Evaluation Report

December 2018

The report in short

This report presents the findings of the evaluation of the Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, Retail and Service Industries Program (MWTRSIP). The evaluation was conducted by Statistics Canada's Evaluation Division and covers the period of 2012/2013 to 2016/2017 and, to some extent, 2017/2018. The evaluation examined the relevance and performance of the program in accordance with the Treasury Board Secretariat's Policy on Results (2016). The evaluation also studied specific areas of interest to the program in support of decision making, accountability and improvement.

The MWTRSIP is responsible for the provision of statistical information and advice on distributive trades, manufacturing, and service industries to governments, private organizations and institutions. The program aims to provide Canadians and the public and private sectors with access to quality statistical information and associated support services to inform public debate, research and decision making.

Key findings

The MWTRSIP is well aligned with federal roles and responsibilities, government priorities, and Statistics Canada's objectives. MWTRSIP activities support government priorities on economic growth and innovation, and the program provides key data for the calculation of gross domestic product (GDP), an indicator used to assess the health of the economy.

There is a clear continued need for the MWTRSIP. The program's statistical information is used for a variety of needs and by a wide range of users. The program is considered a trusted source of information and, while some complementary sources of information exist, no duplicate source was identified. Consultations with external users help the program stay connected, which contributes to meeting users' current and emerging needs—although participants in these consultations felt that more could be done to keep them informed. Gaps were identified during the evaluation, including scope, access, frequency, level of detail and timeliness; several initiatives were underway to fill some of them.

The evaluation found that MWTRSIP statistical information was generally considered accessible, accurate, coherent and interpretable, although there were ways to improve in each area. Most survey respondents and interviewees were quite satisfied with the quality of their customized data and the responsiveness of support service areas once they were able to reach the appropriate contact.

Timeliness is the dimension of quality where some issues were raised. While there was high interest from users to have information earlier, especially for the monthly retail survey, most were not willing to trade timeliness for accuracy—they preferred the status quo. The evaluation found there may be opportunities to improve timeliness by reducing the accompanying analytical information with each release, so long as information on coherence and methodological changes is provided. Finally, there may be opportunities to improve timeliness through the release process.

Overall, evidence indicated that the management of financial resources was challenging because of changes in program operations and resources during the scope of the evaluation. During the period, there were a number of measures implemented to cut costs and increase operational efficiency. The adoption of common tools will bring benefits and efficiency in the long term, but the transition period had an impact on the capacity to maintain quality and on employee workloads. Generally, there appears to be sound management and monitoring in place, although there are opportunities to further integrate activities and provide more guidance for staff.

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: Data gaps

The evaluation found that the program maintains effective relationships with its users and stakeholders and, as a result, has a good understanding of the gaps in the program. Comprehensive consultations took place during the evaluation period, and the program used the information gathered to develop plans to address as many gaps as possible within their resource allocation.

It is recommended that plans address the following key gaps:

  • E-commerce and the new economy—an agency-wide approach is required, given that the subject spans several programs. While efforts are currently underway in several areas, there is a lack of coordination, roles and responsibilities are not clear, and senior management engagement needs to increase.
  • Greater level of detail—over time, there has been a loss of detail for users. The MWTRSIP should continue working with key partners and stakeholders (internal and external) to explore avenues to address this.
  • Data on services—while services make up a large share of the economy, statistical information is rather limited. It is recommended that the MWTRSIP explore opportunities to increase the frequency of its surveys and to increase the scope of the services covered.

In exploring these gaps, the program should continue to use a strong user-centric approach.

Recommendation 2: Timeliness

There were mixed results regarding the level of satisfaction with the timeliness of releases (82% of survey respondents and 55% of interviewees were satisfied with the current release times). When presented with different scenarios trading off timeliness for accuracy, users were generally unwilling to give up accuracy (with more than half preferring the status quo). Some users noted they would be willing to accept a loss in quality for more timely information during their peak seasons (e.g., retail data around Christmas).

It is recommended that the MWTRSIP

  • review its process for releases to ensure they are as timely as possible, taking into consideration other key objectives such as relevance and accuracy; this includes exploring the possibility of reducing contextual analysis to improve timeliness, and targeting and coordinating the setting of release dates
  • undertake a comprehensive consultation of its key users prior to taking any steps to improve timeliness that would impact accuracy.

Recommendation 3: Priority setting

The MWTRSIP is currently trying to address gaps/needs identified during previous consultations, and respond to the modernization agenda and other agency initiatives. These activities are in addition to its regularly mandated program.

It is recommended that, during this transitional period, MWTRSIP management provide greater clarification on priorities to employees.

Recommendation 4: Outreach and client services

Given the rapid evolution taking place in the program, and the broad, diverse range of users, it is vital that the MWTRSIP maintain strong relationships with users and actively promote its statistical information. During the evaluation, evidence was found of ongoing awareness-raising activities, but little evidence was found of a strategic element such as a written plan.

Client services are a key contact point with users. During discussions on access and cost-recovery services with interviewees, it was noted by several that client services could be improved. More specifically, it was noted that the level and quality of responsiveness were inconsistent (e.g., being less responsive during peak periods).

It is recommended that the MWTRSIP

  • develop and implement a comprehensive outreach plan based on information from consultations, staff and other relevant partners (internal and external); the plan should include mechanisms for ongoing communication with users to inform them of program developments and to raise awareness
  • prepare a strategy to strengthen client service delivery.

1. What is covered

This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the Treasury Board Secretariat's Policy on Results (2016) and Statistics Canada's Risk-Based Audit and Evaluation Plan (2017/2018 to 2021/2022). The main objective of the evaluation was to provide a neutral, evidence-based assessment of the relevance and performance of the Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, Retail and Service Industries Program (MWTRSIP) to support decision making, accountability and improvement. The evaluation covered activities undertaken from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017 and, to some extent, 2017/2018. This was the first time the program had been evaluated.

The program

The mandate of the MWTRSIP is to provide trusted, relevant and comprehensive information on the manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail trade and service sectors to inform public debate on economic issues; support economic policy development, implementation and evaluation; and guide business decision making. Total MWTRSIP expenditures over the five-year period (2012/2013 to 2016/2017) were approximately $127 million.

The Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade Division (MWTD) and the Retail and Service Industries Division (RSID) are the two divisions responsible for compiling, analyzing, and disseminating a broad range of comprehensive and integrated statistics that depict the production, sales, financial operations and product types for the manufacturing, retail, wholesale and service sectors in Canada.

The evaluation

Following discussions with the MWTRSIP and senior management, the following seven areas were identified for review in the evaluation:

Relevance and responsiveness to needs

  • 1. Alignment with federal roles and responsibilities, government priorities, and objectives
  • 2. Continued need for the program
  • 3. Responsiveness to user needs

Performance: Effectiveness

  • 4. Quality—access, accuracy, coherence and interpretability
  • 5. Quality—timeliness

Performance: Efficiency

  • 6. Utilization of resources
  • 7. Efficiency

Guided by a utilization-focused evaluation approach, the following quantitative and qualitative collection methods were used:Footnote 1

Administrative and financial reviews

Review of MWTRSIP administrative data on activities, outputs and results.

Review of MWTRSIP financial data.

Literature review

Review of published reports, peer-reviewed journal articles, grey literature, websites and periodicals, including evidence from similar programs in other jurisdictions (e.g., OECD countries) relating to design and delivery.

Survey n=82

Online survey with respondents from a population of the MWTRSIP and statistics users, from November 27 to December 15, 2017 (response rate of 14%):

  • Federal (n=18)
  • Provincial/territorial (n=27)
  • International (n=1)
  • Independent consultants (n=11)
  • Private sector / non-governmental organizations (n=17)
  • Academics (n=8).

Document review

Review of internal departmental strategic documents.

Key informant interviews n=60

Semi-structured individual interviews undertaken between November 16, 2017, and February 7, 2018:

  • Federal (n=4)
  • Provincial/territorial (n=4)
  • Business community (n=23)
  • Academics (n=4)
  • MWTRSIP and other Statistics Canada officials (n=25)

Bibliometric and webometric assessment

A webometric assessment of uptake of 1,019 MWTRSIP releases and a bibliometric assessment of the MWTRSIP outputs in the peer-reviewed scientific literature published between 2000 and 2017 resulted in:

  • 5,841 web page citations
  • 75 peer-reviewed journal articles (from 2000 to 2017).

The program also requested that the following four topics undergo greater examination:

  • balance between timeliness and accuracy
  • increased frequency of the Retail Commodity Survey
  • quicker release of the program's key annual surveys (Annual Survey of Manufacturing and Logging Industries, Annual Retail Trade Survey, Annual Wholesale Trade Survey)
  • reduction of contextual analysis to expedite release.

2. What we learned

2.1. Alignment with federal roles and responsibilities, government priorities, and objectives

Evaluation question

To what extent did the activities of the MWTRSIP align with federal roles and responsibilities, government priorities, and objectives?

As stipulated in the Statistics Act, Statistics Canada is required "to collect, compile, analyze, abstract and publish statistical information relating to the commercial, industrial, financial, social, economic and general activities and condition of the people."Footnote 2 The act also assigns Statistics Canada the responsibility "to promote and develop integrated social and economic statistics pertaining to the whole of Canada and to each of the provinces thereof and to coordinate plans for the integration of those statistics."Footnote 3 Topics such as manufacturing, wholesale and retail trade are specifically listed in the act.Footnote 4

Data from the MWTRSIP are vital for the measurement of gross domestic product (GDP). The program includes 15 of 24 sectors as classified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). As a significant contributor to the measurement of GDP, the MWTRSIP also supports the constitutional commitment of the federal government and Parliament to provide equalization payments to the provinces and territories.Footnote 5 The annual calculations for the equalization payments are made in accordance with the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, which includes GDP.Footnote 6 The MWTRSIP's statistical information is also used to determine harmonized sales tax transfers in accordance with the Comprehensive Integrated Tax Coordination Agreements between the federal government and the provinces.

Reflecting the relative importance of the industries covered under the program, the government introduced a number of targeted measures through budgets to support its growth between 2012 and 2017. For example, Speeches from the Throne, budget documents and mandate letters have all identified growth in manufacturing and exports as a key priority. The MWTRSIP also supports the government by producing and disseminating statistical information required under a number of international agreements such as the International Monetary Fund's Special Data Dissemination Standard.

2.2. Continued need for the program

Evaluation question

To what extent do Canadians and the public and private sectors use statistical information to inform public debate, research and decision making?

The evaluation found evidence that the MWTRSIP was the main source of information for manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail and service industries—all important indicators of the economic performance of the country. The business community, federal government and provincial governments were the main users of MWTRSIP products.

Business community representatives noted that they primarily used MWTRSIP data to conduct economic analysis of trends and industry developments, specifically to understand and interpret how manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail and service industries are faring in the context of the Canadian economy as a whole. Another key use for MWTRSIP data was for econometric modelling and forecasting. For example, the data were used to predict the impact of economic policy changes on corresponding sectors of the economy and to forecast sales for different holiday seasons. Finally, some business community representatives (including those who represented consulting firms and business associations) used MWTRSIP data to develop reports and publications for clients.

Similar to business community users, federal and provincial government stakeholders also used MWTRSIP data for economic forecasting. Provincial government representatives reported they used MWTRSIP data to develop provincial economic accounts estimates, report on provincial GDP estimates and estimate provincial household expenditures.

The evaluation also found that secondary distributors were repackaging program CANSIM data into more user-friendly formats for clients; academic institutions were using MWTRSIP data for research purposes and to contribute to their own publications; and, finally, media were requesting and using the information to support specific research and articles.

When web trends were examined, the Government of Canada was the most frequent user of MWTRSIP products, with Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada being the most frequent user. Monthly retail trade data were accessed the most frequently, followed by monthly manufacturing data and then monthly wholesale data. Respondents and interviewees reported that MWTRSIP data were used frequently on a daily basis.

Findings also indicated that the program did not duplicate or overlap with any other information sources. Interviewees noted that statistical information produced by commercial data providers and other organizations was complementary to the program's outputs and was used only for specific purposes or to fill specific gaps. Other information sources, such as surveys conducted by industry and professional associations or data published by market research firms, usually covered only a subset of the MWTRSIP population (e.g., data from members of associations, panels, and data on e-commerce). Informants also noted that Statistics Canada data were more accessible and more reliable than other information sources. Only a few researchers responded that they used Statistics Canada data as a secondary source to supplement, verify or double-check their own data.

2.3. Responsiveness to user needs

Evaluation questions

To what extent does the MWTRSIP statistical information respond to current and emerging needs of different groups of stakeholders? Are there gaps in the response?

To what extent are consultation activities effective in supporting the development and the responsiveness of the MWTRSIP?

Interviewees mentioned that Statistics Canada can play an important role in helping users define emerging trends and in clarifying how information should be gathered and classified. NAICS and other classification systems (e.g., North American Product Classification System) were seen as barriers that were not keeping pace with the rapidly evolving new economy. Internal documentation indicated that the Standards Division within Statistics Canada is currently working on this issue and that discussions are ongoing with trilateral partners to better reflect the digital economy in the next revision of NAICS in 2022.

Overall, the evaluation team found that MWTRSIP representatives had a good understanding of the current and emerging needs and that several initiatives were underway to fill gaps identified by the evaluation participants.

