA6 are covered and have been modified for Ontario South operations. Ontario South has prepared templates to help employees record IMM 1442s at ports of entry.
Ontario South also does an annual inventory count of generic immigration key control forms. For the manual immigration key control forms, Ontario South carries out a (section removed) inventory count. The three ports of entry (section removed) their counts to the Area Office, which then reconciles its records with the information received from the three ports of entry.
These practices are sound and should be communicated to other offices in the country.
Best Practices: Inventory Counts at Outports
In spring 2000, two ports of entry with outport responsibilities asked the outports to do an inventory count of all manual immigration key control forms on site. This count was (section removed) to the ports of entry and reconciled with their records.
At the time of the audit, both ports of entry were advised that this is a good practice, and that it is important to carry out these inventory counts with the outports on an annual basis.
National Database for Immigration Key Control Forms
As has been stated throughout this report, the only control over IMM 1442 control numbers is the recording of BB numbers when IMM 1442s are issued. It is timely for the Department to consider creating a national database for IMM 1442s and other immigration key control forms, from the date these forms are printed to the date they are used or destroyed.
Recommendation 10: The Department should have a single database for all immigration key control forms.
Management Response
There is currently no automated process for verifying document handling
by the warehousing agent (section removed) and CIC. (section removed)
sends a detailed monthly report to IMTB, detailing inventory level, usage
by form, usage by fund centre, shipping date and the number of orders.
There is also regular communication between CIC and (section removed)
to resolve issues. A contract signed in July 2002 included a clause to
automate the process. This is an ongoing project. As well, an audit of
the (section removed) warehouse inventory of control forms was carried
out.
IMTB has created the Departmental Inventory Control Forms Committee, which
met in February and April 2002 to develop a plan of action to implement
the recommendations of this audit. This group has reviewed practices,
procedures and the guidance issued to CIC staff on the distribution, storage
and use of control forms and on reporting procedures associated with the
use and destruction of control forms at CIC.
Potential solutions are also being explored for a single database that will contain the serial numbers and shipping details of all immigration key control forms shipped in the last 10 years. However, this database will not contain status information (such as whether the form was completed, destroyed, lost or stolen) for each control form.
When funding becomes available, it is proposed that the Computer-Assisted Immigration Processing System (CAIPS) be expanded to include a CAIPS document-tracking module to track the status of control forms. FOSS has a tracking module for key control documents. The CAIPS module will not be completed before 2003-04, at the earliest.
An option to load the data from the warehousing agent into a CIC database that would be cross-referenced with CAIPS and FOSS was also considered. However, this option was not feasible, since the physical serial numbers of the key control forms are not entered into FOSS or CAIPS. It would be extremely labour intensive to manually enter the physical serial number as each form is printed. The possibility of data entry errors would also be high. Another deterrent is the fact that the forms and printers are kept in secured areas with limited access, so the user who requested printing of the form may not have access to this area.
A dedicated staff member has been assigned to monitor the reporting requirements for CIC offices and missions with regard to control forms, and to ensure that offices and missions meet these requirements.
IMTB has revised CIC’s guidance to staff on the distribution, storage, use and destruction of control forms (chapter SA6) and the reporting procedures to be followed when discrepancies are identified (chapter 3 of the Immigration Control Manual).
Action Plan
To carry out the recommendation, the Departmental Inventory Control Forms Committee approved the designation of an FCO in each office. IMTB keeps a list of FCOs and ensures that the FCO in each office is aware of his or her responsibilities, such as providing quarterly status reports. IMTB monitors compliance and, in the last quarter, only 12 out of 170 offices did not submit their reports. Reasons given for non-compliance include insufficient resources and other priorities.
Note: Many of the above-mentioned system requirements and processes will be included in the Global Case Management System.
CIC met with (section removed) in December 2002 to discuss the requirements and processes.
- Date Modified:
