Bank of Canada's Preferred Measures of Core Inflation General Information Document

Definitions of the Bank of Canada's preferred measures of core inflationNote 1

In recent years, the usefulness of CPIX inflationNote 2 as an operational guide to monetary policy has deteriorated (Bank of Canada (2016)). Hence, the Bank of Canada has selected three preferred measures of core inflation in Canada: CPI-trim, CPI-median and CPI-common.Note 3

These three measures of core inflation, available on a monthly basis, are expressed as year-over-year percentage change and are constructed from the price indexes of a disaggregation of 55 components of the consumer price index (CPI), which account for 100 per cent of the Canadian CPI basket. These price indexes are adjusted to remove the effect of changes in indirect taxes and in the case of the CPI-trim and the CPI-median, the ones used are also seasonally adjusted.

CPI-trim is a measure of core inflation that excludes CPI components whose rates of change in a given month are located in the tails of the distribution of price changes. This measure helps filter out extreme price movements that might be caused by factors specific to certain components. In particular, CPI-trim excludes 20 per cent of the weighted monthly price variations at both the bottom and top of the distribution of price changes, and thus it always removes 40 per cent of the total CPI basket.Note 4 These excluded components can change from month to month, depending on which are extreme at a given time. A good example would be the impact of severe weather on the prices of certain food components. This approach differs from traditional a priori exclusion-based measures (e.g., CPIX), which every month omit a pre-specified list of components from the CPI basket.

CPI-median is a measure of core inflation corresponding to the price change located at the 50th percentile (in terms of the CPI basket weights) of the distribution of price changes in a given month. This measure helps filter out extreme price movements specific to certain components. This approach is similar to CPI-trim as it eliminates all the weighted monthly price variations at both the bottom and top of the distribution of price changes in any given month, except the price change for the component that is the midpoint of that distribution.Note 5

CPI-common is a measure of core inflation that tracks common price changes across categories in the CPI basket. It uses a statistical procedure called a factor model to detect these common variations, which helps filter out price movements that might be caused by factors specific to certain components.Note 6

Bank of Canada's motivation for the choice of these three measures of core inflation

The Bank of Canada aims to keep inflation at the 2 per cent midpoint of an inflation-control range of 1 to 3 per cent. The inflation target is expressed in terms of total CPI inflation. The Bank of Canada uses measures of core inflation as an operational guide to help achieve the total CPI inflation target.Note 7

In October 2016, the Bank of Canada and the Government of Canada renewed Canada's agreement on the inflation-control target. One of the issues the Bank of Canada focused on in preparing for the 2016 renewal was the measurement and use of core inflation.Note 8 For that reason, Bank staff conducted an evaluation of different measures of core inflation.Note 9 Bank of Canada (2016) states that this exercise uncovered little compelling evidence in favour of continuing to use CPIX inflation as its focal measure of core inflation, and found that CPI-trim, CPI-median and CPI-common performed more favourably across a range of evaluation criteria.

The evaluation of core inflation measures was based on a variety of criteria selected by the Bank, namely, that the selected measures should (i) closely track long-run movements in total CPI inflation, (ii) be less volatile than total CPI inflation and capture persistent movements in inflation, (iii) be related to the underlying drivers of inflation, and (iv) be easy to understand and explain to the public. As explained in Bank of Canada (2016), the three measures of core inflation, CPI-trim, CPI-median and CPI-common, were found to perform favourably across those criteria, in particular because they better capture persistent movements in inflation and tend to move with macroeconomic drivers. However, the Bank further explains that each measure of core inflation was judged to have limitations, thus making the case to consider a set of measures instead of relying on a single focal measure.

Rationale for moving away from a focal measure of core inflation

The Bank uses these measures of core inflation as an operational guide to monetary policy. As explained in Bank of Canada (2016), each measure of core inflation was judged to have limitations, making it necessary to consider a set of measures instead of relying on a single focal measure and reinforcing the point that monetary policy decisions should not be based on the mechanical use of such indicators. Using several indicators helps the Bank transparently manage the risks associated with the shortcomings of any single indicator.

How the Bank of Canada is using these measures of core inflation

The Bank uses these measures as indicators of pressures on inflation associated with excess demand or supply, (i.e., underlying inflationary pressures). Since some of the components in the CPI basket are subject to sharp and often temporary price swings that are unrelated to these underlying trends, the Bank uses this set of core inflation measures that allow it to “look through” temporary changes in total CPI inflation.Note 10

Interpreting movements in these measures of core inflation

The evolution of these measures of core inflation should reflect more persistent and broad-based movements across CPI components. Thus, trying to identify the contribution of specific CPI components to movements of these measures is not advisable. For CPI-trim and CPI-median, since the list of components excluded can vary every month, it might not be possible to compute the contribution of individual CPI components to the evolution of both measures of core inflation. For CPI-common, a rise in one component would affect that measure of core inflation only if the rise occurred in tandem with increases in several other CPI components.

Responsibility in regards to the construction and publication of these measures of core inflation

Beginning on 22 December 2016 with the publication of the November 2016 CPI, Statistics Canada will produce and publish CPI-trim, CPI-median and CPI-common. Accordingly, any questions related to the compilation of these three measures should be addressed to Statistics Canada. Questions related to the specification of their methodologies as well as to their use in the conduct of monetary policy should be addressed to the Bank of Canada.

References

Bank of Canada. 2016. Renewal of the Inflation-Control Target—Background Information—October 2016. Ottawa. Bank of Canada.

Khan, M., L. Morel and P. Sabourin. 2013. "The Common Component of CPI: An Alternative Measure of Underlying Inflation for Canada." Bank of Canada Staff Working Paper No. 2013-35.

Khan, M., L. Morel and P. Sabourin. 2015. "A Comprehensive Evaluation of Measures of Core inflation for Canada." Bank of Canada Staff Discussion Paper No. 2015-12.

Poloz, S. S. 2016. Letter to the Minister of Finance, 21 September 2016.

Audit of the Business Register

September 2016
Project Number: 80590-94

Table of contents

Executive Summary

The Business Register (BR) is the central repository of information on businesses in Canada. The BR is used as the principal frame for the economic statistics program of Statistics Canada ("the agency"). The BR maintains a complete, up-to-date and unduplicated list of all active businesses (six million) in Canada. The role of the BR is to provide the frame for Statistics Canada's data collection activities (i.e., surveys) and a comprehensive listing of business entities from which survey samples are selected.

Business records maintained in the BR are classified as either simple or complex business structures. The complex portion of the BR represents approximately 1% of the total active businesses in the database, and it accounts for approximately 52% of total economic activity in Canada. The simple portion represents approximately 99% of the total active businesses in the database, and it accounts for approximately 48% of total economic activity in Canada.

One of the primary methods of updating the BR is through profiling. Profiling involves conducting Internet research, telephone calls and on-site visits to obtain legal and operating structure, business address, major activity, business number based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), relationships, accounting practices, and all pertinent financial information about a company. Representatives of two programs—the BR Program and the Enterprise Portfolio Management Program in the Enterprise Statistics Division—conduct profiling activities.

Stakeholders across the agency play a significant role in maintaining the quality of the data in the BR. The agency's Administrative Data Division liaises with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to gather tax administrative data and carry out validation procedures before uploads to the BR. Subject-matter divisions (SMDs), including regional offices, are responsible for working with the BR Program; they make updates to BR data, as well as receive adequate output files to determine samples and develop surveys.

The objectives of the audit were to provide the Chief Statistician and the Departmental Audit Committee with assurance of the following:

  • Statistics Canada has established an adequate governance framework to support the quality of the BR.
  • Effective control mechanisms have been established and are consistently applied to ensure the maintenance of quality data within the BR in accordance with the agency's Quality Guidelines.

The scope of this audit included an examination of the quality assurance framework for the data in the BR. The audit covered the period of April 1, 2015, to January 31, 2016.

Why is this important?

Statistics Canada continues to execute its mandate by providing Canadians with quality information about the state of Canada's economy. The BR is essential to the Statistics Canada to provide the frame for the economic statistics program. Thus, it is essential to establish an adequate governance framework and effective control mechanisms to ensure the maintenance of quality data within the BR in accordance with the agency's Quality Guidelines. To date an audit of BR has not been completed at the Agency.

Key Findings

Overall, roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of the key personnel responsible for the quality of the BR, including stakeholders outside the BR, are well understood; however, in some cases, these roles and responsibilities are not formally documented. Although many stakeholders are involved, and hold vested interests in the quality of the BR data, no overarching accountability framework has been established to integrate the roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and interdependencies of all stakeholders. Risks for the BR have not been formally identified and validated but are discussed at key management meetings on an on-going basis.

Formal processes have been established to validate and test updates to data prior to uploading to the BR; however, there is limited documentation on the results of this process, specifically issues identified and any follow-up procedures conducted for specific data.

Processes in place are adequate for ensuring that profiling of business activities and the resulting updates to the BR are performed. Guidance documents have been developed to support staff in performing their day-to-day activities. However, no specific criteria have been established to prioritize the notifications of updates (messages) to the BR received by profilers, nor have targets or timelines been developed for the resolution of the messages.

A quality assurance program has been established to assess the quality of key BR information, which continues to be reviewed and updated. There are opportunities to improve the following:

  • Profiling activities within the BR should be monitored formally to ensure that activities and results are being documented and that approaches are consistent across supervisors.
  • Appropriate quality assurance mechanisms should be applied to profiling activities across the agency.
  • Although training and guidance processes are well defined and documented, a refresher course should be developed, and more practical examples and exercises should be included in the training content.

Processes exist and have been documented for validating production data files used for surveys; however, there is limited evidence regarding the results of the validation process, including tracking issues, communicating with SMDs and the final resolution.

Overall Conclusion

The BR Program has established a governance structure to ensure the ongoing quality of the BR. The increasing complexity of the BR, and the number of stakeholders who are responsible for contributing to the quality of the BR, have made it necessary to look for ways to improve governance and risk management. This could happen by formalizing the accountability framework outlining the roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and interdependencies of all BR stakeholders; as well as formally identifying and managing risks as part of the agency-wide risk management framework.

Overall, the audit identified that effective control mechanisms are in place, and are being consistently applied to ensure the ongoing quality of the BR. Strengthening the formality of specific elements of the quality assurance program would ensure greater efficiency and continued compliance with the Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines.

Conformance with Professional Standards

This audit engagement conforms with the Internal Auditing Standards for the Government of Canada, as supported by the results of a quality assurance and improvement program.

Sufficient and appropriate audit procedures have been conducted and evidence gathered to support the accuracy of the findings and conclusions in this report and to provide an audit level of assurance. The findings and conclusions are based on a comparison of the conditions, as they existed at the time, against pre-established audit criteria. The findings and conclusions are applicable to the entity examined and for the scope and time period covered by the audit.

Steven McRoberts
Chief Audit & Evaluation Executive

Introduction

Background

Quality is Statistics Canada's hallmark. The agency strives to build relevance and quality into all of its programs and products. The quality of official statistics is founded on the use of sound scientific methods adapted over time to meet changing client needs, as well as to the changing reality that the agency aims to measure, and it is dependent on the capacity or willingness of respondents to supply reliable and timely data. The Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines define quality in terms of six elements: Relevance, Accuracy, Timeliness, Accessibility, Interpretability and Coherence. Together, these elements help program managers to handle the multi-dimensional nature of quality.

The Business Register (BR) is the central repository of information on businesses in Canada. The BR is used as the principal frame for the economic statistics program of Statistics Canada. It maintains a complete, up-to-date and unduplicated list of all active businesses (approximately 6 million) in Canada that have a corporate income tax (T2) account, are an employer (PD7) or have a GST account, as well as sole proprietors who report business income (T1). The role of the BR is to provide the frame for Statistics Canada's data collection activities (i.e., surveys) and a comprehensive listing of business entities from which survey samples are selected. The BR includes key attributes such as industrial classification, revenues and number of employees, which are used to stratify survey samples to improve sampling efficiency. Approximately 200 business surveys use the BR to support their activities, which include establishing a survey frame, sampling, collecting and processing data, and producing estimates.

Business records maintained within the BR are classified as either simple or complex business structures. Complex business structures within the BR represent approximately 1% of the total active businesses in the database, and they account for approximately 52% of total economic activity in Canada. The simple structures represent approximately 99% of the total active businesses in the database, and they account for approximately 48% of total economic activity in Canada.

Data are updated through profiling activities. Profiling is the process of conducting in-depth telephone or on-site interviews with senior company representatives to obtain all pertinent financial information, relationships and structures about a business. Changes and corrections to frame data in the BR are also transmitted regularly by survey collection areas during the collection of economic survey data. Research-gathering tools such as the Internet, provincial gazettes, trade and business publications, and newspaper clippings are also used to update BR data.

Profiling activities for the BR are conducted primarily by two programs: BR profilers within the Statistical Registers and Geography Division (SRGD) and Enterprise Portfolio Management (EPM) profilers within the Enterprise Statistics Division (ESD). EPM profilers have been assigned approximately 350 of the largest enterprises in the BR. BR profilers are responsible for profiling all other enterprises classified as complex business structures. BR and EPM profilers are responsible for profiling and updating data for complex businesses based on administrative data and messages from subject-matter divisions (SMDs), in regional offices, and collection services indicating that the data need to be updated.

Stakeholders across the agency play a significant role in maintaining the quality of the data in the BR. The Administrative Data Division (ADD) is the liaison between Statistics Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for tax data and validation testing of changes in the administrative data provided by the CRA to ensure alignment with the BR System. The SMDs, including regional offices, are responsible for providing updated information to the BR. They either send messages to the profilers for complex businesses or make direct updates themselves for simple businesses, based on survey feedback. SMDs also work with survey account managers (SAMs) to ensure that the output files received from the BR data meet SAMs' needs and that SAMs can rely on the BR data for the creation of surveys.

The following diagram represents the primary BR business process.

Figure 1. Primary BR business process

Figure 1. Primary BR business process
Description of Figure 1

Inputs for the Business Register are from a number of sources. The Canada Revenue Agency is the initial source of information for organizations listed in the Business Register. Secondary sources of information include profiling activities by Statistics Canada staff, public accounts information, and surveys of feedback from businesses.

The Business Register (BR) Quality Assurance Program includes monitoring of the profiling activities, validation of the North American Industrial Classification System coding in the BR, review of incoherence reports; and extensive staff training.

The output of the Business Register System is then used by 200 economic surveys, as well as survey programs of other provincial statistical agencies, and statistical programs of other federal and provincial government departments.

A quality assurance framework has been established within the BR Program to validate and analyze the main input sources and main output. Error detection is performed on an ongoing basis using various methods, both internal and external to the BR Program. A Quality Assurance Survey is carried out bimonthly, and is designed primarily to draw conclusions on the quality of all North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) coding in the BR, specifically error rate (proportion of businesses coded incorrectly), volatility rate (proportion of businesses with an outdated NAICS) and death rate (proportion of inactive businesses). Error rates and death rates are produced at the industrial sector level based on the survey. Then, the classification and business status are updated accordingly in the BR. Ongoing quality measures have also been established and implemented within the BR Program. Specifically, the BR verifies 100% of updates made by new staff, and supervisors regularly perform spot checks on any changes to the BR made by BR profilers. An extensive training program is in place for those who are tasked with updating the BR.

Audit Objectives

The objectives of the audit were to provide the Chief Statistician and the Departmental Audit Committee with assurance of the following:

  • Statistics Canada has established an adequate governance framework to support the quality of the BR.
  • Effective control mechanisms have been established and are consistently applied to ensure the maintenance of quality data within the BR in accordance with the agency's Quality Guidelines.

Scope

The scope of the audit included the following areas, to assess whether:

  • Governance, roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for the quality of data within the BR Program as well as for other users who access and update the BR are clear and well communicated;
  • Management identifies and assesses the risks that may preclude the achievement of quality data for the BR;
  • Effective processes have been established for the input of data into the BR, manual updates made to the BR data, and the production of data extracted from the BR and provided to clients for the development of surveys; and,
  • Training and guidance provided to users of the BR is adequate to carry out responsibilities pertaining to the BR and for ensuring the quality of the data maintained in the BR.

The scope of this audit included an examination of the quality assurance framework for the data in the BR. The audit covered the period of April 1, 2015, to January 31, 2016.

The criteria for this audit are presented in Appendix A.

Approach and Methodology

The audit work consisted of a comprehensive review and analysis of relevant documentation, interviews with key management and staff, and testing to assess the effectiveness of processes in place.

The fieldwork included review and testing of the BR Program's processes and procedures in place related to the quality and accuracy of the BR information.

The audit assessed the BR Program against elements of the Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines. Based on the risk assessment, this audit was primarily focused on the accuracy and coherence elements of those guidelines.

The audit was conducted in accordance with the Internal Auditing Standards for the Government of Canada, which includes the Institute of Internal Auditors International Professional Practices Framework.

Authority

The audit was conducted under the authority of the approved Statistics Canada Integrated Risk-Based Audit and Evaluation Plan 2015/2016 to 2019/2020.

Findings, Recommendations and Management Response

Framework Supporting the Business Register

Overall, roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of the key personnel responsible for the quality of the BR, including stakeholders outside of the BR Program, are well understood; however, in some cases, these roles and responsibilities are not formally documented.

Although many stakeholders are involved and hold vested interests in the quality of the BR data, no overarching accountability framework has been established to integrate the roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and interdependencies of all stakeholders.

Risks for the BR have not been formally identified and validated but are discussed at key management meetings on an on-going basis.

By design, the BR Program relies on several organizations across the agency to support the maintenance of the quality of the BR data. This includes the ADD, which liaises with the CRA and validates the data received from the CRA, and SMDs, which make updates to the BR as well as receive output files for survey samples.

Given the number of stakeholders involved in maintaining the BR, a robust governance and accountability framework is essential to ensure the quality of the BR. Roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for the quality of data within the BR, including the ADD and SMDs, should be clearly documented and well understood, with formal oversight mechanisms to monitor the quality of BR data.

No formal framework has been established to outline key roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and interdependencies of the parties involved.

A key component of governance structures is the establishment of roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of stakeholders. The audit team noted that although the roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of the key personnel responsible for the quality of the BR are appropriate and well understood, these roles and responsibilities have been documented at different levels of formality.

The BR Program has developed, in addition to formal job descriptions, A Brief Guide to the BR, which outlines the various roles and responsibilities of the different sections in the BR. However, the guide does not identify the external stakeholders who influence data quality in the BR. The EPM Program also maintains its own documentation of profiling activities and associated responsibilities.

While ADD is responsible for performing validation procedures on the data files received from the CRA to identify errors or outliers within the data prior to their being uploaded to the BR, these roles and responsibilities are not formally documented.

A service level agreement (SLA) does exist between the BR and SMDs, including regional offices, which outlines the specific roles and responsibilities of SMDs regarding the BR. Although the SLA does not outline specific tasks on the quality of data, some of the duties described affect and improve data quality.

Two committees, the BR Liaison Committee and the BR Strategic Issues Committee, have been established, representing stakeholders across the agency, to support the quality of BR data, including the following:

  • The BR Liaison Committee functions at an operational level, and is responsible for informing all SMDs of any changes related to the BR frame that might affect their survey programs. The committee is comprised of representatives from the SRGD, ADD, all client survey managers, methodologists from the Business Survey Methods Division, and systems representatives from the System Development Division.
  • The Assistant Director of the SRGD chairs the BR Strategic Issues Committee. It is made up of assistant directors from the BR's clients, including SMDs. This committee meets monthly to discuss strategic issues affecting the BR, and discusses how to address these issues. SMD representatives play a role in representing the interests of their division and raise key issues and challenges faced.

There is a mandate document for each of these two committees, yet no formal Terms of Reference have been established for the committees outlining their responsibilities and authority. In each case, formal meeting minutes are maintained, and action items are taken by the BR Program to the management team for appropriate resolution and reporting back.

As outlined above, given the number of organizations involved in maintaining the quality of the BR data, no overarching framework has been established to define stakeholders and their responsibilities and interdependencies. Without a formal accountability framework that outlines individual roles and responsibilities, there is potential for overlap or gaps in coverage relative to the quality of the BR data, and key interdependencies may be overlooked.

In the BR Program, the management structure in place is leveraged to ensure ongoing management and oversight of the day-to-day quality of the BR.  Risks for the BR have not been formally identified and validated as part of the agency's risk management framework since 2014. The management team meets regularly to discuss and resolve operational risks and issues that have materialized. Risks and issues are also presented by other stakeholders through various governance committees and are brought back to the management committee for discussion and resolution.

Recommendation

It is recommended that the Assistant Chief Statistician, Analytical Studies, Methodology and Statistical Infrastructure, ensure that:

  • A formal accountability framework be developed and communicated for the BR, outlining the roles, responsibilities and accountabilities of all BR stakeholders, including relevant committees, and their interdependencies, as these pertain to the mandate of the BR. This accountability framework should outline the escalation processes for the resolution of issues and change requests.
  • Risks are formally identified and managed as part of the agency-wide risk management framework.

Management Response

Management agrees with the recommendation.

  • A formal governance and issue/change resolution framework will be defined and developed for the Business Register and validated and communicated with stakeholder managers and committees in the subject-matter, survey collection, methodology, national accounting and IT areas. Having a well-defined framework will enhance the benefits of the Register as a backbone to the economic statistics programs of Statistics Canada, and ensure that we can further enrich the coherence and efficiency of our statistical programs in general.
  • A formal risk management process for the Business Register will be developed. Risks will be identified and documented and appropriate mitigation strategies will be developed.
Deliverables and Timeline:
  • The Director General, Statistical Registers and Geography Division and the Director, Communication and Dissemination Branch will develop a new accountability framework and communication plan by June 2017.
  • The Director General, Statistical Registers and Geography Division will work with the Integrated Risk Management coordination group to formalize the risk management process for the Business Register. Development of the risk management processes will take place in 2017-2018 with updated risks documented by March 31, 2018.

Control Mechanisms for the Business Register

Formal processes have been established to validate and test the changes prior to uploading the data to the BR; however, there is limited documentation for the results of this process, specifically for issues identified and any follow-up procedures conducted for some, but not all, data sources.

Processes in place are adequate for ensuring that profiling of business activities is performed. Guidance documents have been developed to support staff in performing their day-to-day activities. However, no specific criteria have been established to prioritize the notifications of updates (messages) to the BR received by profilers, nor have targets or timelines been developed for the resolution of the messages.

A quality assurance program has been established to assess the quality of key BR information, which continues to be reviewed and updated. There are opportunities to improve the following:

  • Profiling activities within the BR should be monitored formally to ensure that activities and results are being documented and that approaches are consistent across supervisors.
  • Appropriate quality assurance mechanisms should be applied to profiling activities across the agency.
  • Although training and guidance processes are well defined and documented, a refresher course should be developed, and more practical examples and exercises should be included in the training content.

Processes exist and have been documented for validating production data files used for surveys; however, there is limited evidence regarding the results of the validation process, including tracking issues, communicating with SMDs and the final resolution.

Data Processing

ADD is the liaison between Statistics Canada and the CRA for tax data. It is therefore important for processes to be established for ADD to be informed of and to perform validation testing on changes in the administrative data provided by the CRA, to ensure alignment with the BR System. An effective validation process should also be established to confirm the reliability, completeness and accuracy of the data provided by the CRA prior to its being integrated in the BR.

Overall, there is an effective process to validate changes in data formats received from the CRA.

A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) exists between Statistics Canada and the CRA, outlining the roles and responsibilities of each party concerning the CRA's providing data to ADD. The MOU outlines a requirement for the CRA to inform ADD of any changes in the administrative data provided. These changes often include changes to the format of the files provided, including the data fields used, which affect the compatibility of the data with the BR System and require ADD to make edits to properly adjust the formatting. When ADD is notified of changes in the administrative data, validation procedures are required to ensure that the format of the data will continue to be compatible with the BR. As necessary, changes to the BR are required before new data files can be loaded and relied upon.