Level of detail

The main gap identified by key informants was the level of detail available. Close to 60% of survey respondents reported dissatisfaction with the level of detail, and many interviewees shared the same view. Areas of improvement that were suggested included greater disaggregation at the five- and six-digit NAICS levels; more retail and manufacturing data for lower levels of geography; and more detailed analysis at the regional, sub-regional, and sub-metropolitan levels.

Evaluation participants also raised concerns regarding data suppressions for confidentiality reasons for certain regions. While key informants understood the rationale for the data suppressions, they wondered whether Statistics Canada could suppress less data.

Several initiatives were put in place by the program following consultations in 2015 for manufacturing and wholesale, and in 2016 for RSID. These included the following:

  • More detailed constant dollar estimates for three mission-critical surveys were released in July 2018 for wholesale, and later for the others.
  • More local data: starting in June 2017, three CMAs were included in the monthly retail survey that covered 30% of the total retail sales in Canada (five new CMAs were added in January 2019). For manufacturing, 11 CMAs were released in November 2016, and additional data for 12 CMAs will be released in 2018/2019.
  • More detailed industry-level seasonal adjustments were added in the Monthly Wholesale Trade Survey starting August 2017.
  • The G-Confid softwareFootnote 7 was implemented and the specs were reviewed to ensure the appropriate level of protection for confidential cells while minimizing the loss of information.

Internal users indicated that, to get more detailed information for users, businesses would face an increased survey response burden (e.g., survey length, capacity of businesses to collect information). The MWTRSIP understands this trade-off and strives to find the appropriate balance.

E-commerce and the new economy

Another gap, and the most common trend identified by respondents, was the rise in, and increasing economic importance of, e-commerce. Interviewees indicated that a greater emphasis on e-commerce was needed. They pointed to items such as the development of e-commerce series, e-commerce data categorized by product category and type of store (e.g., e-groceries), separation of shipping costs from true e-commerce costs, and the extent to which retailers are participating in the digital economy. It was noted that improved e-commerce data would allow retailers to better understand the market (and degree of market saturation), compete for shares of retail sales, and prioritize merchandise for online versus in-person sales.

Another important gap identified was the extent to which Canadians are purchasing goods from international online retailers, particularly American retailers. This gap makes it difficult to understand the impact of e-commerce on the Canadian economy. One respondent indicated, "We are almost blind [to] what is going on."

Program representatives were aware of the gap; however, they noted that options are limited and that all countries are struggling with these issues. At the time of the evaluation, the program was taking steps to increase the number of outputs related to e-commerce, with some expected to be released in 2018. It was noted that options were limited for data on household transactions (peer to peer) and on issues around international online retailers. External interviewees generally acknowledged that Statistics Canada recognizes the importance of the issue and has improved the availability of e-commerce data over the past couple of years.Footnote 8

Defining e-commerce also presents a challenge. Some interviewees pointed out that different e-commerce definitions between Statistics Canada and other organizations can lead to vastly different estimates and forecasts related to the proportion of sales made online versus in stores. Furthermore, as mentioned in an internal document, there remains a need for a common definition among survey programs since the word "digital" can be used as a synonym for "Internet/online," which causes conceptual problems with product classification and, de facto, how the sale of a digital product is reported.

Many informants indicated that the boundaries between the sectors and industries of the economy are increasingly blurred. For instance, all supply chain intermediaries can now sell directly to end consumers via e-commerce, services are being bundled with manufactured outputs, and businesses are diversifying their products and services, which makes them harder to differentiate and classify. For example, some grocery stores now serve food and beverages in much the same way as a restaurant ("grocerants"), and some also sell clothing.

Program representatives noted that nebulous boundaries between sectors have always existed, though they have become more prominent with the growth of the service industry and the use of digitalization. Efforts are being made by the MWTRSIP to compare data across the different sectors (manufacturing, wholesale and retail) and to continuously review the Business Register to ensure businesses are classified accurately. However, despite these efforts, limitations still remain. Some program representatives suggested developing multidisciplinary studies by industry and creating online related tables to integrate the three sectors, but this would require resources.

Another trend mentioned was how the expansion of digitalization creates new products and services, such as online marketplaces (e.g., eBay and Amazon), digital publishing, data streaming (e.g., Netflix), and products and services generated by households (e.g., Uber, Airbnb, vloggers). Several factors—such as the statistical framework and tools available to measure the number of household transactions (peer to peer), the organizational structure of businesses that own e-platforms, and Canadian legislation—are hindering the ability to fully assess the sharing economy. It was generally agreed that digital commerce is a gap that needs to be addressed. Statistics Canada is undertaking many initiatives to fill this gap, including a rapid response survey of Canadian households on their use of digital platforms and technologies, and the development of a new digital economy economic account. The Investment, Science and Technology Division (ISTD) is also planning to launch a Canadian Internet Use Survey that will cover some aspects.

Overall, it appeared that better cohesion was required on this issue within Statistics Canada. When the evaluation team discussed concerns about e-commerce and the new economy with program representatives, no clear response arose. While all agreed that it is an important gap and referred to several ad hoc actions and initiatives taken so far, it appeared that there was no clear vision or coordinated approach. This could be explained by the fact that Statistics Canada's economic statistics divisions are primarily organized by industry, so there is no natural home for the subject. In 2016, the ISTD, identified by many as the internal expert on e-commerce, put in place the Subject-Matter Committee on Digital Economy Statistics to improve the exchange of information between the divisions currently working on the digital economy. It was noted that, since the committee's inception, only six meetings had taken place, and attendance was low. It was agreed by many participants that more involvement and commitment from senior management were needed to create more synergies, improve awareness among the different divisions and reinforce divisional accountability to ensure a collaborative effort on digital commerce.Footnote 9

Other trends and needs

Among other trends, informants pointed to changes in the food service industry (third-party food delivery options and higher-quality fast food operations, such as Freshii), growth of the "circular" economy involving the resale and reuse of goods, the impact of the legalization of cannabis, and the impact of fluctuating gasoline prices on retail sales data. The need to capture the impact of the political context, including NAFTA negotiations and other trade agreements, on manufacturing sales was also identified by interviewees.

Some interviewees identified the changing use of retail space as an emerging trend. Physical retailing is no longer as predictable as it once was; large retailers are vacating retail space, and traditional retail space is increasingly being used for services. This phenomenon increases the need for greater detail on commercial real estate vacancy rates, including data on the number of stores available by geographical location, price and sales per square foot.

Finally, key informants mentioned technological changes as an important trend. Data will be needed on labour, employment and productivity. It was also noted that there is a lack of understanding of how these technologies are currently being used, who is using them,Footnote 10 and their impact on the economy (e.g., blockchain technologies and cryptocurrencies).

Services

Virtually all users of services data thought improvements were required. Data users universally reported that, although services make up a large share of the economy, statistical information is rather limited. Several specific gaps were identified:

  • information on industries such as personal care services (e.g., eyeglass services, hair salons, massage parlours, fitness centres, gyms) and health care services
  • more information (historic and current) on intra- and inter-industry trade in services
  • more regional and sub-regional disaggregation (e.g., to help meet targets set in provincial growth plans), metropolitan data (tourism), and more industry categories and subcategories (e.g., a subcategory within restaurants that would cover fast casual; clarification between engineering, architecture and other firms)
  • greater disaggregation by firm size/type (e.g., according to restaurant type—whether or not it is part of a chain)
  • financial and other statistics for the annual food services and drinking places survey (e.g., number of years in business, sales per seat, square footage of the restaurant, number of meals served, franchise affiliation, average bill per customer, number of liquor licences).

Improvements related to access, frequency and timeliness were also raised. In terms of access, many use The Daily as an entry point. They felt that more frequent releases in The Daily, and a dedicated web page with service industry information, would be useful. Grouping service data together and high-profile releases would also make the information more visible to potential users.

The frequency of the data was also viewed as being inadequate, with biannual releases being desired. Internal users indicated that more frequent data releases would provide better quality inputs for estimates such as GDP. The evaluation found that Statistics Canada had produced Quarterly Services Indicators in the past, but no one could speak to the quality of these products. One possible alternative proposed was to release an integrated product on services, similar to what is released in the United States.

Consultations and outreach

The evaluation found that MWTRSIP representatives generally stayed connected through conferences; formal and informal discussions with key users (i.e., provincial, federal, cost-recovery clients and main associations) and counterparts in the United States; business visits; and interdepartmental working groups and committees led by Statistics Canada or other departments, such as Canadian Heritage on culture.

A review of documents and internal interviews showed that initiatives like the manufacturing and wholesale environmental scan in 2015, the retail expert panel in 2016 and the cultural round table in 2018 were the formats that were most successful in identifying needs. As noted in the previous sections, most of the initiatives undertaken by the program to fill the gaps were the result of these larger consultations. Although considered the best formats by some program representatives, these types of consultations are most appropriate when the users and associations are well known. These formats are less effective when consulting with users who are not represented by major industry associations (e.g., service industries).

Some interviewees indicated that the purpose, expectations and outcomes of consultations should have been clearer. For example, post-consultation debriefs could have been conducted. Finally, some respondents noted that consultations were an opportunity to raise awareness of products, especially those that were not available on the website.

All internal informants noted they have excellent collaboration and effective bilateral communication with the MWTRSIP. The majority of the external stakeholders interviewed indicated a high level of satisfaction with the consultation process and believed their concerns were being taken seriously. Those who participated in the consultations agreed that a wide range of stakeholders were brought together and that discussions were facilitated effectively. However, they did comment that more representatives could have been invited, such as retailers, as opposed to those who monitor retail. According to the survey, 19% of the respondents who had never participated in a consultation would be willing to participate and collaborate with Statistics Canada.

It was also suggested that Statistics Canada regularly reach out to users to ensure they are aware of available data (i.e., new products and services). The evaluation found little evidence of strategic formal outreach plans/approaches;Footnote 11 instead, activities appeared to be tied to travel/conference plans. The only exception found was a communication plan in Wholesale Trade from a few years ago. Based on this plan, Wholesale Trade did a one-day public question-and-answer session. There were several other activities that took place during the period, including a Talking Stats session, a Data Story, a chat with an expert and several company visits. Limited activities took place afterward because of other priorities. In addition, there was little evidence of program representatives working with regional offices and the Statistical Information Service to inform them of their products.

2.4. Quality—access, accuracy, coherence and interpretability

Evaluation question

To what extent do Canadians and the public and private sectors have access to quality MWTRSIP statistical information and to associated support services?

Overall, the evidence indicated that MWTRSIP statistical information is considered accessible, accurate, coherent and interpretable. However, there were suggestions on how it could be improved.

Access

Website

Statistical information on the website is generally considered accessible once users are familiar with the website. Issues with the website included poor navigation, difficulty finding specific information, technical problems with the website and with downloading information, and challenges around the manipulation of CANSIM tables.Footnote 12 Two specific suggestions were the publication of release dates for non-monthly surveys and the inclusion of information on the availability of microdata files. On a more positive note, some key informants acknowledged improvements to the website over the past few years.

Client services

Overall, most survey respondents and interviewees were quite satisfied with the quality of their customized data and the responsiveness of support service areas once they were able to reach the appropriate contact. Some frequent users noted that the level of service offered by different parts of the agency is inconsistent and that, at times, they experienced long turnaround times.

Some frequent users of customized products believed that the availability of information depended on whom they spoke to in the agency. They cited examples where requests were first rejected and then approved. Some interviewees also noted a declining level of program knowledge and of knowledge of their past requests. For these reasons, some interviewers avoided using the client service units (and the main contact line) and instead searched for contacts directly in the subject-matter areas.

Program representatives indicated that, depending on the timing of a request, capacity could be an issue. For example, responding to requests during major releases or to requests that require a significant amount of resources can be challenging. This was confirmed by external clients who noted that responsiveness was uneven at times, with some requests being delayed or not fulfilled.

In general, the main reasons for not fulfilling requests, according to program representatives, were concerns over quality and/or confidentiality.

The evaluation found that proactive preparation for releases may help manage some requests. For example, in MWTD, because there are many requests for detailed data, the dissemination group develops tables in advance that take into consideration accuracy and confidentiality. These tables allow the dissemination group to skip the analysis needed to determine whether or not the statistical information can be shared. This increases responsiveness since clients no longer need to go through a pre-assessment stage.

Finally, some key informants and program representatives indicated that cost was also a barrier for customized products and cost-recovered surveys. Over the last few years, the program noted the loss of some cost-recovery surveys. Confidentiality and long turnaround times were also cited as reasons.

Accuracy

The vast majority of survey respondents reported they were either satisfied or very satisfied with the accuracy of the data (88.5%). This level of satisfaction was also confirmed during interviews, where the majority indicated that accuracy was high or at least suitable for their needs. A review of accuracy indicators from 2015 to 2017 found that the program adequately met its targets (Table 1).

Table 1 - Level of accuracy of the MWTRSIP surveys
Indicators of accuracy 2015 2016 2017Table note 1
All MWTRSIP surveys
Percent of estimates meeting their target for coefficient of variationFootnote 13 99.4% 95.5% 96.7%
Percent of surveys meeting their response rate target (target 85%) 96.6% 86.9% 84.9%
Mission-critical monthly surveys
Mean absolute revisions for monthly survey of manufacturing—total sales (target 0.5) 0.35 0.35 0.20
Mean absolute revisions for monthly survey of manufacturing—total inventories (target 0.5) 0.25 0.14 0.17
Mean absolute revisions for monthly survey of wholesale trade—total sales (target 0.5) 0.20 0.36 0.24
Mean absolute revisions for monthly survey of wholesale trade—total inventories (target 0.5) 0.12 0.25 0.39
Mean absolute revisions for monthly survey of retail—total sales (target 0.5) 0.24 0.22 0.44
Table note 1

Preliminary estimates based on partial data and trends compiled by the Evaluation Division, sourced from corporate indicator information and historical CANSIM tables.

Return to table note 1 referrer

In addition, the majority of survey respondents (75.4%) and interviewees stated that the existing revision rates for monthly mission-critical surveys were acceptable. Interviewees believed the revisions were minor and, in most cases, did not impact the story.

While there was overall satisfaction with accuracy, there were some concerns raised about the variability of estimates at lower levels of detail. Some informants (external and internal) had questions about the reliability of annual estimates since the implementation of the Integrated Business Statistics Program (IBSP) in 2013. The evaluation found that, while the accuracy level generally remained within targets during the implementation, there was some decline. The imputation of data for establishments was also questioned by internal users, especially for small entities. During discussions with some program representatives, they confirmed that additional work is now required to ensure accuracy and that they no longer release information at the five- to six-digit levels because of concerns with accuracy (e.g., Annual Survey of Manufacturing and Logging [ASML]).

Coherence and interpretability

Although they were generally satisfied with the coherence of the data, key informants were nonetheless dissatisfied with how the break in series, which occurred when surveys were transferred to the IBSP, was handled. They indicated that, to date, no information has been made available to determine the detailed magnitude of the impact.Footnote 14

Both internal and external users noted that there were challenges when comparing monthly estimates with annual estimates (such as between the Monthly Survey of Manufacturing [MSM] and the ASML) and when examining sectors across surveys (i.e., manufacturing vs. wholesale vs. retail). Program representatives explained that reconciliations between monthly and annual surveys are problematic since different methodologies are used and annual periods may differ between businesses (e.g., some may use calendar years while others use fiscal years or different periods). Furthermore, annual and monthly surveys serve different purposes—annual for structural aspects and monthly for trends/indicators. In terms of comparability with external data, some interviewees felt that the categorizations and breakdowns used by Statistics Canada were not always consistent with the way retailers categorized commodities or how other research firms reported data.

In terms of interpretability, several areas of improvement were mentioned. Some key informants indicated that definitions accompanying data can be difficult to understand, especially for e-commerce. A need for more and better documentation was identified (e.g., to help better interpret the accuracy of the estimates, information on who is being sampled and how this is achieved, descriptions of survey developments, seasonal adjustments, and how data should be transformed). A review of the Integrated Metadatabase based on a sample of surveys indicated that important information such as response rates and accuracy values either was not systematically updated or was simply missing, especially for 2013 and 2014. Program representatives noted that providing coefficients of variation required several days of work and resources and that they preferred to update the information periodically.

Finally, aggregated variables such as "other expenditures" or "miscellaneous subsector" hindered users from getting a complete picture. For instance, important variations in the wholesale sector are sometimes caused by the "miscellaneous subsector."Footnote 15

2.5. Quality—timeliness

Evaluation question

To what extent does the MWTRSIP provide statistical information that adequately balances users' needs for timeliness and data accuracy?

In the evaluation, the quality dimension of timeliness was explored more in depth. More specifically, respondents and interviewees were first asked whether they wanted more timely data, and then they were asked how their responses would be different if there was an impact on accuracy.

Timeliness

In terms of levels of satisfaction with the current release timelines, the evaluation found a difference between survey respondents/internal users and interviewees. Among survey respondents, 82%Footnote 16 indicated that they were satisfied with the current release times, and internal users within the agency also expressed a high level of satisfaction with release times for monthly surveys. The percentage was lower, however, for interviewees (roughly 55%). Interviewees had issues that extended to all domains (i.e., manufacturing, retail trade, wholesale, and the service industry) and covered both annual and monthly surveys.

When asked about the timeliness of annual surveys, the very few intervieweesFootnote 17 who used these products stated that it would be useful to have the estimates a maximum of 12 months after the reference period, as opposed to 18 months, and it was acknowledged that there had been a great improvement with the release of the ASML. Among survey respondents, 52%, especially provincial and municipal users, indicated that shortening the annual releases to 12 months would have a positive impact on their analysis and economic monitoring. There were also indications that the current release times for some culture surveys were too long (as the frequency of some surveys was 24 months) and that this impacted the relevance of the information.

Survey respondents and interviewees were specifically asked about increasing the frequency of the Retail Commodity Survey from quarterly to monthly. While most viewed it positively, they noted that it was not a high priority for them.

Program data on the release times for annual surveys suggest there were challenges in meeting release targets. In 2013 and 2014, 91% and 53%, respectively, of the annual statistical products did not meet Statistics Canada's internal release standard of 18 months. Starting in 2015, improvements were found, and this trend has since continued. Evidence from internal interviews confirmed that there were challenges as a result of the implementation of the IBSP, electronic questionnaires and the 2012 NAICS from 2013 to 2015. Consistent with these findings, internal interviews found that, starting in 2015, implementation issues began to be resolved, and there has since been a gradual return to meeting release times and even beating them in some cases. In the case of the ASML, additional funding from Global Affairs Canada helped to shorten the release time to 12 months.

Figure 1 - Number of lag days after reference period (on average) for monthly surveys

Number of lag days after reference period for monthly surveys (average)
Description for Figure 1 - Number of lag days after reference period (on average) for monthly surveys

This vertical bar chart shows the number of lag days after reference period (on average) per monthly survey, from fiscal years 2014-2015 to 2017-2018. This bar charts also shows the planned number of lag days after reference period (on average) per monthly survey for fiscal year 2018-2019. The following data table provides further details:

Number of lag days after reference period (on average) for monthly surveys covering the period of 2014-2015 to 2018-2019.
  Asphalt roofing Cement Sawmills Production and disposition of tobacco products New motor vehicle sales Food services and drinking places Monthly survey of large retailers Retail trade Wholesale trade Monthly survey of manufacturing
2014-2015 33.67 43.83 60.45 26.00 43.75 58.50 46.67 51.25 48.67 44.92
2015-2016 33.50 44.50 62.17 26.58 44.33 58.83 45.67 50.25 48.75 45.25
2016-2017 32.83 45.00 64.33 26.38 44.33 58.83 46.08 50.75 50.33 45.58
2017-2018 33.50 41.50 66.67 28.00 44.58 53.50 46.50 51.58 51.00 46.08
2018-2019 (planned) - - - - - - - 50.50 51.17 46.17

An examination of administrative data revealed that the release times for two monthly mission-critical surveys (i.e., MSM and MWTS) were gradually becoming longer (Figure 1). Specifically, the average release time for the MSM was 45.25 days in 2015/2016 and is anticipated to be 46.17 days for 2018/2019. Similar results were observed for the average release times for the MWTS. In 2015/2016, the number of days to release was 48.75 days and is projected to be 51.17 days in 2018/2019. For monthly retail trade, the trend has been roughly flat. On the other hand, lag days improved for surveys such as the Cement SurveyFootnote 18 and the Monthly Survey of Food Services and Drinking Places.

External interviewees indicated that they would like to have earlier release times for the three mission-critical surveys, especially wholesale and retail information. Having this information earlier would allow users to more expeditiously examine current trends and seasonal impacts to make important decisions and forecasts for their businesses. For example, retailers would like to have information sooner on sales leading up to Christmas to better plan their purchases and inventories.

Accuracy versus timeliness

Overall, it appears that although users and stakeholders would like data sooner, they were generally not willing to give up much accuracy to achieve it.

When survey respondents were asked, "how important is the timeliness of the statistical information for your work compared to its accuracy?" only 14.3% stated that timeliness was more important. For interviewees, roughly half stated that no trade-off between accuracy and timeliness was acceptable to them, while the remainder indicated they would be willing to accept only a small loss in accuracy.

To explore this trade-off further, four scenarios were presented:

Accuracy versus timeliness
Scenario Impact on time Revisions required
(a) A little sooner Less than five days earlier than current situation Slightly greater than currently
(b) Moderately sooner 5 to 10 days earlier than current situation Moderately greater than currently
(c) Much sooner Advance indicators released 10 to 20 days earlier, and then final results released as per current timelines Substantially greater than currently
(d) No changes / status quo

For survey respondents, 54% wanted the status quo (Scenario D), followed by Scenario B (18.6%), Scenario A (15.3%) and finally Scenario C (11.9%).

For interviewees, their preferences were roughly the same—approximately half chose the status quo, followed by Scenario B, then Scenario A and finally Scenario C. Notably, only one of the key informants preferred Scenario C. It was interviewees from financial institutions who were more likely to indicate they wanted earlier release times at the expense of some accuracy. They indicated that they would like to have the releases anywhere from 15 to 30 days after the reference period to produce GDP estimates. They did acknowledge, however, that although they wanted the data sooner, they would not want very large revisions.

Two factors may explain these results. Several respondents stated that the proposed scenario timelines ranging from a few days to a week and half would have no impact on their work; for them, the trade-off was not worth it. Another factor could be related to the structure of the Canadian economy. As mentioned in a C.D. Howe Institute report, "Because Canada's economy has less global importance and is dependent on trends in the US economy, users of Canadian data are more willing to trade less timeliness for more accurate data."Footnote 19

When asked to prioritize the types of data they would want earlier, key informants and survey respondents chose retail information first, followed by manufacturing data and then wholesale data. In terms of the type of statistics, sales data were the most preferred. Impacts of having data earlier included the ability to report, publish and provide more timely analysis to clients, especially in the area of retail food sales in grocery and department stores. Interestingly, over 70% of survey respondents indicated they do not need any specific monthly data released earlier.

Other potential opportunities to increase timeliness

The evaluation found other potential opportunities to increase timeliness without necessarily impacting accuracy. First, there are opportunities to improve timeliness by providing less contextual analysis with the data release. Among survey respondents, 68% indicated their willingness to sacrifice contextual analysis for more timely data, largely because they develop their own contextual analysis. However, they specified that explanations around accuracy and methodological changes should remain.

Another option is to set more targeted release dates. Evidence indicates that it is up to the unit responsible for a release to decide the release date and that there is minimal communication between units when establishing release dates. Coordination with the other monthly release dates could be improved to ensure that information is timelier for financial organizations who indicated they wanted data prior to the monthly GDP release.

Collaboration between program representatives and stakeholders could also improve timeliness. A best practice shared by program representatives is the collaboration between key associations, businesses, service areas and monthly food survey representatives to increase the timeliness of the survey by a week. They worked closely for six months to determine the appropriate balance between the revision rate, timeliness and response rate of the survey.

2.6. Utilization of resources

Evaluation question

Have the MWTRSIP's resources been used as planned?

The evaluation assessed the extent to which the MWTRSIP, including the subject-matter areas and the dedicated internal enablers, used their resources as planned. Evidence indicated that the management of financial resources was challenging because of changes in program operations and resources during the scope of the evaluation.

During the evaluation period, the program went through several reorganizations. The most significant occurred in early 2014 when

  • the Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade programs were merged into one new division, the Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade Division (MWTD)
  • the Service Industries Division and the Retail Trade Program were merged into one new division, the Retail and Service Industries Division (RSID)
  • the Distributive Trades Division was disbanded.

To ensure consistency over the evaluation period, the financial information was allocated at the activity element level.

Program spending over the five-year period of the evaluation was approximately $96.8 million (excluding operation and maintenance).Footnote 20 From fiscal year 2012/2013 to 2016/2017, financial information shows that expenditures for activities related to MWTD were continuously over budget (Figure 2). For RSID, financial figures indicated that from 2012/2013 to 2014/2015, the expenditures were below budget, and that program expenditures began exceeding budget starting in 2015/2016, mainly because of an increase in salary expenditures (Figure 3).Footnote 21

Figure 2 - Manufacturing and wholesale trade program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017Footnote 22

Manufacturing and wholesale trade program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017
Description for Figure 2 - Manufacturing and wholesale trade program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017

This vertical bar chart shows, in millions of dollars, the budgets and expenditures of the Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade Division and other internal services divisions (i.e. services areas) to support activities related to manufacturing and wholesale trade industries, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017. The following data table provides further details:

Manufacturing and wholesale trade program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017
Fiscal year Budget for MWTD Expenditures from MWTD Budget for Services areas Expenditures from Services areas
($)
2012-2013 3,016,773 4,037,549 4,238,504 4,109,879
2013-2014 3,461,523 3,966,245 4,026,513 3,793,953
2014-2015 3,844,667 3,855,323 3,989,848 3,608,637
2015-2016 4,051,142 4,435,088 2,736,823 2,471,826
2016-2017 5,491,355 6,132,712 3,489,729 3,338,610

Figure 3 - Retail and service program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017Footnote 23

Retail and service program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017
Description for Figure 3 - Retail and service program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017

This vertical bar chart shows, in millions of dollars, the budgets and expenditures of the Retail and Service Industries Division and other internal services divisions (i.e. services areas) to support activities related to retail and service industries, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017. The following data table provides further details:

Retail and service program portion—current budget vs. expenditures, from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017
Fiscal year Budget for RSID Expenditures from RSID Budget for Services areas Expenditures from Services areas
($)
2012-2013 7,971,565 7,503,341 4,718,489 4,102,078
2013-2014 7,774,889 7,497,920 4,615,559 3,546,565
2014-2015 7,712,631 7,599,887 3,813,794 2,869,217
2015-2016 7,857,433 8,477,640 4,332,785 3,912,958
2016-2017 8,101,187 8,550,582 3,555,286 3,020,134

During the period covered by the evaluation, the budgets allocated to services areas, such as collection, significantly exceeded expenditures reported by them; this gap had shrunk by the end of the evaluation period.Footnote 24

Finally, financial figures indicated that from 2012/2013 to 2016/2017, revenue from cost recovery increased by 450%, mainly because of the additional funding from Global Affairs Canada, while the number of projects declined.