As an example, every month, the T2 Unit within ADD processes and loads new and reassessed information received from the CRA. Before loading these data into the BR, the T2 Unit runs several verification programs designed to check for specific errors and make the appropriate corrections, based on defined variables for T2 data. These variables are based on fields within the data, such as "end date" and "number of months." New variables for these data are received twice per year by the CRA, based on any changes made to the format of data files. The complexity of the new or deleted variables determines the turnaround time for ADD to put these variables into production. The audit reviewed the list of T2 variables added by the CRA for these data as of December 31, 2015, and confirmed that the variables had been updated for the current data released.

Limited documentation exists relative to the results of the validation of CRA data files.

The ADD is responsible for performing validation on the data files received from the CRA prior to their being uploaded into the BR, to ensure the quality and integrity of the data. This validation involves verifying record linkages, data variables, the length and number of records, and irregular fluctuations in revenue as well as ensuring that no errors occur when the data is converted to other formats.

The audit team was able to review documentation outlining the validation processes performed on the data, as well as the ways to confirm the accuracy of the data prior to its being uploaded to the BR. Every month, the ADD processes and loads new and reassessed information received from the CRA for approximately 220 T2 schedules. Before loading these data, the T2 Unit within ADD runs several validation programs designed to check for specific errors and make the appropriate corrections, and the audit noted that these validation procedures are documented.

The BR expects the ADD to provide usable quality data to be uploaded to the BR, and that the ADD perform all T2, GST values and edits required. Through the audit team's walkthrough of the validation procedures, review of resulting documentation, and discussions with BR Program management, the audit team confirmed that validation procedures carried out by ADD meet the BR's needs regarding the quality of data uploaded to the BR.

The ADD monitors its validation processes through a monthly monitoring report, which lists the counts of records that were affected by each edit process. The audit reviewed examples of the output tables created during the validation process. These tables are generated throughout the process, and reviewed and maintained; however, limited documentation exists around the outliers and issues identified from reviewing these tables and any follow-up procedures performed, specifically for T2 data. This could result in issues not being appropriately followed up on and remediated for an appropriate resolution. Results with respect to GST data are documented, and issues are formally tracked.

Maintenance of Business Register data

To align with the Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines and provide the most accurate business data to stakeholders, there must be control mechanisms in place to ensure that all updates made to the BR records are appropriate. An adequate quality assurance program should be in place to assess the quality of the information maintained within the BR. Further, adequate training and guidance should be provided to all users of the BR in support of reliable, complete, accurate and timely updates made to these data.

Processes and associated guidance documents have been established to support day-to-day profiling activities.

The EPM program is responsible for performing profiling activities for over 350 of Canada's largest and most complex business enterprises. This program has a team of 10 profilers, and each has a portfolio of 32 to 35 businesses, with the requirement to complete 8 to 10 full parent BR profile reviews during a year.

Profilers in the BR program are responsible for profiling all other complex businesses (approximately 32,000 businesses), and each profiler is assigned a portfolio of businesses. Each profiler is expected to complete approximately 30 to 40 business profiles annually and is responsible for responding to notifications of changes or messages relative to his or her portfolio.

The BR Profiling section has developed several guides and training manuals to support profiling activities. For example, a Checklist for the Profilers document describes the steps for updating the BR. Another guide is Interviewer's Manual for the Quality Assurance Profiling describes the procedures for Quality Assurance Survey on NAICS. Feedback obtained during the audit from profilers and supervisors indicated that the guidance documents provided are adequate and support daily activities. Overall, the profiling activities undertaken align with the Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines.

Limited criteria have been established for profilers to prioritize and address notifications of changes or updates (messages) to the BR data, other than messages affecting monthly or annual surveys.

Messages represent all requests for updates and information received during collection of data for complex structures. The collection of this information may originate from various sources, such as collection centres, regional offices, SMDs and the CRA. Messages sent are automatically routed to the profiler assigned to that portfolio, to perform required manual updates. A message can be marked as either "critical" or "non-critical," which is selected by the originator. Types of messages include request to change legal name, change of address affecting the province, cessation of the operation entity (or bankruptcy), and changes to the NAICS.

Based on interviews and walkthroughs performed within the BR Program, when a message is received, the profiler carries out research or contacts the business owner to confirm the information in the message. If necessary, the update is made in the BR and the message status is changed to "update applied," with the justification documented in an entry journal in the BR System. Based on the information gathered or research conducted, if the profiler finds that the proposed change is inaccurate or inappropriate and, therefore, not required, no update is made. The message is then cancelled, and the justification is documented in the journal. Supervisors review the messages periodically, but no documentation is maintained to demonstrate that a review was performed.

Profilers receive a significant number of messages and have responsibility to determine how to prioritize these messages. As of March 31, 2016, 56,204 unanswered messages remained in the BR. Although profilers try to give priority to messages affecting monthly surveys and ensure that all messages affecting annual surveys are addressed by December 31, limited criteria have been established for the prioritization of the messages received by profilers. Further, no targets or timeframes have been outlined for the resolution of the messages. This increases the risk that necessary changes are not made to the BR data in a timely manner, thus reducing the quality of information contained in the BR.

A formal quality assurance program has been established to assess the quality of key BR information. As this program continues to evolve, there are opportunities to improve the consistency of specific elements.

Two levels of quality assurance are applied to evaluate the quality of the data maintained within the BR. The first level is performed at the micro level within the BR profilers section and the EPM program. The second is performed at a macro level by the Concepts, Quality Assurance and Training (CQAT) section. Thus, the Quality Assurance team ensures that the quality of the data in the BR System is adequate through the establishment of several quality assurance mechanisms. The results of the quality assurance testing performed are used to draw conclusions about the quality of all NAICS coding in the BR. These results are reported to the methodologists and then communicated to management through dashboard reports.

The monitoring (i.e., spot checks) of the BR profiling activities is not formalized and standardized.

Profiler supervisors have responsibility to review the profiling activities of profilers. For new profilers, supervisors review all profiles completed by the profiler. Supervisors perform spot checks on more experienced profilers carrying out telephone surveys and making updates to the BR. Then, supervisors provide comments to profilers on the adequacy of the activities carried out. However, no evidence is maintained for the review/spot checks performed with respect to indicating how the profiles that were spot checked were selected, and the outcome of the spot checks performed.

The audit conducted a walkthrough of spot checks performed by a BR supervisor on BR profiling activities, and confirmed that spot checks were performed adequately and that any issues were escalated and mitigated appropriately. However, no documentation was maintained to support these quality assurance activities. During the audit, supervisors confirmed that there is no standard frequency or consistent process to perform spot checks among supervisors. As a result, it is at the supervisors' discretion to determine how they conduct spot checks and how many they conduct.

Review of profiling activities conducted by EPM profilers differs from those conducted by BR profilers, since EPM profilers deal with the approximately 350 largest and most complex businesses; they are also responsible for activities such as collection and surveys. Spot checks are not performed when EPM profilers do manual updates in the BR. Instead, unit heads review the profiling activities once a profile is complete for an enterprise and document the results in an enterprise report document. The audit confirmed that any comments or questions raised by unit heads during their review are adequately followed up and documented in the report.

Quality assurance profiling for the NAICS is performed adequately.

Bimonthly, the Quality Assurance Profiling (QAP) team performs telephone surveys for approximately 650 businesses in the BR to determine whether the NAICS coding of active businesses in the BR is accurate or requires updating. The sample is selected by the Methodology team and based on active businesses that have not been contacted over the past two years. The QAP team is made up of a separate group of profilers who contact the businesses to obtain the required information and determine whether a change is required to the NAICS coding.

The audit tested a sample of 20 businesses that had already been tested under the QAP. Audit testing indicated that a spreadsheet is maintained showing all businesses tested, all updates required, and comments provided on the information obtained. More detailed comments on procedures performed, as well as detailed information on the industry and structure are documented in the journal within the BR. The audit work confirmed that when a change was required to the NAICS, it was accurately updated in the BR. For all updates made, a log shows which field was updated, who made the update, and when the update was made. Based on the testing performed by the audit team, the QAP is performed adequately and the results are sufficiently documented.

Review of incoherence reports results were followed up, and corrections were made in the BR.

Quality assurance is provided at a macro level by the CQAT through the review of incoherence reports to ensure that the General Survey Universe File (G-SUF) is adequate for the production of various surveys. Incoherence reports are generated monthly using the final G-SUF and running queries on various types of BR data to identify irregularities in specific key data fields. The G-SUF provides a preview of the population of units in scope for survey programs and is generated on a monthly basis for SMDs to review when developing their surveys. To be able to provide the most accurate data possible to SMDs, incoherence reports are run on BR data to identify potential anomalies within the data and to show where updates may be required.

Incoherence reports are run for the following:

  • legal operating entity, part of a consolidation, that have GST but no NAICS
  • T4 parents in a consolidation
  • PD7 (employees) incoherencies
  • income tax returns incoherencies
  • NAICS incoherencies
  • inactive reporting entity
  • operating entity with a single direct child
  • participants in a consolidation with no NAICS
  • cost centre production with no revenue

Only incoherencies appearing on two of the nine reports (T4 parents in a consolidation, and inactive reporting entity) need to be addressed before the production of the final G­-SUF, because those have a great impact on the quality of data for the production of surveys. The remaining incoherence reports are considered non-critical and are provided to the BR profilers, EPM and specific SMDs to address. Audit testing confirmed that for the two critical incoherence reports, results were followed up and corrections were made in the BR.

With the aim of continuing to evolve and refine the quality assurance program within the BR, the CQAT has developed Enterprise Quality Assurance Indicators to assess the enterprise quality by looking at various indicators of profiling, including messages, incoherencies, T4 data and the profile date. The CQAT indicated that the new indicators will help to better prioritize the profiling activities and allow the quality of the profiling work performed for each enterprise in the BR to be assessed.

Quality assurance processes to oversee profiling activities and changes made by SMDs who have Direct Updater access are not subject to the same level of quality assurance monitoring as for BR profilers.

The majority of profiling activities and changes to the BR are performed by BR and EPM profilers; however, the audit team observed that many SMD users had Direct Updater access, with the ability to make edits not only to the data but also to the enterprise structures—consistent with BR access given to profilers. It was confirmed that, by design, specific SMDs are performing direct profiling activities to ensure that survey requirements are being met and to allow for more timely and accurate updates to the BR.

Although the changes made by SMDs directly to the BR would be subject to some of the quality assurance activities, others that are specifically applied to profilers (i.e., spot checks) would not be applied to the SMDs, which could result in inaccurate updates to the BR.

Training and guidance processes are well defined and documented. In general, profilers and users of the BR have received proper training before being granted access to the BR.

The BR Program has established mandatory training to obtain access to the BR System and has developed training courses adapted for users according to their roles, responsibilities and required access to the BR.

The Chief of the BR Profiling section is responsible for training for all staff. The CQAT provides or coordinates training for all other users of the BR, including the regional offices that perform profiling activities.

A previous audit identified a finding about the training provided to employees in regional offices. The associated recommendation suggested that training be tailored to address specific needs and weaknesses of regional employees. As this included training on the BR, the BR Program considered this recommendation; training has since been streamlined to focus on key concepts of the BR.

The audit team found that the training programs and associated training materials are well defined and documented, and appropriate tracking for completion of training is maintained. Interviews with several users of the BR confirmed that sufficient training and training materials have been received, and they are useful for conducting profiling activities. It was noted, however, that providing a refresher course for users periodically would be useful, especially to support SMD and regional office users of the BR. Further, feedback from regional offices identified the opportunity to include more practical examples and exercises within the training content.

Information Provided to Clients

Effective control mechanisms for the production of BR data products help the BR Program to meet stakeholders' quality expectations. In accordance with the Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines, an effective review process should be established to identify and address potential data errors, to ensure that the data released by the BR is relevant, accurate, timely and coherent.

Processes have been established for validating the production files used for the creation of surveys; however, the results have not been formally documented.

The survey account manager (SAM) team performs validation on the G-SUF, since SMDs choose their survey sample from this file and SAMs must ensure that samples have been pulled correctly and adhere to the characteristics of the survey. A Survey Processing Rules document was developed in March 2014 that provides an overview of the process, and gives examples to assist SMDs in determining which rules would be most beneficial for their surveys. This document also includes a template for noting the applicable rules, which is sent back to SAMs.