2.7. Efficiency

Evaluation questions

Are MWTRSIP activities sufficiently integrated and coordinated to support the achievement of results?

Are there any implementing factors that are impacting the efficiency of the MWTRSIP?

Governance and management

Findings indicated that appropriate governance mechanisms were in place and that there was effective collaboration and coordination with internal users and service areas to ensure sound management and monitoring of key strategic and operational issues, data discussions and information sharing, and implementation of projects. These governance mechanisms included weekly senior-level and chief-level meetings, data discussion groups, steering committees, working groups, and bilateral divisional management meetings.

At the operational level, the reorganization of the divisions and the relocation of employees to the same floor helped facilitate day-to-day exchanges among employees, especially within MWTD. The merger of the Wholesale unit and the Manufacturing unit into the same division led to improved communications, problem-solving capacity (solving complex data issues and reporting issues) and expertise. In comparison, evidence indicated that there was less coordination within RSID since there was a less natural connection between retail and services. Between the two divisions, coordination is also limited because of the nature of the programs and the work.

In terms of management of the program, a number of representatives indicated the need for more guidance. Staff were being asked to maintain their regular activities, work on initiatives identified during past consultations to fill data and information gaps, and explore new projects to support Statistics Canada's modernization initiatives. According to interviews, staff were often asked to perform all these tasks using the same level of resources. To meet these demands, many program representatives indicated that they needed clearer direction from management (including senior management) on where to put their efforts.

A few representatives indicated that the solution to managing multiple priorities resides in strategic thinking within the division and across the program. They felt that knowledge sharing and discussions about where to gain efficiencies were limited. There were opportunities to share lessons learned and best practices, to use common standards across the divisions for similar survey processes (e.g., monthly surveys), to review processes and eliminate low value-added activities, to review the organization of work, and to examine survey sequencing to facilitate the sharing of employees across surveys and divisions.

Concerted efforts between divisions can result in significant added value to users. A good example of this was the coordinated work done in response to the Fort McMurray wildfires in 2016. The three mission-critical survey teams joined together to create an electronic questionnaire (EQ) module that allowed for ad hoc questions to measure the impact of specific events or phenomena on the economy. Another example was the work taking place to streamline the two-phased sampling of the annual surveys to expedite the pre-collection phase and deliver results faster.

Common tools and processes

Statistics Canada implemented major projects starting in 2009 in an effort to be more efficient, robust and responsive to user needs. The implementation of the IBSP was aimed at improving data quality by standardizing and improving sampling quality and timeliness while reducing response burden and ongoing costs to realize efficiency.Footnote 25 Another opportunity for efficiency for the agency was the move of all business surveys into the Business Collection Portal environment. This included the adoption of an electronic questionnaire—the primary mode of collection. Efficiency came from reducing the number of different software platforms, implementing new processes and tools, and increasing the proportion of electronic responses.

As mentioned previously, although the adoption of common tools will yield long-term benefits and efficiency, the transition had an impact on the program's capacity to maintain the quality of its outputs and on employee work-life balance (increased stress, frustration and overtime).

Many program representatives also indicated frustration with the lengthy transition process. They felt that the EQ system was less efficient because of a heavy bureaucratic process and that it was less effective. More specifically, it is now difficult to change survey elements and, when changes do take place, many errors occur and extensive revisions are required. This has translated into more time and effort being spent to ensure that changes are correct and that there are no errors. It was also noted that changes are costly and have created frustration with cost-recovered survey clients. Better communication and coordination between the groups would be helpful.

3. How to improve

SWOC analysis

Strengths

  • Statistical information does not duplicate any other source
  • Program representatives have a good understanding of the current and emerging needs
  • Consultation mechanisms are adequate to identify user needs and opportunities
  • Good quality and trust
  • Recognized expertise and professionalism
  • Use of common tools to standardize processes

Weaknesses

  • Lack of cohesion and vision around e-commerce and new economy (agency-wide)
  • Scope and frequency of releases on services information do not respond to user needs
  • Gaps in outreach activities and service delivery
  • Management of competing priorities (clarification and allocation of resources) and conflicting resources

Opportunities

  • New economy and cross-functional information increase opportunities for new products and collaboration
  • Openness of main stakeholders and businesses to collaborate and share information
  • Increase in collaboration within and across divisions to innovate and gain efficiencies

Challenges

  • Satisfying diverse needs from a wide range of stakeholders in a timely manner
  • Lack of program understanding among users
  • Measurement of rapidly evolving domains such as the new economy
  • Lack of agility of processes such as EQ
  • Need for more disaggregated information (geographical and five- or six-digit NAICS level)

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: Data gaps

The evaluation found that the program maintains effective relationships with its users and stakeholders and, as a result, has a good understanding of the gaps in the program. Comprehensive consultations took place during the evaluation period, and the program used the information gathered to develop plans to address as many gaps as possible within their resource allocation.

It is recommended that plans address the following key gaps:

  • E-commerce and the new economy—an agency-wide approach is required, given that the subject spans several programs. While efforts are currently underway in several areas, there is a lack of coordination, roles and responsibilities are not clear, and senior management engagement needs to increase.
  • Greater level of detail—over time, there has been a loss of detail for users. The MWTRSIP should continue working with key partners and stakeholders (internal and external) to explore avenues to address this.
  • Data on services—while services make up a large share of the economy, statistical information is rather limited. It is recommended that the MWTRSIP explore opportunities to increase the frequency of its surveys and to increase the scope of the services covered.

In exploring these gaps, the program should continue to use a strong user-centric approach.

Recommendation 2: Timeliness

There were mixed results regarding the level of satisfaction with the timeliness of releases (82% of survey respondents and 55% of interviewees were satisfied with the current release times). When presented with different scenarios trading off timeliness for accuracy, users were generally unwilling to give up accuracy (with more than half preferring the status quo). Some users noted they would be willing to accept a loss in quality for more timely information during their peak seasons (e.g., retail data around Christmas).

It is recommended that the MWTRSIP

  • review its process for releases to ensure they are as timely as possible, taking into consideration other key objectives such as relevance and accuracy; this includes exploring the possibility of reducing contextual analysis to improve timeliness and targeting and coordinating the setting of release dates
  • undertake a comprehensive consultation of its key users prior to taking any steps to improve timeliness that would impact accuracy.

Recommendation 3: Priority setting

The MWTRSIP is currently trying to address gaps/needs identified during previous consultations, and respond to the modernization agenda and other agency initiatives. These activities are in addition to its regularly mandated program.

It is recommended that during this transitional period, MWTRSIP management provide greater clarification on priorities to employees.

Recommendation 4: Outreach and client services

Given the rapid evolution taking place in the program, and the broad, diverse range of users, it is vital that the MWTRSIP maintain strong relationships with users and actively promote its statistical information. During the evaluation, evidence was found of ongoing awareness-raising activities, but little evidence was found of a strategic element such as a written plan.

Client services are a key contact point with users. During discussions on access and cost-recovery services with interviewees, it was noted by several that client services could be improved. More specifically, it was noted that the level and quality of responsiveness were inconsistent (e.g., being less responsive during peak periods).

It is recommended that the MWTRSIP

  • develop and implement a comprehensive outreach plan based on information from consultations, staff and other relevant partners (internal and external); the plan should include mechanisms for ongoing communication with users to inform them of program developments and to raise awareness
  • prepare a strategy to strengthen client service delivery.

4. Management response and action plan

Recommendation 1

The evaluation found that the program maintains effective relationships with its users and stakeholders and, as a result, has a good understanding of the gaps in the program. Comprehensive consultations took place during the evaluation period, and the program used the information gathered to develop plans to address as many gaps as possible within their resource allocation.

It is recommended that plans address the following key gaps:

  • E-commerce and the new economy—an agency-wide approach is required, given that the subject spans several programs. While efforts are currently underway in several areas, there is a lack of coordination, roles and responsibilities are not clear, and senior management engagement needs to increase.
  • Greater level of detail—over time, there has been a loss of detail for users. The MWTRSIP should continue working with key partners and stakeholders (internal and external) to explore avenues to address this.
  • Data on services—while services make up a large share of the economy, statistical information is rather limited. It is recommended that the MWTRSIP explore opportunities to increase the frequency of its surveys and to increase the scope of the services covered.

In exploring these gaps, the program should continue to use a strong user-centric approach.

Statement of agreement or disagreement

Management agrees with the recommendation.

Management response

E-commerce
The measurement of e-commerce and the new economy will be fully explored as part of the framework for measuring the digital economy. Measurement elements across the agency are already underway and progress has been made regarding coordination and governance.

The MWTRSIP recognizes the increasing economic importance of e-commerce and has recently added e-commerce modules to most surveys, as well as new questions related to the digital economy to a number of culture and other surveys. MWTRSIP management will become more active on the Subject-Matter Committee on Digital Economy Statistics with the ISTD and the Digital Economy Satellite Account with the National Economic Accounts Division to improve the exchange of information between divisions currently working on the digital economy and to help ensure a collaborative effort on digital commerce.

Greater level of detail
The MWTRSIP currently has a number of projects underway to enhance data products to respond to user requirements in terms of published detail.

Specifically, for RSID:

  • pilot a "census of tax" approach to producing financial estimates that will allow us to publish more geographical detail for financial estimates
  • released six new CMAs for the MRTS in January 2019
  • investigate different suppression patterns to minimize the loss of published information while ensuring the appropriate level of protection for confidential cells
  • redesign the New Motor Vehicle Survey and New Motor Vehicle Dealer Commodity Survey—this will improve the quality and coherence of motor vehicle data
  • work with third-party data providers to explore, encourage and pursue the use of point-of-sale information in the interest of response burden relief
  • publish the Retail Commodity Survey on a monthly basis
  • produced details on recreational cannabis in December 2018.

Specifically, for MWTD:

  • reduce the number of suppressed cells in monthly surveys
  • add CMA-level estimates for manufacturing—annual for 11 CMAs released in November 2016, monthly for 12 CMAs to come later in 2019
  • increase the sample for wood product manufacturing industries, and administer a supplemental questionnaire to gather (and, if possible, disseminate) more detailed commodity information
  • work with Methodology to improve the quality of the ASML so that greater industrial detail (lost with the move to the IBSP and, consequently, with the move from a census to a sample) will be made available
  • produce cannabis-specific activity in wholesale and manufacturing programs.

Data on services
RSID's capacity to improve the frequency and increase the scope of services covered using traditional survey methods is limited by budget constraints. However, efforts are ongoing to identify opportunities to integrate alternative data sources into our statistical processes. This will be a critical component of our capacity to improve the frequency and increase the scope of services covered. RSID has recently released financial estimates for private residential care facilities and will be releasing estimates on home health care shortly based on tax data exclusively.

Data on services
Timeline Deliverable(s) Responsible party
March 2021 Delivery of a comprehensive plan for measuring the digital economy. Assistant Chief Statistician Economic Statistics
Immediate RSID to actively participate in multi-divisional work groups related to e-commerce. Director, RSID
March 2020 Delivery of planned improvements to product detail, as listed in Management Response above. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Delivery of a strategy on administrative sources (e.g., scanner data) for RSID. Director, RSID

Recommendation 2

There were mixed results regarding the level of satisfaction with the timeliness of releases (82% of survey respondents and 55% of interviewees were satisfied with the current release times). When presented with different scenarios trading off timeliness for accuracy, users were generally unwilling to give up accuracy (with more than half preferring the status quo). Some users noted they would be willing to accept a loss in quality for more timely information during their peak seasons (e.g., retail data around Christmas).

It is recommended that the MWTRSIP

  • review its process for releases to ensure they are as timely as possible, taking into consideration other key objectives such as relevance and accuracy; this includes exploring the possibility of reducing contextual analysis to improve timeliness and targeting and coordinating the setting of release dates
  • undertake a comprehensive consultation of its key users prior to taking any steps to improve timeliness that would impact accuracy.

Statement of agreement or disagreement

Management agrees with the recommendation.

Management response

Setting release dates
Fixed release dates for the mission-critical monthly surveys are set a year in advance in consultation with the macroeconomic accounts that they feed into. These dates are published on the Statistics Canada website and are adhered to exactly. For other surveys (IBSP annuals, commodity-specific annuals and monthlies), the collection and processing schedules determine the possible turnaround time and, therefore, the planned release dates.

The MWTRSIP follows a formal process to establish release dates that take into account collection and processing schedules and production capacity while striving to improve timeliness. In addition, policies regarding Daily releases (maximum of two major releases on each day) can limit options for earlier release dates. Most products were released as scheduled following the initial transition period to the IBSP.

The MWTRSIP is continually monitoring the timeliness of program outputs and seeking efficiencies, whether within its own programs or in its support services, to reduce time to release when warranted.

Reducing contextual analysis
Contextual analysis, such as The Daily, adds a maximum of two days to the monthly production cycle. Doing away with it would save time, but would also increase the burden on analysts to provide background to users, such as external analysts. An analytical focus is also a critical step in data quality assurance. Having said that, the MWTRSIP is investigating the use of natural language generation software to accelerate the production of Daily articles.

Comprehensive consultation on changes
Through ongoing consultation with stakeholders, the Mining, Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade Division (MMWTD) will consult key users prior to taking any steps to improve timeliness that would impact accuracy.

Comprehensive consultation on changes
Timeline Deliverable(s) Responsible party
March 2020 Initiate discussion at the senior management level on the necessity of contextual analysis and possible replacement by tools such as artificial intelligence. Director General, Industry Statistics
March 2020 Seek funding (API) to produce a report/strategy on the feasibility of releasing flash estimates of retail sales during peak periods, and consult stakeholders on its merits. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Identify impediments to releasing annual survey data within 12 months of the end of the reference period and develop strategies, in consultation with our internal partners, to overcome them. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Explore the feasibility of streamlining operational processes in consultation with internal service areas to improve the timeliness of our sub-annual programs. An assessment of the impact on data quality will also be undertaken. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Review the method of establishing internal release date targets. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Assess natural language generation software to reduce time to write The Daily. Director MMWTD

Recommendation 3

The MWTRSIP is currently trying to address gaps/needs identified during previous consultations, and respond to the modernization agenda and other agency initiatives. These activities are in addition to its regularly mandated program.

It is recommended that during this transitional period, MWTRSIP management provide greater clarification on priorities to employees.

Statement of agreement or disagreement

Management agrees with the recommendation.

Management response

Clarification on priorities
MWTRSIP fully expects communication with employees to improve as IBSP processes have now been fully implemented, and as the modernization agenda is better understood and continues to be communicated and deployed throughout the agency.

MWTRSIP management will continue to use multiple avenues to communicate priorities in response to changing agency initiatives and transition periods, including

  • regular management and staff meetings to discuss progress and issues
  • management meetings
  • divisional meetings
  • regular communication through email
  • encouragement for all supervisors to meet regularly with staff.
Clarification on priorities
Timeline Deliverable(s) Responsible party
December 2019 Consult with employees to determine if additional or different avenues are required and seek opportunities to improve communications. Directors, RSID and MMWTD

Recommendation 4

Given the rapid evolution taking place in the program, and the broad, diverse range of users, it is vital that the MWTRSIP maintain strong relationships with users and actively promote its statistical information. During the evaluation, evidence was found of ongoing awareness-raising activities, but little evidence was found of a strategic element such as a written plan.

Client services are a key contact point with users. During discussions on access and cost-recovery services with interviewees, it was noted by several that client services could be improved. More specifically, it was noted that the level and quality of responsiveness were inconsistent (e.g., being less responsive during peak periods).

It is recommended that the MWTRSIP

  • develop and implement a comprehensive outreach plan based on information from consultations, staff and other relevant partners (internal and external); the plan should include mechanisms for ongoing communication with users to inform them of program developments and to raise awareness
  • prepare a strategy to strengthen client service delivery.

Statement of agreement or disagreement

Management agrees with the recommendation.

Management response

Comprehensive outreach plan
As it has done in previous years, the MWTRSIP continues to maintain ongoing and effective relationships with its users and stakeholders and, as a result, has a good understanding of the gaps in the program. Comprehensive consultations have taken place recently. Future consultations will include a requirement to communicate program developments and increase awareness of the program.

We prepare weekly check-ins on upcoming outreach activities, biweekly summaries for senior management briefings on the Industry Statistics Branch, and an outreach report on an annual basis.

Client service delivery
The MWTRSIP is committed to serving its clients in a prompt, reliable, courteous and fair manner that will meet or exceed Statistics Canada's Standards of Service to the Public. To this end, MWTRSIP management will adopt a strategy to strengthen client service delivery training that will include Client Relationship Management System (CRMS) training, clear communication from management of Statistics Canada's standards of service, clear expectations to meet or exceed these standards, and central tracking of progress of all client requests to assess results.

Methods for marketing existing products better are also being explored.

Client service delivery
Timeline Deliverable(s) Responsible party
March 2020 Pursue opportunities to build awareness within our existing outreach plan by requiring Statistics Canada attendees to inform stakeholders of existing program outputs and current development activities when appropriate. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Work with regional offices to identify gaps in client awareness and in improving their understanding of our program outputs. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Assess client service requests (CRMS) to help identify gaps in awareness and outreach opportunities. Directors, RSID and MMWTD
March 2020 Review current practices and implement a strategy to ensure that Statistics Canada service standards are met. Targeted training will be explored. Directors, RSID and MMWTD

Appendix 1: Program description

The Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, Retail and Service Industries Program (MWTRSIP) plans, directs, coordinates and controls the provision of statistical information and advice on distributive trades, manufacturing, and service industries to governments, private organizations and institutions. The program supplies the Canadian System of Macroeconomic Accounts with data required by the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Regulations, and the Special Data Dissemination Standard with the International Monetary Fund. Data are required as part of Canada's participation in the North American Free Trade Agreement under the snapback provision, and under the Bank Act, section 427. The program also satisfies the information requirements of federal government departments, provincial governments, international organizations, industry associations, the academic community and the public at large.

The Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade Division (MWTD) and the Retail and Service Industries Division (RSID) are the two divisions responsible for compiling, analyzing and disseminating the broad range of comprehensive and integrated statistics that depict the production, sales, financial operations and product types for the manufacturing, retail and wholesale sectors, and a number of service sectors in Canada. Together, they represent 15 of the 24 sectors as classified in the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) and account for a significant part of Canada's gross domestic product (GDP)Footnote 26 and employment.

MWTD and RSID function as separate operational and financial entities, each with a unique set of outputs and each with its own organizational structure.

Manufacturing

The manufacturing and logging sectors comprise establishments that are primarily engaged in the chemical, mechanical or physical transformation of materials or substances into new products (NAICS groupings 31-33, manufacturing). These products may be finished, in the sense that they are ready to be used or consumed, or semi-finished, in the sense of becoming an input for an establishment to use in further manufacturing. Related activities—such as assembling component parts of manufactured goods; blending materials; and finishing manufactured products by dyeing, heat-treating, plating and similar operations—are also treated as manufacturing activities.

MWTD disseminates information via monthly and annual Common Output Data Repository tables,Footnote 27 online publications and special tables for clients. The wide range of indicators of economic activity for the manufacturing program includes

  • monthly estimates of sales, inventories, and the value of unfilled orders and new orders for 28 manufacturing industry aggregates, provincially and nationally
  • monthly estimates of production and destination of shipments of asphalt roofing, sawmill products, and production and disposition of tobacco productsFootnote 28
  • annual indicators of manufacturing revenue, employment, salaries and wages, cost of materials and supplies used, cost of energy and water utilities, inventories, and information about commodities produced and used in the production process (e.g., supplement to ASML).

Wholesale and retail

The wholesale trade sector provides the link between producers and retailers of goods in both the domestic and the global economies. Many wholesalers are organized to sell merchandise in large quantities to retail business and institutional clients. However, some wholesalers—in particular those that supply non-consumer capital goods—sell merchandise in single units to final users. This sector comprises two main types of wholesalers: merchant wholesalers that sell goods on their own account, and brokers that arrange sales and purchases for others generally for a commission or fee.

The retailing process is the final step in the distribution chain of merchandise. The retail trade sector comprises establishments primarily engaged in retailing merchandise, generally without transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise. Retailers are organized to sell merchandise in small quantities to the general public, which then becomes a primary indicator of consumer demand. The sector comprises two main types of retailers, store and non-store. The store retailers operate fixed point-of-sale locations, located and designed to attract a high volume of walk-in customers. The non-store retailers reach customers and market merchandise with methods such as the broadcasting of infomercials, the broadcasting and publishing of direct-response advertising, the publishing of traditional and electronic catalogues, door-to-door solicitation, in-home demonstration, the temporary displaying of merchandise (stalls), and distribution by vending machines.

MWTD is responsible for producing statistics on a monthly and annual basis for the NAICS grouping 41 (wholesale trade) by industry and geographical detail. Similar information is produced for the NAICS grouping 44-45 (retail trade) by RSID. Together, the two programs disseminate Common Output Data Repository tables and special tabulations for clients on

  • annual information on the operating revenues, expenditures and inventory of wholesalers and retailers
  • monthly estimates of sales, inventories and inventories/sales ratio for wholesalers
  • monthly estimates of sales for retailers
  • the monthly commodity breakdown of national retail sales for a panel of about 80 large retail enterprises
  • the quarterly commodity breakdown of retail sales by geographical detail
  • sales of new motor vehicles in units and in dollars by vehicle type, origin of manufacture and region.

Services

The service sector is characterized by establishments primarily engaged in activities where human capital is the major input. These establishments make available the knowledge and skills of their employees to create added value as opposed to producing tangible goods. Statistics covering only a portion of the service sector are in scope for RSID as other divisions produce service (education, transportation, tourism, etc.) indicators as well. The indicators produced by RSID cover portions of the following service sectors on an annual basis:

  • real estate and rental and leasing (53)
  • professional, scientific and technical services (54)
  • information and cultural industries (51)
  • administrative and support, waste management and remediation services (56)
  • accommodation and food services (72)
  • other services (except public administration) (81)
  • management of companies and enterprises (55)
  • arts, entertainment and recreation (71).

The output of the program consists of a series of annual indicators by industry and province for various types of revenues and expenses, inventories and exports.

Aside from financial data, the program disseminates a broad range of information on specific characteristics of the different service industries, such as distribution of sales by type of client (engineering services), number of screens (motion picture theatres), advertising and circulation revenue (periodical publishers), etc.

The program also disseminates a monthly indicator of the value of restaurant, caterer and drinking place sales by province and territory and by industry.

Internal processes

Information for manufacturing, wholesale, retail and service estimates is compiled by using a combination of survey and administrative data. The annual and monthly surveys collect information mostly from large and medium-sized establishments; tax information from T1, T2 and GST files is used to estimate production activity for small units.

Over the last few years, as a result of a number of corporate initiatives under the umbrella of the Corporate Business Architecture, there has been a concerted effort to streamline and standardize the infrastructure, methods and concepts in scope for these programs. As a result, the profile of the programs has shifted much more toward analysis and dissemination, and away from data collection and processing.Footnote 29

Expected outcomes

The MWTRSIP is part of the Economic and Environmental Statistics Program Activity (Sub-program 1.2, Industry Statistics) in Statistics Canada's Program Alignment Architecture. It contributes to the following Statistics Canada Strategic Outcomes (SOs):

  • "Canadians have access to timely, relevant and quality statistical information on Canada's changing economy and society for informed debate, research and decision making on social and economic issues" (SO1).
  • "Specific client needs for high-quality and timely statistical services are met" (SO2).

While Statistics Canada is part of the "Government Affairs" outcome area in the whole-of-government framework, the agency and its programs contribute to most federal government outcomes in the domains of economic, social, international and government affairs.

The following logic model describes MWTRSIP's key activities, outputs and outcomes. It is based on Statistics Canada's Quality Assurance Framework,Footnote 30 which describes the six dimensions for quality management (accessibility, timeliness, accuracy, interpretability, coherence and relevanceFootnote 31) and is applied to all Statistics Canada statistical data and products.

Figure 4 - MWTRSIP logic model

MWTRSIP logic model
Description for Figure 4 - MWTRSIP logic model

This figure depicts the Logic Model for the Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, Retail and Service Industries Program. It is divided into six layers and shows how each layer contributes upwards to achieve the ultimate outcome. The six layers are from top to bottom: ultimate outcome, intermediate outcome, immediate outcome, outputs, activities, and inputs.

The ultimate outcome is that "Canadians, public and private sectors use manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail and service industries statistical information to inform public debate, research and decision-making". It is at the top of the model.

The intermediate outcome is that "Canadians, public and private sectors information needs are met by manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail and service industries statistical information".

The immediate outcome is that "Canadians, public and private sectors have access to quality manufacturing, wholesale trade, retail and service industries statistical information and to associated support services".

There are two outputs: statistical products which includes datasets, analytical products, research, advice and expertise; and, customized products and services.

There are two activities: program specific core activities according to the GSBPM which includes specify needs, design, build, collect, process, analyze, disseminate and evaluate; and, cost-recovery activities according to GSBPM.

The inputs are program specific data and infrastructure inputs. It includes subject matter input, tools, IT infrastructure, resources, standards, methodology principles and guidelines. The inputs are the lowest layer.

GSBPM referred to under activities is the Generic Statistical Business Process Model.