The audit reviewed examples of the files generated and how validation procedures are performed on these files. Results of the procedures applied and the issues identified, as well as correspondence with SMDs to resolve these issues, are not formally documented. The BR Program places heavy reliance on the knowledge and experience of the SAMs to identify and resolve issues. Without formally tracking and documenting the communication and resolution of the identified issues, there is the potential that issues might not be resolved, which would affect the quality of the final production files.

Recommendations

It is recommended that the Assistant Chief Statistician, Analytical Studies, Methodology and Statistical Infrastructure ensure that:

  • A standardized process with accompanying tools be established for the tracking of all outliers and issues identified as a result of the validation process carried out by ADD, including documentation of correspondence between the CRA and the BR, and the resolution of the issues.
  • The quality assurance program is strengthened through :
    • The establishment of criteria for profilers to automatically prioritize messages received and targets should be established and monitored to ensure messages are being addressed accordingly;
    • the establishment of a standardized monitoring approach for BR supervisors and formal documentation of monitoring activities;
    • a consistent level of quality assurance activities are being applied to profiling activities across the organization by SMDs;
    • the inclusion of more practical examples and exercises as part of the existing training curriculum.
  • A standardized process with accompanying tools be established for the SAM team which outlines the validation procedures to be carried out; specifically how to track and document the communication and resolution of identified system errors.

Management Response

Management agrees with the recommendations.

The development of new tools and processes will be done as part of the approved Continuity and Quality Maintenance (CQM) items that are planned for the T2 redesign that will take place from April 2017 to March 2020. By March 2017, ADD will review the existing tools and procedures and specify the required changes.

In the interim, shorter-term mechanisms will be identified and implemented that can address the needs prior to having the fully integrated solutions to be developed as part of the CQM.

There is a system to establish priorities that is communicated to employees. However, there is no system that allows the program to monitor the handling of the messages according to the various priorities.

A more automatic means of identifying priority messages will be created. It could be through the creation of a priority index for messages that could then be used to set targets/quotas for profilers and updaters. This will ensure the focus on those messages that have potential to impact statistical aggregates for key industry-geography domains.

Procedures and guidelines will be reviewed and improved for checking updates made by profilers and direct updaters in the various divisions (i.e. Statistical Registers and Geography Division profilers, EPM profilers and SMDs). Newly formalized guidelines and procedures will be documented, communicated and implemented. This should ensure all divisions are using a consistent approach.

New training exercises and materials that are being piloted in the regional offices, will be reviewed and finalized taking into consideration the audit recommendations.

Procedures and documentation for identifying, communicating and resolving issues related to the processing of records by Survey Account Managers (SAMs) and SMDs will be reviewed. This will build on existing procedural documentation and also newly-implemented Service Level Agreements with SMDs. Issue resolution will be in line with the framework to be implemented as part of the outcome of recommendation related to formal accountability framework.

Deliverables and Timeline

The Director of the Administrative Data Division will:

  • Identify and implement short term solutions by March of 2017;
  • Review the existing tools and procedures and specify the required changes by March 2017; and,
  • Implement the fully-integrated tools and procedures of the CQM including the T2 redesign by March 2020.

The Director General, Statistical Registers and Geography Division will:

  • Implement a method for prioritizing messages and settings quotas by March 2017;
  • Document, communicate and implement newly formalized procedures and guidelines for checking updates made by profilers and direct updaters in the various divisions by March 2017;
  • Implement the training examples for regional interviewers by June 2017; and,
  • Develop documented and standardized procedures and tools for validating production files by December 2017.

Appendices

Appendix A: Audit Criteria

Audit Criteria
Control Objective / Core Controls / Criteria Sub-Criteria Policy Instrument
Objective 1: Statistics Canada has established an adequate governance framework to support the quality of the Business Register (BR).

1.1 Roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for the quality of data within the BR are clear and well communicated.

1.1.1 Roles, responsibilities and accountabilities for key personnel responsible for the quality of the BR have been clearly documented and are well understood.

1.1.2 Appropriate and adequate oversight bodies have been established to monitor the quality of BR data.

1.1.3 Appropriate resources with the proper skillset and knowledge have been staffed to ensure the quality of the BR.

Management Accountability Framework—Core Management Control

Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines

1.2 Management identifies and assesses the risks that may preclude the achievement of quality as an objective for the BR.

1.2.1 Formal processes and guidelines exist and are applied to facilitate the identification and assessment of risks to the quality of BR data.

1.2.2 Risk mitigation strategies have been developed to address key risks and are monitored on an ongoing basis for effectiveness.

Management Accountability Framework—Core Management Control

Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines

Objective 2: Effective control mechanisms have been established and are consistently applied to ensure the maintenance of quality data within the BR in accordance with the agency's Quality Guidelines.

2.1 Effective control mechanisms have been established and are consistently applied to ensure the quality of administrative data updating the BR.

2.1.1 A process has been established to be informed of and perform validation testing on any changes in the administrative data provided by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to ensure alignment with the BR System.

2.1.2 An effective validation process has been established to confirm the reliability, completeness and accuracy of the data provided by the CRA prior to being accepted into the BR.

Management Accountability Framework—Core Management Control

Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines

2.2 Effective control mechanisms have been established and are consistently applied to ensure the quality of the manual updates being made to the BR across the agency.

2.2.1 An effective process has been established for the profiling of businesses and any updates that need to be made to the BR.

2.2.2 Messages sent to profilers for any updates proposed by subject-matter divisions are reviewed and addressed on a timely basis.

2.2.3 An adequate quality assurance program has been developed and is in place to assess the quality of the information maintained within the BR.

2.2.4 Adequate training and guidance is provided to all users of the BR in support of reliable, complete, accurate and timely updates made to the data.

Management Accountability Framework—Core Management Control

Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines

2.3 Effective control mechanisms have been established and are consistently applied to ensure the quality of the information provided from the BR to clients for the development of surveys.

2.3.1 An effective process is in place for the production, review and approval of data used for the creation of surveys.

Management Accountability Framework—Core Management Control

Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines

Appendix B: Acronyms

Acronyms
Abbreviation Description
ADD Administrative Data Division
BR Business Register
CQAT Concepts, Quality Assurance and Training
CRA Canada Revenue Agency
EPM Enterprise Portfolio Management
ESD Enterprise Statistics Division
GST Goods and services tax
G-SUF General Survey Universe File
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
QAP Quality Assurance Profiling
SAM Survey Account Manager
SLA Service Level Agreement
SMD Subject-Matter Division
SRGD Statistical Registers and Geography Division

Monthly Retail Trade Survey (MRTS) Data Quality Statement

Objectives, uses and users
Concepts, variables and classifications
Coverage and frames
Sampling
Questionnaire design
Response and non-response
Data collection and capture operations
Editing
Imputation
Estimation
Revisions and seasonal adjustment
Data quality evaluation
Disclosure control

1. Objectives, uses and users

1.1. Objective

The Monthly Retail Trade Survey (MRTS) provides information on the performance of the retail trade sector on a monthly basis, and when combined with other statistics, represents an important indicator of the state of the Canadian economy.

1.2. Uses

The estimates provide a measure of the health and performance of the retail trade sector. Information collected is used to estimate level and monthly trend for retail sales. At the end of each year, the estimates provide a preliminary look at annual retail sales and performance.

1.3. Users

A variety of organizations, sector associations, and levels of government make use of the information. Retailers rely on the survey results to compare their performance against similar types of businesses, as well as for marketing purposes. Retail associations are able to monitor industry performance and promote their retail industries. Investors can monitor industry growth, which can result in better access to investment capital by retailers. Governments are able to understand the role of retailers in the economy, which aids in the development of policies and tax incentives. As an important industry in the Canadian economy, governments are able to better determine the overall health of the economy through the use of the estimates in the calculation of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

2. Concepts, variables and classifications

2.1. Concepts

The retail trade sector comprises establishments primarily engaged in retailing merchandise, generally without transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise.

The retailing process is the final step in the distribution of merchandise; retailers are therefore organized to sell merchandise in small quantities to the general public. This sector comprises two main types of retailers, that is, store and non-store retailers. The MRTS covers only store retailers. Their main characteristics are described below. Store retailers operate fixed point-of-sale locations, located and designed to attract a high volume of walk-in customers. In general, retail stores have extensive displays of merchandise and use mass-media advertising to attract customers. They typically sell merchandise to the general public for personal or household consumption, but some also serve business and institutional clients. These include establishments such as office supplies stores, computer and software stores, gasoline stations, building material dealers, plumbing supplies stores and electrical supplies stores.

In addition to selling merchandise, some types of store retailers are also engaged in the provision of after-sales services, such as repair and installation. For example, new automobile dealers, electronic and appliance stores and musical instrument and supplies stores often provide repair services, while floor covering stores and window treatment stores often provide installation services. As a general rule, establishments engaged in retailing merchandise and providing after sales services are classified in this sector. Catalogue sales showrooms, gasoline service stations, and mobile home dealers are treated as store retailers.

2.2. Variables

Sales are defined as the sales of all goods purchased for resale, net of returns and discounts. This includes commission revenue and fees earned from selling goods and services on account of others, such as selling lottery tickets, bus tickets, and phone cards. It also includes parts and labour revenue from repair and maintenance; revenue from rental and leasing of goods and equipment; revenues from services, including food services; sales of goods manufactured as a secondary activity; and the proprietor’s withdrawals, at retail, of goods for personal use. Other revenue from rental of real estate, placement fees, operating subsidies, grants, royalties and franchise fees are excluded.

Trading Location is the physical location(s) in which business activity is conducted in each province and territory, and for which sales are credited or recognized in the financial records of the company. For retailers, this would normally be a store.

Constant Dollars: The value of retail trade is measured in two ways; including the effects of price change on sales and net of the effects of price change. The first measure is referred to as retail trade in current dollars and the latter as retail trade in constant dollars. The method of calculating the current dollar estimate is to aggregate the weighted value of sales for all retail outlets. The method of calculating the constant dollar estimate is to first adjust the sales values to a base year, using the Consumer Price Index, and then sum up the resulting values.

2.3. Classification

The Monthly Retail Trade Survey is based on the definition of retail trade under the NAICS (North American Industry Classification System). NAICS is the agreed upon common framework for the production of comparable statistics by the statistical agencies of Canada, Mexico and the United States. The agreement defines the boundaries of twenty sectors. NAICS is based on a production-oriented, or supply based conceptual framework in that establishments are groups into industries according to similarity in production processes used to produce goods and services.

Estimates appear for 21 industries based on special aggregations of the 2012 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) industries. The 21 industries are further aggregated to 11 sub-sectors.

Geographically, sales estimates are produced for Canada and each province and territory.

3. Coverage and frames

Statistics Canada’s Business Register ( BR) provides the frame for the Monthly Retail Trade Survey. The BR is a structured list of businesses engaged in the production of goods and services in Canada. It is a centrally maintained database containing detailed descriptions of most business entities operating within Canada. The BR includes all incorporated businesses, with or without employees. For unincorporated businesses, the BR includes all employers with businesses, and businesses with no employees with annual sales that have a Goods and Services Tax (GST) or annual revenue that declares individual taxes.  annual sales greater than $30,000 that have a Goods and Services Tax (GST) account (the BR does not include unincorporated businesses with no employees and with annual sales less than $30,000).

The businesses on the BR are represented by a hierarchical structure with four levels, with the statistical enterprise at the top, followed by the statistical company, the statistical establishment and the statistical location. An enterprise can be linked to one or more statistical companies, a statistical company can be linked to one or more statistical establishments, and a statistical establishment to one or more statistical locations.

The target population for the MRTS consists of all statistical establishments on the BR that are classified to the retail sector using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) (approximately 200,000 establishments). The NAICS code range for the retail sector is 441100 to 453999. A statistical establishment is the production entity or the smallest grouping of production entities which: produces a homogeneous set of goods or services; does not cross provincial boundaries; and provides data on the value of output, together with the cost of principal intermediate inputs used, along with the cost and quantity of labour used to produce the output. The production entity is the physical unit where the business operations are carried out. It must have a civic address and dedicated labour.