For quality as is referred to under the immediate outcome, Statistics Canada defines the quality of information in terms of its fitness for use. This is a multidimensional concept embracing both the relevance of information to users' needs, and characteristics of the information such as accuracy, timeliness, accessibility, interpretability and coherence that affect how it can be used.

Appendix 2: Limitations and mitigation strategies

Five main limitations were identified, and a set of mitigation strategies was employed:

Limitations:

  1. The objective of the evaluation did not include an assessment in detail of the quality dimensions for specific statistical products.
  2. There were a large number of surveys administered through these divisions. Not all surveys and products could be assessed in detail.
  3. The MWTRSIP had a high number of partners and users from a variety of work areas. Not all could be contacted for an interview.
  4. Data collection with external stakeholders might have been a burden for some respondents because of recent and ongoing program consultations with stakeholders.
  5. Recent organizational changes to the MWTRSIP limited the capacity for efficiency analysis.

Mitigation Strategies:

  1. The use of a general inductive approach provided the flexibility necessary to perform in-depth analyses if and where significant issues were observed.
  2. Greater focus for the evaluation on:
    Mission-critical survey (MSM, MWTS, MRTS) relevance and performance.
    Service industry approach and potential statistical information gaps (excluding culture surveys).
    Secondary analysis of other MWTRSIP components through stakeholder interviews and user surveys.
  3. The use of other lines of evidence such as a survey of key users allowed to maximize the reach and data collection with users.
  4. The evaluation made use of relevant existing data collected by the MWTRSIP to avoid duplication (e.g., client consultation reports, culture survey consultations).
  5. Review of annual financial expenditures in the context of organizational change.
    Identification of efficiency issues through key informant interviews.

Canadian Employer Employee Dynamics Database (CEEDD): Introduction

The Canadian Employer-Employee Dynamics Database (CEEDD) is a set of linkable files maintained by Statistics Canada to provide linkage between employees and employers in the Canadian labour market. This linkable employer-employee dataset is based on processed administrative data sources from Statistics Canada (StatCan), Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).

The construction of the CEEDD takes advantage of various administrative data sets that can be linked at the person level and job level using individual's Social Insurance Number (SIN) and employer's Business Number (BN). The population of the CEEDD covers all individuals and firms that can be identified from the administrative files. A key feature of the CEEDD data structure is that it is a set of linkable files from different sources instead of being a single linked file containing all variables available from numerous linkages. Using unique personal and firm identifiers available on each linkable file, information at the employee and employer level can be linked across different component files over time.

Analysis using the CEEDD data can be done either on a cross-sectional basis―at a given point in time based on covariates drawn from the same year across different component files; or longitudinally―by tracking firms and individuals over time across different component files. In particular, with the longitudinal linked employer-employee data structure, employer-employee relationships can be monitored by following specific employer-employee pairings over time. Doing so allow analyses of worker transitions across employers, job tenure, and of the number of jobs held at some point in a given year by employees.

The CEEDD is created from the component files listed in Table 1, which allows researchers to access processed variables at the individual level, family level, job level, and firm level. A set of geographic indicators at the sub-provincial level that can be linked to postal code of the analytical files is also available to users. The CEEDD data provides researchers with: workers' and business owners' information using T1 tax forms and T2 corporate tax returns; job-level information using T4 records and Record of Employment (ROE) data; and firm-level information from the National Accounts Longitudinal Microdata File (NALMF) maintained by Statistics Canada. Sub groups of the population such as immigrants or temporary foreign workers can be analyzed using the Longitudinal Immigration Database (IMDB) and the Temporary Residents File from IRCC. Table 1 also outlines what type of data is available, its source file(s), and time periods available (which depends on the vintage). A new vintage of CEEDD is produced every year with updates from the most current information available.

Table 1: Summary of CEEDD file (2018 Vintage)
Output analytical files Source files 2018 vintage
Individual-level data
T1 Personal Master Files T1 PMF 2001 to 2016
T1 Historical Files T1 H 2001 to 2014
IMDB files Landing Files & Non-Permanent Residents Files 1980 to 2016
Family-level data
T1 Family Files T1FF master file – based on T1 PMF, T4, Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB) Files 2001 to 2016
Job-level data
Edited T4–ROE–NALMF Edited T4, ROE, NALMF 2001 to 2016
Business owners' module T1FD, T1BD, and T2 Corporation Income Tax Return Schedule 50 2001 to 2014
Raw T4 - ROE - LEAP T4, ROE, LEAP 2001 to 2016
Firm-level data
NALMF BR, T2, T4, PD7, and GST 2001 to 2016
Import files Trade by Importer Characteristics 2010 to 2016
Export files Trade by Exporter Characteristics 2010 to 2016
Geography data
Sub-provincial indicators Postal Code Conversion File 2001 to 2016

The full CEEDD dataset is not publicly available to researchers because individual worker and firm observations are confidential under the Statistics Act. However, researchers can pay for custom cuts of the CEEDD linked files through Statistics Canada's Research Data Centers (RDCs). Information on the access process, application requirements and costing can be found on the RDCs' website. Inquiries regarding custom tabulations from the CEEDD linkage environment should be directed to statcan.asbproductionsupport-deasoutienalaproduction.statcan@statcan.gc.ca. Analytical output based on the CEEDD linkage environment can be found under Statistics Canada's Analytical Studies Branch Research Paper Series and Economic and Social Reports."

2019 Census Test Website

Consultation objectives

In preparation for the 2021 Census of Population and Census of Agriculture, Statistics Canada conducts a Census test in 2019 to evaluate the new and modified questions of the questionnaire, as well as the collection procedures and tools.

In March 2019, Statistics Canada conducted usability testing on the Census test website. The website has been enhanced to provide key information on: the Census; the Census test and jobs; frequently asked questions; and, contact information.

Feedback, suggestions and ideas expressed during this consultation ensured that the 2019 Census Test website is as user-friendly as possible while meeting users' needs.

Consultation methodology

Statistics Canada conducted in-person usability consultations in Ottawa, Ontario. Participants were asked to complete a series of tasks and to provide feedback on the proposed website.

How participants got involved

This consultation is now closed.

Individuals who wished to obtain more information or to take part in a consultation were requested to contact Statistics Canada by sending an email to statcan.consultations-consultations.statcan@statcan.gc.ca.

It was noted that Statistics Canada selects participants for each consultation to ensure feedback is sought from a representative sample of the target population for the study. Not all applicants were asked to participate in a given consultation.

Statistics Canada is committed to respecting the privacy of consultation participants. All personal information created, held or collected by the Agency is protected by the Privacy Act. For more information on Statistics Canada's privacy policies, please consult the Privacy notice.

Results

What worked

All participants were able to complete the majority of tasks on various pages of the 2019 Census Test Website, stating that the pages included the expected information. Overall, participants thought that the information provided was clear and concise. They also indicated that website was easy to use and that the navigation was intuitive.

Areas for Improvement

Some participants made suggestions concerning the section headers, the quantity of information and the distribution of the information in the FAQ section.

Recommendations

For increased clarity, consider changing some section headers on the landing page and ensure that the FAQ section is organized in a more intuitive order, beginning with the most general information and most popular questions.

Statistics Canada would like to thank participants for their participation in this consultation. Their insights will guide the agency's web development and ensure that the final products meet users' expectations.

Share this page
Date modified:

Methodology used to create indicators of profit shifting by multinational enterprises operating in Canada

Introduction

The following describes the methodology used in the upcoming paper "Indicators of profit shifting by multinational enterprises operating in Canada" to be published on June 18, 2019. This methodology follows the one proposed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in its Action 11 Report to create a dashboard of profit shifting indicators.

Section 1: Disconnect between financial and real economic activities

Discrepancies between financial and real economic activity within a country can be a sign that income is not reported, and therefore not taxed, where it was earned. The two indicators in this section rely on data aggregated to the country level and a list of countries with favourable corporate tax rates to explore these discrepancies.

Data sources for Indicators 1A & 1B: Data about real and financial economic activity is from Statistics Canada's Balance of Payments program, specifically the outward foreign direct investment statistics (NDM table 36-10-0008-01) and the activities of Canadian majority-owned affiliates abroad (NDM table 36-10-0470-01). We also used Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by country from the World Bank (World Development Indicators).

To identify jurisdictions with favourable corporate tax systems, we used data about foreign subsidiaries of Canadian corporations collected by the Canada Revenue Agency using the T1134 Information Return Relating to Controlled and Not- controlled Foreign Affiliates.

BEPS Indicator 1A: Mismatches between stocks of Canadian outward FDI and GDP of recipient countries for countries with favourable corporate income tax rates

This indicator is designed to gauge whether a significant proportion of Canada's outward FDI is driven by tax minimization. It compares Canada's outward FDI stock in 2016 to GDP of countries receiving the investments, for countries that have a favourable corporate income tax rates, and for those that do not.

Methodology: BEPS research often uses effective tax rates (ETRs) to identify jurisdictions with favourable corporate tax rates, because it is a measure of how much tax is actually paid for each dollar of income.Footnote 1 To determine whether countries had a favorable corporate income tax rate, we used data from the T1134 return from 2011 to 2016 to calculate the ETR (taxes divided by income)Footnote 2 for each foreign subsidiary. We weighted these ETRs by the subsidiary's assets to calculate the average ETR for each country over the period. We sorted countries by ETR, and labelled countries with the lowest- ETRs and up to 20% of the total assets held by foreign subsidiaries as having favourable corporate tax rates.

We also labelled countries with slightly higher ETRs and between 20% and 25% of total assets as having favourable corporate tax systems if they appeared on a list of countries compiled by the United States Government Accountability Office (2008) to study corporate tax evasion that is commonly cited.Footnote 3Footnote 4

We collected data on the 10 countries with the largest stocks of Canadian outward FDI from Statistics Canada's FDI statistics program, and obtained GDP for each of these countries from the World Bank's World Development Indicatorstable.

We grouped countries according to whether they had favourable corporate tax rates, and added up the FDI and GDP for each group. We presented the sums for each group as a proportion of the total.

BEPS Indicator 1B: Mismatches between assets, employment and sales for countries with favourable corporate tax rates

This indicator looks for discrepancies between asset ownership, employment and sales in foreign subsidiaries of MNEs operating in Canada which may be associated with tax minimization. It compares the ratios of employees and sales to assets in subsidiaries operating in countries with favourable corporate income tax rates to those that are not.

Methodology: We collected data on total assets, employment and sales for the 10 countries where the subsidiaries of Canadian companies had the most assets from Statistics Canada's Activities of Canadian majority-owned affiliate's abroad program.

We grouped these countries using the list of countries with favorable corporate tax rates from Indicator 1A. We calculated averages of employment and sales per billion dollars' worth of assets.

Section 2: Profit rate differentials within MNEs

MNE affiliates with low tax rates that are highly profitable relative to their group overall may suggest that some of the group's income was transferred to minimize taxes. The two indicators in this section are recreated from Action 11 of the OECD's BEPS Action Plan using data about MNEs operating in Canada and their subsidiaries abroad.

Data sources for Indicators 2A & 2B: We used financial data about foreign affiliates from the T1134 Information Return Relating to Controlled and Not- controlled Foreign Affiliates. The variables were assets, income and taxes, and data was available for 2011 to 2016.Footnote 5

Financial data about the Canadian resident companies filling the T1134 return came from the T2 Corporation Income Tax Returns filed with the Canada Revenue Agency. The variables we used were assets, income and taxes for the same years where we had data from the T1134 available.Footnote 6

Combining these data sources allowed us to get a picture of a MNEs financials in Canada and abroad. A limitation was that financial data on foreign parents of the Canadian reporting company and other affiliates of these foreign parents was not available.Footnote 7

BEPS Indicator 2A: High profit rates of low-taxed affiliates of MNEs

This indicator compares income earned by MNE affiliates that are grouped based on how their profit rates and ETRs compare to their group. A high proportion of total income earned by affiliates with higher profit rates and lower effective tax rates than their groups is a sign of BEPS. This distribution of income suggests that MNEs could have strategically 'shifted' income to minimize taxes.

Methodology: The methodology for this indicator is adapted from Indicator 2 in Action 11 of the OECD's BEPS Action Plan. The OECD study used data from consolidated and unconsolidated financial statements of MNEs, and focussed on the largest 250 MNEs globally (OECD 2015).

Following this methodology, we calculated profit rate (income divided by assets) and ETR for each affiliate, and dropped observations with negative effective tax rates and income.

Next, we calculated profitability and ETR for each MNE group as a whole and compared the ratio of each affiliate to that of its group.Footnote 8 Based on these results, we sorted affiliates into the following groups (or quadrants):

Quadrant 1: Higher ETR, higher profitability,

Quadrant 2: Lower ETR, higher profitability

Quadrant 3: Lower ETR, lower profitability

Quadrant 4: Higher ETR, lower profitability

We then added up the income earned by the affiliates in each quadrant, and repeated the exercise for each year from 2011 to 2016. Since the results were variable year- over- year, we chose to present our result as an aggregate for the whole period.Footnote 9Footnote 10

BEPS Indicator 2B: High profit rates of MNE affiliates in lower- tax locations

Indicator 2B compares the profit rates of affiliates within an MNE in low- tax areas to the profit rate of the MNE as a whole by calculating relative profit rates for each MNE, and combining these to create an average. If the indicator is above 1, profits are higher in low- tax areas than in high tax areas, meaning that MNEs may be shifting profits to minimize taxation.