The exclusions to the target population are ancillary establishments (producers of services in support of the activity of producing goods and services for the market of more than one establishment within the enterprise, and serves as a cost centre or a discretionary expense centre for which data on all its costs including labour and depreciation can be reported by the business), future establishments, establishments with a missing or a zero gross business income (GBI) value on the BR and establishments in the following non-covered NAICS:

  • 4541 (electronic shopping and mail-order houses)
  • 4542 (vending machine operators)
  • 45431 (fuel dealers)
  • 45439 (other direct selling establishments)

4. Sampling

The MRTS sample consists of 10,000 groups of establishments (clusters) classified to the Retail Trade sector selected from the Statistics Canada Business Register. A cluster of establishments is defined as all establishments belonging to a statistical enterprise that are in the same industrial group and geographical region. The MRTS uses a stratified design with simple random sample selection in each stratum. The stratification is done by industry groups (the mainly, but not only four digit level NAICS), and the geographical regions consisting of the provinces and territories, as well as three provincial sub-regions. We further stratify the population by size.

The size measure is created using a combination of independent survey data and three administrative variables: the annual profiled revenue, the GST sales expressed on an annual basis, and the declared tax revenue (T1 or T2). The size strata consist of one take-all (census), at most, two take-some (partially sampled) strata, and one take-none (non-sampled) stratum. Take-none strata serve to reduce respondent burden by excluding the smaller businesses from the surveyed population. These businesses should represent at most ten percent of total sales. Instead of sending questionnaires to these businesses, the estimates are produced through the use of administrative data.

The sample was allocated optimally in order to reach target coefficients of variation at the national, provincial/territorial, industrial, and industrial groups by province/territory levels. The sample was also inflated to compensate for dead, non-responding, and misclassified units.

MRTS is a repeated survey with maximisation of monthly sample overlap. The sample is kept month after month, and every month new units are added (births) to the sample.  MRTS births, i.e., new clusters of establishment(s), are identified every month via the BR’s latest universe. They are stratified according to the same criteria as the initial population. A sample of these births is selected according to the sampling fraction of the stratum to which they belong and is added to the monthly sample. Deaths occur on a monthly basis. A death can be a cluster of establishment(s) that have ceased their activities (out-of-business) or whose major activities are no longer in retail trade (out-of-scope). The status of these businesses is updated on the BR using administrative sources and survey feedback, including feedback from the MRTS. Methods to treat dead units and misclassified units are part of the sample and population update procedures.

5. Questionnaire design

The Monthly Retail Trade Survey incorporates the following sub-surveys:

Monthly Retail Trade Survey - R8

Monthly Retail Trade Survey (with inventories) – R8

Survey of Sales and Inventories of Alcoholic Beverages

The questionnaires collect monthly data on retail sales and the number of trading locations by province or territory and inventories of goods owned and intended for resale from a sample of retailers. The items on the questionnaires have remained unchanged for several years. For the 2004 redesign, the general questionnaires were subject to cosmetic changes only. The questionnaire for Sales and Inventories of Alcoholic Beverages underwent more extensive changes. The modifications were discussed withstakeholders and the respondents were given an opportunity to comment before the new questionnaire was finalized. If further changes are needed to any of the questionnaires, proposed changes would go through a review committee and a field test with respondents and data users to ensure its relevancy.

6. Response and non-response

6.1. Response and non-response

Despite the best efforts of survey managers and operations staff to maximize response in the MRTS, some non-response will occur. For statistical establishments to be classified as responding, the degree of partial response (where an accurate response is obtained for only some of the questions asked a respondent) must meet a minimum threshold level below which the response would be rejected and considered a unit non-response.  In such an instance, the business is classified as not having responded at all.

Non-response has two effects on data: first it introduces bias in estimates when non-respondents differ from respondents in the characteristics measured; and second, it contributes to an increase in the sampling variance of estimates because the effective sample size is reduced from that originally sought.

The degree to which efforts are made to get a response from a non-respondent is based on budget and time constraints, its impact on the overall quality and the risk of non-response bias.

The main method to reduce the impact of non-response at sampling is to inflate the sample size through the use of over-sampling rates that have been determined from similar surveys.

Besides the methods to reduce the impact of non-response at sampling and collection, the non-responses to the survey that do occur are treated through imputation. In order to measure the amount of non-response that occurs each month, various response rates are calculated. For a given reference month, the estimation process is run at least twice (a preliminary and a revised run). Between each run, respondent data can be identified as unusable and imputed values can be corrected through respondent data. As a consequence, response rates are computed following each run of the estimation process.

For the MRTS, two types of rates are calculated (un-weighted and weighted). In order to assess the efficiency of the collection process, un-weighted response rates are calculated. Weighted rates, using the estimation weight and the value for the variable of interest, assess the quality of estimation. Within each of these types of rates, there are distinct rates for units that are surveyed and for units that are only modeled from administrative data that has been extracted from GST files.

To get a better picture of the success of the collection process, two un-weighted rates called the ‘collection results rate’ and the ‘extraction results rate’ are computed. They are computed by dividing the number of respondents by the number of units that we tried to contact or tried to receive extracted data for them. Non-monthly reporters (respondents with special reporting arrangements where they do not report every month but for whom actual data is available in subsequent revisions) are excluded from both the numerator and denominator for the months where no contact is performed.

In summary, the various response rates are calculated as follows:

Weighted rates:

Survey Response rate (estimation) =
Sum of weighted sales of units with response status i / Sum of survey weighted sales

where i = units that have either reported data that will be used in estimation or are converted refusals, or have reported data that has not yet been resolved for estimation.

Admin Response rate (estimation) =
Sum of weighted sales of units with response status ii / Sum of administrative weighted sales

where ii = units that have data that was extracted from administrative files and are usable for estimation.

Total Response rate (estimation) =
Sum of weighted sales of units with response status i or response status ii / Sum of all weighted sales

Un-weighted rates:

Survey Response rate (collection) =
Number of questionnaires with response status iii/ Number of questionnaires with response status iv

where iii = units that have either reported data (unresolved, used or not used for estimation) or are converted refusals.

where iv = all of the above plus units that have refused to respond, units that were not contacted and other types of non-respondent units.

Admin Response rate (extraction) =
Number of questionnaires with response status vi/ Number of questionnaires with response status vii

where vi = in-scope units that have data (either usable or non-usable) that was extracted from administrative files

where vii = all of the above plus units that have refused to report to the administrative data source, units that were not contacted and other types of non-respondent units.

(% of questionnaire collected over all in-scope questionnaires)

Collection Results Rate =
Number of questionnaires with response status iii / Number of questionnaires with response status viii

where iii = same as iii defined above

where viii = same as iv except for the exclusion of units that were contacted because their response is unavailable for a particular month since they are non-monthly reporters.

Extraction Results Rate =
Number of questionnaires with response status ix / Number of questionnaires with response status vii

where ix = same as vi with the addition of extracted units that have been imputed or were out of scope

where vii = same as vii defined above

(% of questionnaires collected over all questionnaire in-scope we tried to collect)

All the above weighted and un-weighted rates are provided at the industrial group, geography and size group level or for any combination of these levels.

Use of Administrative Data

Managing response burden is an ongoing challenge for Statistics Canada. In an attempt to alleviate response burden and survey costs, especially for smaller businesses, the MRTS has reduced the number of simple establishments in the sample that are surveyed directly and instead derives sales data for these establishments from Goods and Service Tax (GST) files using a statistical model. The model accounts for differences between sales and revenue (reported for GST purposes) as well as for the time lag between the survey reference period and the reference period of the GST file.

For more information on the methodology used for modeling sales from administrative data sources, refer to ‘Monthly Retail Trade Survey: Use of Administrative Data’ under ‘Documentation’ of the IMDB.

Table 1 contains the weighted response rates for all industry groups as well as for total retail trade for each province and territory. For more detailed weighted response rates, please contact the Marketing and Dissemination Section at (613) 951-3549, toll free: 1-877-421-3067 or by e-mail at retailinfo@statcan.

6.2. Methods used to reduce non-response at collection

Significant effort is spent trying to minimize non-response during collection. Methods used, among others, are interviewer techniques such as probing and persuasion, repeated re-scheduling and call-backs to obtain the information, and procedures dealing with how to handle non-compliant (refusal) respondents.

If data are unavailable at the time of collection, a respondent's best estimates are also accepted, and are subsequently revised once the actual data become available.

To minimize total non-response for all variables, partial responses are accepted. In addition, questionnaires are customized for the collection of certain variables, such as inventory, so that collection is timed for those months when the data are available.

Finally, to build trust and rapport between the interviewers and respondents, cases are generally assigned to the same interviewer each month. This action establishes a personal relationship between interviewer and respondent, and builds respondent trust.

7. Data collection and capture operations

Collection of the data is performed by Statistics Canada’s Regional Offices.

Table 1: Weighted response rates by NAICS, for all provinces and territories: October 2016
Table summary
This table displays the results of Table 1: Weighted response rates by NAICS Weighted Response Rates (appearing as column headers).
  Weighted Response Rates
Total Survey Administrative
NAICS - Canada  
Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers 90.5 91.2 64.1
Automobile Dealers 92.2 92.5 68.4
New Car Dealers 93.6 93.6 Note ...: not applicable
Used Car Dealers 70.0 70.4 68.4
Other Motor Vehicle Dealers 71.0 72.4 62.9
Automotive Parts, Accessories and Tire Stores 81.2 84.1 60.4
Furniture and Home Furnishings Stores 77.7 80.2 48.3
Furniture Stores 77.8 79.1 53.1
Home Furnishings Stores 77.6 82.4 44.6
Electronics and Appliance Stores 67.7 68.7 21.6
Building Material and Garden Equipment Dealers 89.7 90.2 85.4
Food and Beverage Stores 84.2 85.0 72.9
Grocery Stores 90.0 90.7 80.9
Grocery (except Convenience) Stores 92.3 92.9 83.8
Convenience Stores 58.4 57.7 62.6
Specialty Food Stores 54.0 58.4 34.4
Beer, Wine and Liquor Stores 70.0 70.2 59.4
Health and Personal Care Stores 86.2 86.3 84.5
Gasoline Stations 73.0 73.9 58.3
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores 84.9 85.8 41.0
Clothing Stores 85.6 86.6 34.1
Shoe Stores 83.2 83.3 77.0
Jewellery, Luggage and Leather Goods Stores 80.3 81.6 54.5
Sporting Goods, Hobby, Book and Music Stores 80.8 84.3 26.8
General Merchandise Stores 98.9 99.0 80.8
Department Stores 100.0 100.0 Note ...: not applicable
Other general merchandise stores 98.1 98.3 80.8
Miscellaneous Store Retailers 78.7 81.2 52.9
Total 86.4 87.2 67.0
Regions  
Newfoundland and Labrador 83.7 83.8 81.3
Prince Edward Island 80.7 81.1 50.5
Nova Scotia 85.9 86.0 82.2
New Brunswick 81.6 82.9 50.7
Québec 89.9 90.7 74.8
Ontario 87.2 88.6 58.8
Manitoba 81.7 82.0 64.4
Saskatchewan 82.3 82.3 82.6
Alberta 85.4 86.1 68.8
British Columbia 83.6 84.1 68.9
Yukon Territory 79.7 79.7 Note ...: not applicable
Northwest Territories 85.7 85.7 Note ...: not applicable
Nunavut 95.2 95.2 Note ...: not applicable


Weighted Response Rates

Respondents are sent a questionnaire or are contacted by telephone to obtain their sales and inventory values, as well as to confirm the opening or closing of business trading locations. Collection of the data begins approximately 7 working days after the end of the reference month and continues for the duration of that month.

New entrants to the survey are introduced to the survey via an introductory letter that informs the respondent that a representative of Statistics Canada will be calling. This call is to introduce the respondent to the survey, confirm the respondent's business activity, establish and begin data collection, as well as to answer any questions that the respondent may have.

8. Editing

Data editing is the application of checks to detect missing, invalid or inconsistent entries or to point to data records that are potentially in error. In the survey process for the MRTS, data editing is done at two different time periods.

First of all, editing is done during data collection. Once data are collected via the telephone, or via the receipt of completed mail-in questionnaires, the data are captured using customized data capture applications. All data are subjected to data editing. Edits during data collection are referred to as field edits and generally consist of validity and some simple consistency edits. They are used to detect mistakes made during the interview by the respondent or the interviewer and to identify missing information during collection in order to reduce the need for follow-up later on. Another purpose of the field edits is to clean up responses. In the MRTS, the current month’s responses are edited against the respondent’s previous month’s responses and/or the previous year’s responses for the current month. Field edits are also used to identify problems with data collection procedures and the design of the questionnaire, as well as the need for more interviewer training.

Follow-up with respondents occurs to validate potential erroneous data following any failed preliminary edit check of the data. Once validated, the collected data is regularly transmitted to the head office in Ottawa.

Secondly, editing known as statistical editing is also done after data collection and this is more empirical in nature. Statistical editing is run prior to imputation in order to identify the data that will be used as a basis to impute non-respondents. Large outliers that could disrupt a monthly trend are excluded from trend calculations by the statistical edits. It should be noted that adjustments are not made at this stage to correct the reported outliers.

The first step in the statistical editing is to identify which responses will be subjected to the statistical edit rules. Reported data for the current reference month will go through various edit checks.

The first set of edit checks is based on the Hidiriglou-Berthelot method whereby a ratio of the respondent’s current month data over historical (last month, same month last year) or auxiliary data is analyzed. When the respondent’s ratio differs significantly from ratios of respondents who are similar in terms of industry and/or geography group, the response is deemed an outlier.

The second set of edits consists of an edit known as the share of market edit. With this method, one is able to edit all respondents, even those where historical and auxiliary data is unavailable. The method relies on current month data only. Therefore, within a group of respondents, that are similar in terms of industrial group and/or geography, if the weighted contribution of a respondent to the group’s total is too large, it will be flagged as an outlier.

For edit checks based on the Hidiriglou-Berthelot method, data that are flagged as an outlier will not be included in the imputation models (those based on ratios). Also, data that are flagged as outliers in the share of market edit will not be included in the imputation models where means and medians are calculated to impute for responses that have no historical responses.

In conjunction with the statistical editing after data collection of reported data, there is also error detection done on the extracted GST data. Modeled data based on the GST are also subject to an extensive series of processing steps which thoroughly verify each record that is the basis for the model as well as the record being modeled. Edits are performed at a more aggregate level (industry by geography level) to detect records which deviate from the expected range, either by exhibiting large month-to-month change, or differing significantly from the remaining units. All data which fail these edits are subject to manual inspection and possible corrective action.

9. Imputation

Imputation in the MRTS is the process used to assign replacement values for missing data. This is done by assigning values when they are missing on the record being edited to ensure that estimates are of high quality and that a plausible, internal consistency is created. Due to concerns of response burden, cost and timeliness, it is generally impossible to do all follow-ups with the respondents in order to resolve missing responses. Since it is desirable to produce a complete and consistent microdata file, imputation is used to handle the remaining missing cases.

In the MRTS, imputation is based on historical data or administrative data (GST sales). The appropriate method is selected according to a strategy that is based on whether historical data is available, auxiliary data is available and/or which reference month is being processed.

There are three types of historical imputation methods. The first type is a general trend that uses one historical data source (previous month, data from next month or data from same month previous year). The second type is a regression model where data from previous month and same month, previous year are used simultaneously. The third type uses the historical data as a direct replacement value for a non-respondent. Depending upon the particular reference month, there is an order of preference that exists so that top quality imputation can result. The historical imputation method that was labelled as the third type above is always the last option in the order for each reference month.

The imputation method using administrative data is automatically selected when historical information is unavailable for a non-respondent. Trends are then applied to the administrative data source (monthly size) depending on whether the structure is simple, e.g. enterprises with only one establishment, or the unit has a more complex structure.

10. Estimation

Estimation is a process that approximates unknown population parameters using only part of the population that is included in a sample. Inferences about these unknown parameters are then made, using the sample data and associated survey design. This stage uses Statistics Canada's Generalized Estimation System (GES).

For retail sales, the population is divided into a survey portion (take-all and take-some strata) and a non-survey portion (take-none stratum). From the sample that is drawn from the survey portion, an estimate for the population is determined through the use of a Horvitz-Thompson estimator where responses for sales are weighted by using the inverses of the inclusion probabilities of the sampled units. Such weights (called sampling weights) can be interpreted as the number of times that each sampled unit should be replicated to represent the entire population. The calculated weighted sales values are summed by domain, to produce the total sales estimates by each industrial group / geographic area combination. A domain is defined as the most recent classification values available from the BR for the unit and the survey reference period. These domains may differ from the original sampling strata because units may have changed size, industry or location. Changes in classification are reflected immediately in the estimates and do not accumulate over time. For the non-survey portion, the sales are estimated with statistical models using monthly GST sales.

For more information on the methodology for modeling sales from administrative data sources which also contributes to the estimates of the survey portion, refer to ‘Monthly Retail Survey: Use of Administrative Data’ under ‘Documentation’ of the IMDB.

The measure of precision used for the MRTS to evaluate the quality of a population parameter estimate and to obtain valid inferences is the variance. The variance from the survey portion is derived directly from a stratified simple random sample without replacement.

Sample estimates may differ from the expected value of the estimates. However, since the estimate is based on a probability sample, the variability of the sample estimate with respect to its expected value can be measured. The variance of an estimate is a measure of the precision of the sample estimate and is defined as the average, over all possible samples, of the squared difference of the estimate from its expected value.

11. Revisions and seasonal adjustment

Revisions in the raw data are required to correct known non-sampling errors. These normally include replacing imputed data with reported data, corrections to previously reported data, and estimates for new births that were not known at the time of the original estimates.

Raw data are revised, on a monthly basis, for the month immediately prior to the current reference month being published. That is, when data for December are being published for the first time, there will also be revisions, if necessary, to the raw data for November. In addition, revisions are made once a year, with the initial release of the February data, for all months in the previous years. The purpose is to correct any significant problems that have been found that apply for an extended period. The actual period of revision depends on the nature of the problem identified, but rarely exceeds three years. The revision period can be extended when historical revisions or restratitfication are done.

Retail trade data are seasonally adjusted using the X12-ARIMA method. This consists of extrapolating a year's worth of raw data with the ARIMA model (auto-regressive integrated moving average model), and of seasonally adjusting the raw time series. Finally, the annual totals of the seasonally adjusted series are forced to the annual totals of the original series.

The seasonally adjusted data also need to be revised. In part, they need to reflect the revisions identified for the raw data. Also, the seasonally adjusted estimates are calculated using X-12-ARIMA, and are sensitive to the most recent values reported in the raw data. For this reason, with the release of each month of new data, the seasonally adjusted values for the previous three months are revised.  A seasonally adjusted time series is a time series that has been modified to eliminate the effect of seasonal and calendar influences. For this reason, the seasonally adjusted data allows for more meaningful comparisons of economic conditions from month to month.

Once a year, seasonal adjustments options are reviewed to take into account the most recent data. Revised seasonally adjusted estimates for each month in the previous years are released at the same time as the annual revision to the raw data. The actual period of revision depends on the number years the raw data was revised.

12. Data quality evaluation

The methodology of this survey has been designed to control errors and to reduce their potential effects on estimates. However, the survey results remain subject to errors, of which sampling error is only one component of the total survey error. Sampling error results when observations are made only on a sample and not on the entire population. All other errors arising from the various phases of a survey are referred to as nonsampling errors. For example, these types of errors can occur when a respondent provides incorrect information or does not answer certain questions; when a unit in the target population is omitted or covered more than once; when GST data for records being modeled for a particular month are not representative of the actual record for various reasons; when a unit that is out of scope for the survey is included by mistake or when errors occur in data processing, such as coding or capture errors.

Prior to publication, combined survey results are analyzed for comparability; in general, this includes a detailed review of individual responses (especially for large businesses), general economic conditions and historical trends.

A common measure of data quality for surveys is the coefficient of variation (CV). The coefficient of variation, defined as the standard error divided by the sample estimate, is a measure of precision in relative terms. Since the coefficient of variation is calculated from responses of individual units, it also measures some non-sampling errors.

The formula used to calculate coefficients of variation (CV) as percentages is:

CV (X) = S(X) * 100% / X
where X denotes the estimate and S(X) denotes the standard error of X.

Confidence intervals can be constructed around the estimates using the estimate and the CV. Thus, for our sample, it is possible to state with a given level of confidence that the expected value will fall within the confidence interval constructed around the estimate. For example, if an estimate of $12,000,000 has a CV of 2%, the standard error will be $240,000 (the estimate multiplied by the CV). It can be stated with 68% confidence that the expected values will fall within the interval whose length equals the standard deviation about the estimate, i.e. between $11,760,000 and $12,240,000.

Alternatively, it can be stated with 95% confidence that the expected value will fall within the interval whose length equals two standard deviations about the estimate, i.e. between $11,520,000 and $12,480,000.

Finally, due to the small contribution of the non-survey portion to the total estimates, bias in the non-survey portion has a negligible impact on the CVs. Therefore, the CV from the survey portion is used for the total estimate that is the summation of estimates from the surveyed and non-surveyed portions.

13. Disclosure control

Statistics Canada is prohibited by law from releasing any data which would divulge information obtained under the Statistics Act that relates to any identifiable person, business or organization without the prior knowledge or the consent in writing of that person, business or organization. Various confidentiality rules are applied to all data that are released or published to prevent the publication or disclosure of any information deemed confidential. If necessary, data are suppressed to prevent direct or residual disclosure of identifiable data.

Confidentiality analysis includes the detection of possible "direct disclosure", which occurs when the value in a tabulation cell is composed of a few respondents or when the cell is dominated by a few companies.

The Monthly Survey of Large Retailers

The Monthly Survey of Large Retailers
Table summary
This table displays the results of The Monthly Survey of Large Retailers. The information is grouped by Legal Name (appearing as row headers), Operating Name (appearing as column headers).
Legal Name Operating Name
The Food Retailers  
Buy-Low Foods Limited Partnership Buy-Low Foods, Nesters Market
Canada Safeway Limited Safeway, Safeway - Liquor Store
Loblaw Companies Limited At the Pumps, Atlantic Gas Bars, Dominion, Extra Foods, Loblaws, Loblaws à plein gaz, Maxi, Maxi & Cie, Provigo, Real Atlantic Superstore, Real Canadian Liquor Store, Real Canadian Superstore, Western Gas Bars, Zehrs, pharmacies in franchised locations (Fortino's, No Frills, Save Easy, Your Independent Grocer)
Metro Inc. Drug Basics, Food Basics, Metro, Super C, The Pharmacy
Overwaitea Food Group Limited Partnership Cooper's Foods, Overwaitea Foods, PriceSmart Foods, Save-on-Foods, Save-On-Foods Gas Bar
Sobeys Group Inc. Foodland, FreshCo., IGA, IGA Extra, Lawtons Drugs, Needs Convenience, Price Chopper, Rachelle-Béry, Sobeys, Sobeys Fast Fuel, Sobeys Urban Fresh, Thrifty Foods, Western Cellars
The Department Stores (including concessions)  
Hudson's Bay Company Home Outfitters/Déco Découverte, The Bay/La Baie, Zellers
Sears Canada Inc. Sears Appliance & Mattress Store/Magasin de matelas et électroménagers, Sears Department Store/Grand magasin Sears, Sears Home Store/Magasin Sears Décor, Sears Hometown Store/Magasin Local Sears, Sears Outlet Store/Magasin de liquidation Sears
Wal-Mart Canada Corp. Walmart
The Other Non-Food Retailers  
668824 Alberta Ltd. Visions Electronics
9251-7200 Québec Inc. Jacob, Jacob Lingerie, Jacob Outlet
American Eagle Outfitters Canada Corporation Aerie, American Eagle Outfitters
Best Buy Canada Ltd. Best Buy, Future Shop
Boutique Laura Canada Ltée. Laura, Laura Outlet, Laura Petites, Laura Plus, Melanie Lyne
Boutique Marie Claire Inc. CF Sports, Claire France, Emotions, Marie Claire, Marie Claire Super Boutique, Marie Claire Weekend, San Francisco, Terra Nostra
Boutiques Tristan & Iseut Inc. Tristan, Tristan & America, Tristan & Iseut, West Coast
Canadian Tire Corporation Limited Canadian Tire Gas Bar, PartSource, Canadian Tire Corporation
Club Monaco Corp. Club Monaco
Comark Inc. Bootlegger, Cleo, Revolution, Ricki's
Costco Wholesale Canada Ltd. Costco, Costco Canada Liquor
Cotton Ginny Inc. Cotton Ginny
Eddie Bauer of Canada Corporation Eddie Bauer
Fairweather Ltd. Fairweather
Foot Locker Canada Corporation Champ Sports, Foot Locker
Gap (Canada) Inc. Banana Republic, Gap, Gap Kids
Grafton-Fraser Inc. George Richards Big & Tall Menswear, Mr. Big & Tall Menswear, Tip Top Tailors
Groupe ATBM Inc. Ameublement Tanguay, Brault et Martineau
Groupe Bikini Village Inc. Bikini Village
Harry Rosen Inc. Harry Rosen
Holt, Renfrew & Co., Limited Holt Renfrew
Ikea Canada Limited Partnership Ikea
International Clothiers Inc. Big Steel, Brogue, INC Men's, International Boys, International Clothiers, Petrocelle, Pinstripe Menswear, Randy River, River Island, Stockhomme
La Senza Corporation La Senza, La Senza Express
Le Chateau Inc. Le Chateau
Leon's Furniture Limited Leon's Furniture/Meubles Léon
Magasin Laura (P.V.) Inc. Laura, Laura Outlet, Laura Petites, Laura Plus, Melanie Lyne
Mark's Work Wearhouse Ltd. Mark's Work Wearhouse/L'Équipeur
Moores The Suit People Inc. Moores Clothing For Men
Northern Reflections Ltd. Northern Reflections
Nygard International Partnership Alia, Jay Set, Nygard, Nygard Fashion Park, Tan Jay
Old Navy (Canada) Inc. Old Navy
Pantorama Industries Inc. 1850, Fixx, Levi's, Levi's l'entrepôt, Pantorama, Pantorama l'entrepôt, Roberto, UR2B
Pharma Plus Drugmarts Ltd. Rexall, Rexall Pharma Plus
Reitmans (Canada) Limitée Addition Elle, Cassis, Penningtons, Reitmans, RW & Co., Smart Set, Thyme Maternity
Roots Canada Ltd. Roots Canada
Sony of Canada Ltd. Sony of Canada - Retail Division
Sport-Chek International 2000 Ltd. Athletes World, Atmosphere, National Sports, Sport Chek, Sport Mart
Tabi International Corporation Tabi International
Talbots Canada Corporation Talbots Canada
The Bargain! Shop Holdings Inc. The Bargain! Shop
The Brick Ltd. The Brick/Brick, The Brick Mattress Store, United Furniture Warehouse
The Children's Place (Canada) L.P. The Children's Place
The Source (Bell) Electronics Inc. / La Source (Bell) Electronique Inc. The Source/La Source
Thrifty's Inc. Bluenotes
Winners Merchants International L.P. Homesense, Marshalls, Stylesense, Winners
YM Inc. (Sales) Siblings, Sirens, Stitches, Suzy Shier, Urban Planet