Methodology: The methodology for this indicator is adapted from Indicator 3 in Action 11 of the OECD's BEPS Action Plan.

Following this methodology, we added up assets, income and taxes paid by affiliates to arrive at totals by country for each MNE group. We calculated the ETR by country for each MNE group by dividing the total tax paid by total income. Next, we ranked countries within each MNE by their ETR, and labelled the countries with the lowest ETRs and up to 20% of each MNEs assets as 'low-tax'.Footnote 11

Similarly, we calculated the profit rate by country for each MNE group by dividing the total income by total assets. We weighted profit rates for each affiliate in a 'low-tax' country by the total assets in that country and combined them into an average profit rate for each MNEs 'low-tax' affiliates.

Next, we added up assets and income by affiliates to arrive at totals for each MNE group, and calculated the overall profit rate for each MNE by dividing the total income by total assets. To obtain relative profit rates for each MNE, we divided the profit rate for the low- tax countries where the group had affiliates by the profit rate for the MNE as a whole.

Finally, we weighted each relative profit rate by the MNEs assets and combined these to obtain an overall average relative profit rate.Footnote 12 We repeated the exercise for each year from 2011 to 2016. As with Indicator 2A, results were variable year- over- year and we chose to present them for the period as a whole.Footnote13

We also calculated a weighted overall average relative profit rate for the 25% of MNEs with the highest relative profitability.

Section 3: MNE vs 'comparable' non-MNE effective tax rate differentials

BEPS Indicator 3: Effective tax rates of MNEs relative to non-MNE entities with similar characteristics

Unlike other BEPS indicators which focus on activities that reduce net income in countries where tax rates are high, Indicator 3 is designed to detect whether MNEs take advantage of their capacity to shift income to other jurisdictions, to minimize their tax rate. Lower ETRs for MNEs may also reflect non-BEPS behaviours such as the decision to carry out substiantial activity to benefit from certain preferential tax treatments (e.g. R&D tax subsidies, investment tax credits).

The indicator compares ETRs for two types of MNEs operating in Canada to ETRs for comparable enterprises without subsidiaries or parents abroad.

Data sources: We used consolidated financial statements of enterprises operating in Canada from the Annual Financial Taxation Statistics program, specifically the financial variables total assets, net income before taxes, and federal tax payable for 2011 to 2016. These data are consolidated at the enterprise level and cover activities that are 'booked in Canada'.

We also used a new 'flag' to identify MNEsFootnote 14 which was developed in collaboration with Statistics Canada's International Accounts and Trade Division. It relies on tax data to identify MNEs with affiliates abroad, and the data collected under the Corporate Returns Act to identify enterprises with foreign parents.

Methodology: The methodology for this indicator is adapted from Indicator 4 in Action 11 of the OECD's BEPS Action Plan. The OECD study used data from unconsolidated financial statements of MNEs and non-MNEs worldwide (OECD 2015).

To recreate this indicator for Canada, we set up the data for analysis by labelling enterprises as 'large' if they had over 25 million in total assetsFootnote 15. Following OECD methodology, we dropped all observations with negative total assets, net income, and taxes.

We calculated ETRFootnote 16 and profit rate for each enterprise, and sorted enterprises into six groups based on their characteristics: non-MNEs or enterprises without affiliates abroad (large and small), and two types of MNEs: Canadian- owned enterprises with one or more foreign affiliates (large and small) and foreign- owned enterprises (large and small). To discover whether differences between these 6 groups were statistically significant, we ran a regression that controlled for industry and profitability.Footnote 17

We present our findings as the differential between ETRs for comparable MNEs and non-MNEs for 2016, because results were stable year-over-year.

Agriculture and Food Statistics

Agriculture and Food Statistics

Follow:

Sign up to My StatCan to get updates in real-time.

Indicators

Changing any selection will automatically update the page content.

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Canada ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Canada ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Alberta ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Alberta ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Saskatchewan ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Saskatchewan ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Manitoba ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Manitoba ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Quebec ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Quebec ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ New Brunswick ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ New Brunswick ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Nova Scotia ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Nova Scotia ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Prince Edward Island ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Prince Edward Island ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Newfoundland and Labrador ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Newfoundland and Labrador ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Ontario ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Ontario ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ British Columbia ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ British Columbia ~ ''; ?>

Releases

Find agriculture and food data and analytical products released in The Daily.

Census of Agriculture

The Census of Agriculture provides a statistical portrait of Canada's agriculture industry and its farm operators and families.

Crop condition

The Crop Condition Assessment Program (CCAP) interactive mapping application provides weekly cropland and pasture condition reports across Canada and the northern United States.

Food Statistics

The Food Statistics portal offers access to a centralized collection of information on food for human consumption in Canada by bringing together data, tools and reports.

Food Price Data Hub

The Food Price Data Hub features a variety of food price related statistics, articles and tools.

Custom services

Customized products and services

A variety of data products can be personalized to meet clients' special requirements. Contact us by filling out an online form or by email or telephone.

Feedback

What do you want to see on this page? Email infostats@statcan.gc.ca to let us know.

Education, training and learning statistics

Education, training and learning statistics

Follow:

Sign up to My StatCan to get updates in real-time.

The Canadian Centre for Education Statistics provides the latest information on education, training and learning by bringing together data, tools and reports.

This data portal offers access to a centralized collection of information on learners and the systems that support learning in Canada. These data are available thanks to the participation of Canadians in our surveys and our partnerships with provincial and territorial education authorities and organizations.

Key indicators

Changing any selection will automatically update the page content.

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Nunavut ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Nunavut ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Newfoundland and Labrador ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Newfoundland and Labrador ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Prince Edward Island ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Prince Edward Island ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ British Columbia ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ British Columbia ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Yukon ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Yukon ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Ontario ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Ontario ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Alberta ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Alberta ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Saskatchewan ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Saskatchewan ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Manitoba ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Manitoba ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Quebec ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Quebec ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Nova Scotia ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Nova Scotia ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ New Brunswick ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ New Brunswick ~ ''; ?>

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Northwest Territories ~ ''; ?>

More key indicators

Selected geographical area: ~ ' ' ~ Northwest Territories ~ ''; ?>

Education data visualization

Elementary to Postsecondary Student Education Dashboard: Enrolments, Graduations and Tuition Fees

The Elementary to Postsecondary Student Education Dashboard: Enrolments, Graduations and Tuition Fees comprehensive data visualization tool overviews counts of enrolments and graduations for elementary to postsecondary education. It also includes the cost of tuition for full-time studies at Canadian degree-granting postsecondary public institutions for the current academic year (September to April).

View all Education-related data visualizations.

Quality of Life Hub

Multiple education indicators are covered by the Prosperity domain of the Quality of Life Framework for Canada, such as Youth not in employment, education or training, and Postsecondary attainment. Find out more on the Quality of Life Hub.

Sustainable development goals

Goal 4 - Quality education

Goal 4 – Quality education of the Sustainable Development Goals is to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities.

The transition from school to work

The transition from school to work: the NEET (not in employment, education or training) indicator for 20 – to 24 year-olds in Canada

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the proportion of youth not in employment, education or training: A regional analysis and international perspective. Over the course of the pandemic, measures put in place to prevent the spread of COVID-19 posed unprecedented disruptions for youth aged 15 to 29 with the shift to virtual learning, loss of employment opportunities and the decline of mental health and wellbeing.

Client services

A variety of custom data products (e.g., tables, maps, etc.) can be personalized to meet clients' special requirements. Send us your custom requests by email at statcan.education-education.statcan@statcan.gc.ca.

What's trending in education?

Education, training and learning surveys and statistical programs

Complete list of surveys and statistical programs. Information on activities whose purpose is to develop knowledge, skills, understanding, and values.

Education and Labour Market Longitudinal Platform (ELMLP)

The Education and Labour Market Longitudinal Platform (ELMLP) is a platform of securely integrated anonymized datasets which are longitudinal and accessible for research and statistical purposes.

The Platform enables analysis of anonymized data on past cohorts of college/university students and registered apprentices, in order to better understand their pathways and how their education and training affected their career prospects in term of earnings.

Integrated datasets allow us to know more than what a single dataset or survey can provide. Datasets are integrated using an anonymous linkage key.

The data available within the Platform is also linkable longitudinally, allowing researchers to better understand the behaviours and outcomes of students and apprentices over time.

For more information, consult the Overview of the Education and Labour Market Longitudinal Platform and Associated Datasets and the ELMLP Technical Reference Guides, or browse findings available on the Statistics Canada website, including information on student pathways through postsecondary educationlabour market outcomes for college and university graduates, earnings and mobility indicators for newly certified journeypersons in Canada, and pathways indicators for registered apprentices in Canada.

2018 Annual Survey on Research and Development Expenditures and Personnel in Canadian Higher Education Sector Organizations

Why do we conduct this survey?

This survey's purpose is to collect information on the scientific activities of higher education sector organizations in Canada. This sector is composed of all universities, colleges of technology and other institutions providing formal tertiary education programs, as well as all research institutes, centres, experimental stations and clinics that are affiliated with higher education institutions.

The research and development expenditures and personnel information is used by federal, provincial and territorial governments and agencies, academics and international organizations for statistical analyses and policy purposes.

Your information may also be used by Statistics Canada for other statistical and research purposes.

Your participation in this survey is required under the authority of the Statistics Act.

Other important information

Authorization to collect this information

Data are collected under the authority of the Statistics Act, Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985, Chapter S-19.

Confidentiality

By law, Statistics Canada is prohibited from releasing any information it collects that could identify any person, business, or organization, unless consent has been given by the respondent, or as permitted by the Statistics Act. Statistics Canada will use the information from this survey for statistical purposes only.

Record linkages

To enhance the data from this survey and to reduce the reporting burden, Statistics Canada may combine the acquired data with information from other surveys or from administrative sources.

Data-sharing agreements

To reduce respondent burden, Statistics Canada has entered into data-sharing agreements with provincial and territorial statistical agencies and other government organizations, which have agreed to keep the data confidential and use them only for statistical purposes. Statistics Canada will only share data from this survey with those organizations that have demonstrated a requirement to use the data.

Section 11 of the Statistics Act provides for the sharing of information with provincial and territorial statistical agencies that meet certain conditions. These agencies must have the legislative authority to collect the same information, on a mandatory basis, and the legislation must provide substantially the same provisions for confidentiality and penalties for disclosure of confidential information as the Statistics Act. Because these agencies have the legal authority to compel respondents to provide the same information, consent is not requested and respondents may not object to the sharing of the data.

For this survey, there are Section 11 agreements with the provincial and territorial statistical agencies of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia and the Yukon. The shared data will be limited to information on in-house research and development expenditures (Question 18) and in-house research and development personnel (Question 26) pertaining to higher education sector organizations located within the jurisdiction of the respective province or territory.

Section 12 of the Statistics Act provides for the sharing of information with federal, provincial or territorial government organizations.

Under Section 12, you may refuse to share your information with any of these organizations by writing a letter of objection to the Chief Statistician, specifying the organizations with which you do not want Statistics Canada to share your data and mailing it to the following address:

Chief Statistician of Canada
Statistics Canada
Attention of Director, Enterprise Statistics Division
150 Tunney's Pasture Driveway
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0T6

You may also contact us by email at statcan.esdhelpdesk-dsebureaudedepannage.statcan@statcan.gc.ca or by fax at 613-951-6583.

For this survey, there are Section 12 agreements with the statistical agencies of Prince Edward Island, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. The shared data will be limited to information on in-house research and development expenditures (Question 18) and in-house research and development personnel (Question 26) pertaining to higher education sector organizations located within the jurisdiction of the respective province or territory.

Business or organization and contact information

1. Verify or provide the business or organization's legal and operating name and correct where needed.

Note: Legal name modifications should only be done to correct a spelling error or typo.

Legal Name

The legal name is one recognized by law, thus it is the name liable for pursuit or for debts incurred by the business or organization. In the case of a corporation, it is the legal name as fixed by its charter or the statute by which the corporation was created.
Modifications to the legal name should only be done to correct a spelling error or typo.
To indicate a legal name of another legal entity you should instead indicate it in question 3 by selecting 'Not currently operational' and then choosing the applicable reason and providing the legal name of this other entity along with any other requested information.

Operating Name

The operating name is a name the business or organization is commonly known as if different from its legal name. The operating name is synonymous with trade name.

  • Legal name:
  • Operating name (if applicable):

2. Verify or provide the contact information of the designated business or organization contact person for this questionnaire and correct where needed.

Note: The designated contact person is the person who should receive this questionnaire. The designated contact person may not always be the one who actually completes the questionnaire.

  • First name:
  • Last name:
  • Title:
  • Preferred language of communication:
    • English
    • French
  • Mailing address (number and street):
  • City:
  • Province, territory or state:
  • Postal code or ZIP code:
  • Country:
    • Canada
    • United States
  • Email address:
  • Telephone number (including area code):
  • Extension number (if applicable):
    The maximum number of characters is 10.
  • Fax number (including area code):

3. Verify or provide the current operational status of the business or organization identified by the legal and operating name above.