Data accuracy Vital Statistics – Death Database

(Survey number 3233)

Coverage

Since the registration of deaths is a legal requirement in each Canadian province and territory, reporting is virtually complete. Under-coverage is thought to be minimal, but is being monitored. Under-coverage may occur because of late registration, but this is much less common than in birth registration. Death registration is necessary for the legal burial or disposal of a body, as well as for settling estate matters, so there is a strong incentive for relatives or officials to complete a registration in a timely manner. Some deaths are registered by local authorities, but the paperwork is not forwarded to provincial or territorial registrars before a cut-off date. These cases for 2000 represent approximately 200 deaths, 7 years after the year of death (accumulated late records), or less than one-tenth of one percent of the total records.

Other late or missing registrations may occur with unidentified bodies, or for Canadians who die outside of Canada. By long-standing practice, the date of death for unidentified remains is defined as the date of discovery. These deaths of unidentified persons typically represent less than ten cases per year. For out-of-country deaths, only deaths in the United States are regularly reported to Statistics Canada, and of these, Statistics Canada receives abstracted death records from approximately 20 American states. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in the United States reveals that in 2004 there were 572 deaths of Canadian residents in the United States, compared with 259 death records received by Statistics Canada via the state registrars. Health Statistics Division is working with provincial, territorial, and state registrars to increase the inter-jurisdictional exchanges of records for statistical and administrative purposes.

Under-coverage is also present for deaths of serving members of the Canadian military. Deaths of Canadians who died overseas while serving in the Armed Forces are not included in the Statistics Canada databases because they are not registered by the provinces and territories. Health Statistics Division is working with officials from the Department of National Defence to develop a death registration form for that department, based upon the model form developed by the Vital Statistics Council for Canada.

Over-coverage is minimal. Deaths of non-residents of Canada are registered but are excluded from most tabulations. Duplicate death registrations are identified as part of the regular processing operations on each provincial and territorial subset, as well as by additional inter-provincial checks. Possible duplicate registrations are verified against microfilmed registrations or optical images, or by consulting with the provinces and territories.

Response rates

Item response

For 2000 to 2005, the response rates were 99% to 100% for most of the demographic and geographic variables on the death database (age, date of birth, sex, province and census division of residence). The birthplace of deceased and marital status have response rates around 95% to 97% nationally except Quebec (81% for the birth place of deceased and 91% for the martital status). Underlying cause of death response rates have generally been stable for 2000 to 2004 at 99% and 99.2% in 2005. The reporting of postal codes has improved to 94% in 2005. The birthplace of the decedent’s mother and father remain poorly reported, at only 35% of deaths nationally. Both Quebec and Ontario collect the information on the registration forms, but do not include the variable in the electronic files forwarded to Statistics Canada.

Other Accuracy Issues

Age at death of persons over 100 years old

The demographers Bourbeau and Lebel have compared Canadian mortality and census data with other countries, and determined that the number of centenarians appears quite high in relation to other industrialized countries. In the absence of civil registration in Canada before 1921 and high levels of immigration to Canada, it is difficult to determine if the number of persons aged 100 and older is overestimated. On the death file, age and date of birth outliers are annually reviewed for capture errors. Where possible, obituaries are found for the oldest of the old. Reconciliation with other data sources is difficult, especially in the case of immigrants. Where birth certificates are unavailable, the overestimated age may have been used consistently on other documents such as health care registration, income tax, and census.

Cause of death certification

When a person dies, the medical certificate of cause of death is completed by the medical doctor in attendance, or the coroner, or medical examiner or other certifier. The certificate elicits the direct antecedent and underlying causes of death, other significant conditions, manner of death (for example, natural, accidental, suicide, homicide), and further information on injuries.

Data accuracy Vital Statistics – Death Database

(Survey number 3233)

Coverage

Since the registration of deaths is a legal requirement in each Canadian province and territory, reporting is virtually complete. Under-coverage is thought to be minimal, but is being monitored. Under-coverage may occur because of late registration, but this is much less common than in birth registration. Death registration is necessary for the legal burial or disposal of a body, as well as for settling estate matters, so there is a strong incentive for relatives or officials to complete a registration in a timely manner. Some deaths are registered by local authorities, but the paperwork is not forwarded to provincial or territorial registrars before a cut-off date. These cases for 2000 represent approximately 200 deaths, 7 years after the year of death (accumulated late records), or less than one-tenth of one percent of the total records.

Other late or missing registrations may occur with unidentified bodies, or for Canadians who die outside of Canada. By long-standing practice, the date of death for unidentified remains is defined as the date of discovery. These deaths of unidentified persons typically represent less than ten cases per year. For out-of-country deaths, only deaths in the United States are regularly reported to Statistics Canada, and of these, Statistics Canada receives abstracted death records from approximately 20 American states. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in the United States reveals that in 2004 there were 572 deaths of Canadian residents in the United States, compared with 259 death records received by Statistics Canada via the state registrars. Health Statistics Division is working with provincial, territorial, and state registrars to increase the inter-jurisdictional exchanges of records for statistical and administrative purposes.

Under-coverage is also present for deaths of serving members of the Canadian military. Deaths of Canadians who died overseas while serving in the Armed Forces are not included in the Statistics Canada databases because they are not registered by the provinces and territories. Health Statistics Division is working with officials from the Department of National Defence to develop a death registration form for that department, based upon the model form developed by the Vital Statistics Council for Canada.

Over-coverage is minimal. Deaths of non-residents of Canada are registered but are excluded from most tabulations. Duplicate death registrations are identified as part of the regular processing operations on each provincial and territorial subset, as well as by additional inter-provincial checks. Possible duplicate registrations are verified against microfilmed registrations or optical images, or by consulting with the provinces and territories.

Response rates

Item response

For 2000 to 2004, the response rates were 99% to 100% for most of the demographic variables on the death database (age, date of birth, sex, province and census division of residence). The birthplace of the deceased and the marital status have response rates around 95% to 97% nationally except Québec (82% for the birthplace of the deceased and 92% for the marital status). Underlying cause of death response rates have stood at 99% for 2000 to 2004, while name and date of birth were at 100%. The reporting of postal codes has improved: 89 % of deaths in 2000, and 93% in 2004. The birthplace of the decedent’s mother and father remain poorly reported, at only 35% of deaths nationally. Both Québec and Ontario collect the information on the registration forms, but do not include the variable in the electronic files forwarded to Statistics Canada.

Other Accuracy Issues

Age at death of persons over 100 years old

The demographers Bourbeau and Lebel have compared Canadian mortality and census data with other countries, and determined that the number of centenarians appears quite high in relation to other industrialized countries. In the absence of civil registration in Canada before 1921 and high levels of immigration to Canada, it is difficult to determine if the number of persons aged 100 and older is overestimated. On the death file, age and date of birth outliers are annually reviewed for capture errors. Where possible, obituaries are found for the oldest of the old. Reconciliation with other data sources is difficult, especially in the case of immigrants. Where birth certificates are unavailable, the overestimated age may have been used consistently on other documents such as health care registration, income tax, and census.

Cause of death certification

When a person dies, the medical certificate of cause of death is completed by the medical doctor in attendance, or the coroner, or medical examiner or other certifier. The certificate elicits the direct antecedent and underlying causes of death, other significant conditions, manner of death (for example, natural, accidental, suicide, homicide), and further information on injuries.

Data accuracy Vital Statistics – Death Database

(Survey number 3233)

Coverage

Since the registration of deaths is a legal requirement in each Canadian province and territory, reporting is virtually complete. Under-coverage is thought to be minimal, but is being monitored. Under-coverage may occur because of late registration, but this is much less common than in birth registration. Death registration is necessary for the legal burial or disposal of a body, as well as for settling estate matters, so there is a strong incentive for relatives or officials to complete a registration in a timely manner. Some deaths are registered by local authorities, but the paperwork is not forwarded to provincial or territorial registrars before a cut-off date. These cases for 1996 represent approximately 400 deaths, 6 years after the year of death (accumulated late records), or two-tenths of one percent of the total records.

Other late or missing registrations may occur with unidentified bodies, or for Canadians who die outside of Canada. By long-standing practice, the date of death for unidentified remains is defined as the date of discovery. These deaths of unidentified persons typically represent less than ten cases per year. For out-of-country deaths, only deaths in the United States are regularly reported to Statistics Canada, and of these, Statistics Canada receives abstracted death records from approximately 20 American states. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in the United States reveals that in 2000 there were 635 deaths of Canadian residents in the United States, compared with 280 death records received by Statistics Canada via the state registrars. Health Statistics Division is working with provincial, territorial, and state registrars to increase the inter-jurisdictional exchanges of records for statistical and administrative purposes.

Under-coverage is also present for deaths of serving members of the Canadian military. Deaths of Canadians who died overseas while serving in the Armed Forces are not included in the Statistics Canada databases because they are not registered by the provinces and territories. Health Statistics Division is working with officials from the Department of National Defence to develop a death registration form for that department, based upon the model form developed by the Vital Statistics Council for Canada.

Over-coverage is minimal. Deaths of non-residents in Canada are registered but are excluded from most tabulations. Duplicate death registrations are identified as part of the regular processing operations on each provincial and territorial subset, as well as by additional inter-provincial checks. Possible duplicate registrations are verified against microfilmed registrations or optical images, or by consulting with the provinces and territories.

Response rates

Item response

For 1997 to 2000, the response rates were 99% to 100% for most of the demographic variables on the death database (age, date of birth, sex, province and census division of residence). The birthplace of deceased and marital status have response rates around 95% to 97% nationally except Québec Underlying cause of death response rates have generally risen over this period: 97.7% in 1997 data, 98.9% in 1998, 99.4% in 1999 and 99.3% in 2000. The reporting of postal codes has improved: 69% of deaths in 1997, 76% in 1998, and 89% in 1998 to 2000. The birthplace of the decedent’s mother and father remain poorly reported, at only 35% of deaths nationally. Both Québec and Ontario collect the information on the registration forms, but do not include the variable in the electronic files forwarded to Statistics Canada.

Other Accuracy Issues

Age at death of persons over 100 years old

The demographers Bourbeau and Lebel have compared Canadian mortality and census data with other countries, and determined that the number of centenarians appears quite high in relation to other industrialized countries. In the absence of civil registration in Canada before 1921 and high levels of immigration to Canada, it is difficult to determine if the number of persons aged 100 and older is overestimated. On the death file, age and date of birth outliers are annually reviewed for capture errors. Where possible, obituaries are found for the oldest of the old. Reconciliation with other data sources is difficult, especially in the case of immigrants. Where birth certificates are unavailable, the overestimated age may have been used consistently on other documents such as health care registration, income tax, and census.

Cause of death certification

When a person dies, the medical certificate of cause of death is completed by the medical doctor in attendance, or the coroner, or medical examiner or other certifier. The certificate elicits the direct antecedent and underlying causes of death, other significant conditions, manner of death (for example, natural, accidental, suicide, homicide), and further information on injuries.

Data accuracy Vital Statistics – Death Database

(Survey number 3233)

Coverage

Since the registration of deaths is a legal requirement in each Canadian province and territory, reporting is virtually complete. Under-coverage is thought to be minimal, but is being monitored. Under-coverage may occur because of late registration, but this is much less common than in birth registration. Death registration is necessary for the legal burial or disposal of a body, as well as for settling estate matters, so there is a strong incentive for relatives or officials to complete a registration in a timely manner. Some deaths are registered by local authorities, but the paperwork is not forwarded to provincial or territorial registrars before a cut-off date. These cases for 1996 represent approximately 400 deaths, 6 years after the year of death (accumulated late records), or two-tenths of one percent of the total records.

Other late or missing registrations may occur with unidentified bodies, or for Canadians who die outside of Canada. By long-standing practice, the date of death for unidentified remains is defined as the date of discovery. These deaths of unidentified persons typically represent less than ten cases per year. For out-of-country deaths, only deaths in the United States are regularly reported to Statistics Canada, and of these, Statistics Canada receives abstracted death records from approximately 20 American states. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in the United States reveals that in 2000 there were 635 deaths of Canadian residents in the United States, compared with 280 death records received by Statistics Canada via the state registrars. Health Statistics Division is working with provincial, territorial, and state registrars to increase the inter-jurisdictional exchanges of records for statistical and administrative purposes.

Under-coverage is also present for deaths of serving members of the Canadian military. Deaths of Canadians who died overseas while serving in the Armed Forces are not included in the Statistics Canada databases because they are not registered by the provinces and territories. Health Statistics Division is working with officials from the Department of National Defence to develop a death registration form for that department, based upon the model form developed by the Vital Statistics Council for Canada.

Over-coverage is minimal. Deaths of non-residents in Canada are registered but are excluded from most tabulations. Duplicate death registrations are identified as part of the regular processing operations on each provincial and territorial subset, as well as by additional inter-provincial checks. Possible duplicate registrations are verified against microfilmed registrations or optical images, or by consulting with the provinces and territories.

Response rates

Item response

For 2000 to 2002, the response rates were 99% to 100% for most of the demographic variables on the death database (age, sex, province and census division of residence). Underlying cause of death response rates have generally risen over this period: 97.7% in 1997 data, 98.9% in 1998, 99.4% in 1999 and 99.3% in 2000. The reporting of postal codes has improved: 69% of deaths in 1997, 76% in 1998, and 89% in 1998 to 2000. The birthplace of the decedent’s mother and father remain poorly reported, at only 35% of deaths nationally. Both Québec and Ontario collect the information on the registration forms, but do not include the variable in the electronic files forwarded to Statistics Canada.

Other Accuracy Issues

Age at death of persons over 100 years old

The demographers Bourbeau and Lebel have compared Canadian mortality and census data with other countries, and determined that the number of centenarians appears quite high in relation to other industrialized countries. In the absence of civil registration in Canada before 1921 and high levels of immigration to Canada, it is difficult to determine if the number of persons aged 100 and older is overestimated. On the death file, age and date of birth outliers are annually reviewed for capture errors. Where possible, obituaries are found for the oldest of the old. Reconciliation with other data sources is difficult, especially in the case of immigrants. Where birth certificates are unavailable, the overestimated age may have been used consistently on other documents such as health care registration, income tax, and census.

Cause of death certification

When a person dies, the medical certificate of cause of death is completed by the medical doctor in attendance, or the coroner, or medical examiner or other certifier. The certificate elicits the direct antecedent and underlying causes of death, other significant conditions, manner of death (for example, natural, accidental, suicide, homicide), and further information on injuries.

Data accuracy Vital Statistics – Death Database

(Survey number 3233)

Coverage

Since the registration of deaths is a legal requirement in each Canadian province and territory, reporting is virtually complete. Under-coverage is thought to be minimal, but is being monitored. Under-coverage may occur because of late registration, but this is much less common than in birth registration. Death registration is necessary for the legal burial or disposal of a body, as well as for settling estate matters, so there is a strong incentive for relatives or officials to complete a registration in a timely manner. Some deaths are registered by local authorities, but the paperwork is not forwarded to provincial or territorial registrars before a cut-off date. These cases for 1996 represent approximately 400 deaths, 6 years after the year of death (accumulated late records), or two-tenths of one percent of the total records.

Other late or missing registrations may occur with unidentified bodies, or for Canadians who die outside of Canada. By long-standing practice, the date of death for unidentified remains is defined as the date of discovery. These deaths of unidentified persons typically represent less than ten cases per year. For out-of-country deaths, only deaths in the United States are regularly reported to Statistics Canada, and of these, Statistics Canada receives abstracted death records from approximately 20 American states. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in the United States reveals that in 2000 there were 635 deaths of Canadian residents in the United States, compared with 280 death records received by Statistics Canada via the state registrars. Health Statistics Division is working with provincial, territorial, and state registrars to increase the inter-jurisdictional exchanges of records for statistical and administrative purposes.

Under-coverage is also present for deaths of serving members of the Canadian military. Deaths of Canadians who died overseas while serving in the Armed Forces are not included in the Statistics Canada databases because they are not registered by the provinces and territories. Health Statistics Division is working with officials from the Department of National Defence to develop a death registration form for that department, based upon the model form developed by the Vital Statistics Council for Canada.

Over-coverage is minimal. Deaths of non-residents in Canada are registered but are excluded from most tabulations. Duplicate death registrations are identified as part of the regular processing operations on each provincial and territorial subset, as well as by additional inter-provincial checks. Possible duplicate registrations are verified against microfilmed registrations or optical images, or by consulting with the provinces and territories.

Response rates

Item response

For 1997 to 2000, the response rates were 99% to 100% for most of the demographic variables on the death database (age, sex, province and census division of residence). Underlying cause of death response rates have generally risen over this period: 97.7% in 1997 data, 98.9% in 1998, 99.4% in 1999 and 99.3% in 2000. The reporting of postal codes has improved: 69% of deaths in 1997, 76% in 1998, and 89% in 1998 to 2000. The birthplace of the decedent’s mother and father remain poorly reported, at only 35% of deaths nationally. Both Québec and Ontario collect the information on the registration forms, but do not include the variable in the electronic files forwarded to Statistics Canada.

Other Accuracy Issues

Age at death of persons over 100 years old

The demographers Bourbeau and Lebel have compared Canadian mortality and census data with other countries, and determined that the number of centenarians appears quite high in relation to other industrialized countries. In the absence of civil registration in Canada before 1921 and high levels of immigration to Canada, it is difficult to determine if the number of persons aged 100 and older is overestimated. On the death file, age and date of birth outliers are annually reviewed for capture errors. Where possible, obituaries are found for the oldest of the old. Reconciliation with other data sources is difficult, especially in the case of immigrants. Where birth certificates are unavailable, the overestimated age may have been used consistently on other documents such as health care registration, income tax, and census.

Cause of death certification

When a person dies, the medical certificate of cause of death is completed by the medical doctor in attendance, or the coroner, or medical examiner or other certifier. The certificate elicits the direct antecedent and underlying causes of death, other significant conditions, manner of death (for example, natural, accidental, suicide, homicide), and further information on injuries.

Data accuracy Vital Statistics – Death Database

(Survey number 3233)

Coverage

Since the registration of deaths is a legal requirement in each Canadian province and territory, reporting is virtually complete. Under-coverage is thought to be minimal, but is being monitored. Under-coverage may occur because of late registration, but this is much less common than in birth registration. Death registration is necessary for the legal burial or disposal of a body, as well as for settling estate matters, so there is a strong incentive for relatives or officials to complete a registration in a timely manner. Some deaths are registered by local authorities, but the paperwork is not forwarded to provincial or territorial registrars before a cut-off date. These cases for 1996 represent approximately 400 deaths, 6 years after the year of death (accumulated late records), or two-tenths of one percent of the total records.

Other late or missing registrations may occur with unidentified bodies, or for Canadians who die outside of Canada. By long-standing practice, the date of death for unidentified remains is defined as the date of discovery. These deaths of unidentified persons typically represent less than ten cases per year. For out-of-country deaths, only deaths in the United States are regularly reported to Statistics Canada, and of these, Statistics Canada receives abstracted death records from approximately 20 American states. The National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) in the United States reveals that in 2000 there were 635 deaths of Canadian residents in the United States, compared with 280 death records received by Statistics Canada via the state registrars. Health Statistics Division is working with provincial, territorial, and state registrars to increase the inter-jurisdictional exchanges of records for statistical and administrative purposes.

Under-coverage is also present for deaths of serving members of the Canadian military. Deaths of Canadians who died overseas while serving in the Armed Forces are not included in the Statistics Canada databases because they are not registered by the provinces and territories. Health Statistics Division is working with officials from the Department of National Defence to develop a death registration form for that department, based upon the model form developed by the Vital Statistics Council for Canada.

Over-coverage is minimal. Deaths of non-residents in Canada are registered but are excluded from most tabulations. Duplicate death registrations are identified as part of the regular processing operations on each provincial and territorial subset, as well as by additional inter-provincial checks. Possible duplicate registrations are verified against microfilmed registrations or optical images, or by consulting with the provinces and territories.

Response rates

Item response

For 1997 to 2000, the response rates were 99% to 100% for most of the demographic variables on the death database (age, sex, province and census division of residence). Underlying cause of death response rates have generally risen over this period: 97.7% in 1997 data, 98.9% in 1998, 99.4% in 1999 and 99.3% in 2000, while name and date of birth were at 100%. The reporting of postal codes has improved: 69% of deaths in 1997, 76% in 1998, and 89% in 1998 to 2000. The birthplace of the decedent’s mother and father remain poorly reported, at only 35% of deaths nationally. Both Québec and Ontario collect the information on the registration forms, but do not include the variable in the electronic files forwarded to Statistics Canada.

Other Accuracy Issues

Age at death of persons over 100 years old

The demographers Bourbeau and Lebel have compared Canadian mortality and census data with other countries, and determined that the number of centenarians appears quite high in relation to other industrialized countries. In the absence of civil registration in Canada before 1921 and high levels of immigration to Canada, it is difficult to determine if the number of persons aged 100 and older is overestimated. On the death file, age and date of birth outliers are annually reviewed for capture errors. Where possible, obituaries are found for the oldest of the old. Reconciliation with other data sources is difficult, especially in the case of immigrants. Where birth certificates are unavailable, the overestimated age may have been used consistently on other documents such as health care registration, income tax, and census.

Cause of death certification

When a person dies, the medical certificate of cause of death is completed by the medical doctor in attendance, or the coroner, or medical examiner or other certifier. The certificate elicits the direct antecedent and underlying causes of death, other significant conditions, manner of death (for example, natural, accidental, suicide, homicide), and further information on injuries.