  • Operational
  • Not currently operational
    • Why is this business or organization not currently operational?
      • Seasonal operations
        • When did this business or organization close for the season? Date
        • When does this business or organization expect to resume operations? Date
      • Ceased operations
        • When did this business or organization cease operations? Date
        • Why did this business or organization cease operations?
          • Bankruptcy
          • Liquidation
          • Dissolution
          • Other
            Specify the other reasons for ceased operations
      • Sold operations
        • When was this business or organization sold? Date
        • What is the legal name of the buyer?
      • Amalgamated with other businesses or organizations
        • When did this business or organization amalgamate? Date
        • What is the legal name of the resulting or continuing business or organization?
        • What are the legal names of the other amalgamated businesses or organizations?
      • Temporarily inactive but will re-open
        • When did this business or organization become temporarily inactive? Date
        • When does this business or organization expect to resume operations? Date
        • Why is this business or organization temporarily inactive?
      • No longer operating due to other reasons
        • When did this business or organization cease operations? Date
        • Why did this business or organization cease operations?

4. Verify or provide the current main activity of the business or organization identified by the legal and operating name above.

Note: The described activity was assigned using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

This question verifies the business or organization's current main activity as classified by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS). The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is an industry classification system developed by the statistical agencies of Canada, Mexico and the United States. Created against the background of the North American Free Trade Agreement, it is designed to provide common definitions of the industrial structure of the three countries and a common statistical framework to facilitate the analysis of the three economies. NAICS is based on supply-side or production-oriented principles, to ensure that industrial data, classified to NAICS, are suitable for the analysis of production-related issues such as industrial performance.

The target entity for which NAICS is designed are businesses and other organizations engaged in the production of goods and services. They include farms, incorporated and unincorporated businesses and government business enterprises. They also include government institutions and agencies engaged in the production of marketed and non-marketed services, as well as organizations such as professional associations and unions and charitable or non-profit organizations and the employees of households.

The associated NAICS should reflect those activities conducted by the business or organizational units targeted by this questionnaire only, as identified in the 'Answering this questionnaire' section and which can be identified by the specified legal and operating name. The main activity is the activity which most defines the targeted business or organization's main purpose or reason for existence. For a business or organization that is for-profit, it is normally the activity that generates the majority of the revenue for the entity.

The NAICS classification contains a limited number of activity classifications; the associated classification might be applicable for this business or organization even if it is not exactly how you would describe this business or organization's main activity.

Please note that any modifications to the main activity through your response to this question might not necessarily be reflected prior to the transmitting of subsequent questionnaires and as a result they may not contain this updated information.

The following is the detailed description including any applicable examples or exclusions for the classification currently associated with this business or organization.

Description and examples

  • This is the current main activity
  • This is not the current main activity
    Provide a brief but precise description of this business or organization's main activity:
    e.g., breakfast cereal manufacturing, shoe store, software development

Main activity

5. You indicated that is not the current main activity. Was this business or organization's main activity ever classified as: ?

  • Yes
    When did the main activity change?
    Date:
  • No

6. Search and select the industry classification code that best corresponds to this business or organization's main activity.

Select this business or organization's activity sector (optional)

  • Farming or logging operation
  • Construction company or general contractor
  • Manufacturer
  • Wholesaler
  • Retailer
  • Provider of passenger or freight transportation
  • Provider of investment, savings or insurance products
  • Real estate agency, real estate brokerage or leasing company
  • Provider of professional, scientific or technical services
  • Provider of health care or social services
  • Restaurant, bar, hotel, motel or other lodging establishment
  • Other sector

7. You have indicated that the current main activity of this business or organization is: Main activity. Are there any other activities that contribute significantly (at least 10%) to this business or organization's revenue?

  • Yes, there are other activities
    Provide a brief but precise description of this business or organization's secondary activity:
    e.g., breakfast cereal manufacturing, shoe store, software development
  • No, that is the only significant activity

8. Approximately what percentage of this business or organization's revenue is generated by each of the following activities?

When precise figures are not available, provide your best estimates.

Approximately what percentage of this business or organization's revenue is generated by each of the following activities?
  Percentage of revenue
Main activity  
Secondary activity  
All other activities  
Total percentage  

Reporting period

1. What is the end date of this organization's fiscal year?

Note: For this survey, this organization's fiscal year end date should fall on or before August 31, 2019.

Here are some examples of fiscal periods that fall within the targeted dates:

May 1, 2017 to April 30, 2018
July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2018
October 1, 2017 to September 30, 2018
January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2018
February 1, 2018 to January 31, 2019
April 1, 2018 to March 31, 2019

Note: This fiscal year will be referred to as 2018 throughout the questionnaire.

Fiscal Year-End date:

Organization status

2. What is this organization's business number (e.g., GST number or charitable registration number)?

Business number (9-digit number):

3. Is this organization affiliated with a hospital, a university or a government agency or department?

  • Yes
  • No

4. In 2018, what were this organization's total expenditures within Canada?

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

If precise figures are not available, please provide your best estimate.

Total expenditures represent the total budget for all operations of this organization in the fiscal period. If 'total expenditures' cannot be calculated, total funds (from members, government programs and all other sources of funds) or total revenues can be provided.

CAN$ '000:

5. In 2018, what were this organization's total wages and salaries within Canada?

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

If precise figures are not available, please provide your best estimate.

CAN$ '000:

6. In 2018, what was the average number of employees in full-time equivalents (FTE) within Canada for this organization?

If precise figures are not available, please provide your best estimate in full-time equivalents (FTE).

Full-time equivalent (FTE)

The organization's personnel is composed of full-time and part-time employees.

Full-time equivalent (FTE) = Number of persons who work full-time for the organization + part-time workers.

Example calculation: If out of four employees, one works full-time for the organization and the remaining three devote only one quarter of their working time to the organization, then: FTE = 1 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 = 1.75 employees.

In-house research and development ( R&D ) expenditures

Before you begin

For this survey 'In-house R&D ' refers to:

Expenditures within Canada for R&D performed within this organization by:

  • employees (permanent, temporary or casual)
  • self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this organization's R&D projects.

'Payments for R&D performed by other organizations' refers to:

Payments made within or outside Canada to other organizations, individuals or companies to fund R&D performance:

  • grants
  • fellowships
  • contracts.

In-house research and development ( R&D ) expenditures

7. In 2018, did this organization have expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?

Exclude payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 13.

In-house refers to R&D which is performed on-site or within the organization's establishment. Exclude R&D expenses performed by other companies or organizations. A later question will collect these data.

Research and experimental development (R&D) comprise creative and systematic work undertaken in order to increase the stock of knowledge - including knowledge of humankind, culture and society - and to devise new applications of available knowledge.

R&D is performed in the natural sciences, engineering, social sciences and humanities. There are three types of R&D activities: basic research, applied research and experimental development.

Research work in the social sciences

Include if projects are employing new or significantly different modelling techniques or developing new formulae, analyzing data not previously available or applying new research techniques, development of community strategies for disease prevention or health education.

Exclude:

  • routine analytical projects using standard techniques and existing data
  • routine market research
  • routine statistical analysis intended for on-going monitoring of an activity.
  • Yes
  • No

8. In 2018, what were this organization's expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?

Exclude payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 13.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

Report '0' for no R&D expenditures.

In-house R&D expenditures are composed of current in-house R&D expenditures and capital in-house R&D expenditures.

Current in-house R&D expenditures

Include:

  • wages, salaries, benefits and fringe benefits, materials and supplies
  • services to support R&D, including on-site R&D consultants and contractors
  • necessary background literature
  • minor scientific equipment
  • associated administrative overhead costs.

a. Wages, salaries of permanent, temporary and casual R&D employees

Include benefits and fringe benefits of employees engaged in R&D activities. Benefits and fringe benefits include bonus payments, holiday or vacation pay, pension fund contributions, other social security payments, payroll taxes, etc.

b. Services to support R&D

Include:

  • payments to on-site R&D consultants and contractors working under the direct control of your organization
  • other services including indirect services purchased to support in-house R&D such as security, storage, repair, maintenance and use of buildings and equipment
  • computer services, software licensing fees and dissemination of R&D findings.

c. R&D materialsInclude:

  • water, fuel, gas and electricity
  • materials for creation of prototypes
  • reference materials (books, journals, etc.)
  • subscriptions to libraries and data bases, memberships to scientific societies, etc.
  • cost of outsourced (contracted out or granted) small R&D prototypes or R&D models
  • materials for laboratories (chemicals, animal, etc.)
  • all other R&D -related materials.

d. All other current R&D costs including overhead

Include administrative and overhead costs (e.g., office, post and telecommunications, internet, insurance), prorated if necessary to allow for non- R&D activities within the business.

Exclude:

  • interest charges
  • value-added taxes (goods and services tax (GST) or harmonized sales tax (HST)).

Capital in-house expenditures are the annual gross amount paid for the acquisition of fixed assets that are used repeatedly, or continuously in the performance of R&D for more than one year. Report capital in-house expenditures in full for the period when they occurred.

Include costs for software, land, buildings and structures, equipment, machinery and other capital costs.

Exclude capital depreciation.

e. SoftwareInclude applications and systems software (original, customized and off-the-shelf software), supporting documentation and other software-related acquisitions.

f. Land acquired for R&D including testing grounds, sites for laboratories and pilot plants.

g. Buildings and structures that are constructed or purchased for R&D activities or that have undergone major improvements, modifications, renovations and repairs for R&D activities.

h. Equipment, machinery and all other capital

Include major equipment, machinery and instruments, including embedded software, acquired for R&D activities.

In 2018, what were this organization's expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?
  CAN$ '000
2018 - Current in-house R&D expenditures within Canada  
a. Wages, salaries of permanent, temporary and casual R&D employees
Include fringe benefits.
 
b. Services to support R&D
Include services of self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this organization's R&D projects.
Exclude contracted out or granted expenditures to other organizations to perform R&D (report in question 13).
 
c. R&D materials  
d. All other current R&D costs
Include overhead costs.
 
2018 - Total current in-house R&D expenditures within Canada  
2018 - Capital in-house R&D expenditures within Canada  
e. Software
Exclude capital depreciation.
 
f. Land
Exclude capital depreciation.
 
g. Buildings and structures
Exclude capital depreciation.
 
h. Equipment, machinery and all other capital
Exclude capital depreciation.
 
2018 - Total capital in-house R&D expenditures within Canada  
2018 - Total in-house R&D expenditures within Canada  

9. In 2019 and 2020, does this organization plan to make expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?

Exclude payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 15.

Select all that apply.

Help text:

In-house R&D expenditures are composed of current in-house R&D expenditures and capital in-house R&D expenditures.

Research and experimental development R&D comprise creative and systematic work undertaken in order to icrease the stock of knowledge - including knowledge of humankind, culture and society - and to devise new applications of available knowledge.

  • Inclusions
    • Prototypes
      • Include design, construction and operation of prototypes, provided that the primary objective is to make furtherimprovements or to undertake technical testing.
      • Exclude if the prototype is for commercial purposes.
    • Pilot plants
      • Include construction and operation of pilot plants, provided that the primary objective is to make further imprements or to undertake technical testing.
      • Exclude if the pilot plant is intended to be operated for commercial purposes.
    • New computer software or significant improvements/modifications to existing computer softwar
      • Includes technological or scientific advances in theoretical computer sciences; operating systems e.g., improvement in interface management, developing new operating system of converting an existing operating system to a significantly different hardware environment; programming languages; and applications if a significant technological change occurs.
    • Contracts
      • Include all contracts which require R&D. For contracts which include other work, report only the R&D costs.
    • Research work in the social sciences
      • Include if projects are employing new or significantly different modelling techniques or developing new formulae analyzing data not previously available or applying new research techniques.
  • Exclusions
    • Routine analysis in the social sciences including policy-related studies, management studies and efficiency studies
      • Exclude analytical projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies, principles and models of the related social sciences to bear on a particular problem (e.g., commentary on the probable economic effects of a change in the tax structure, using existing economic data; use of standard techniques in applied psychology to select and classify industrial and military personnel, students, etc., and to test children with reading or other disabilities).
    • Consumer surveys, advertising, market research
      • Exclude projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies intended for commercialization of the results of R&D.
    • Routine quality control and testing
      • Exclude projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies not intended to ceate new knowledge, even if carried out by personnel normally engaged in R&D.
    • Pre-production activities such as demonstration of commercial viability, tooling up, trial production, trouble shooting
      • Although R&D may be required as a result of these steps, these activities are excluded.
    • Prospecting, exploratory drilling, development of mines, oil or gas wells
      • Include only if for R&D projects concerned with new equipment or techniques in these activities, such as in-situ and tertiary recovery research.
    • Engineering
      • Exclude engineering unless it is in direct support of R&D.
    • Design and drawing
      • Exclude design and drawing unless it is in direct support of R&D.
    • Patent and licence work
      • Exclude all administrative and legal work connected with patents and licences.
    • Cosmetic modifications or style changes to existing products
      • Exclude if no significant technical improvement or modification to the existing products has occurred.
    • General purpose or routine data collection
      • Exclude projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies intended for on-going monitoring of an activity.
    • Routine computer programming, systems maintenance or software application
      • Exclude projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies intended to support on-going operations.
    • Routine mathematical or statistical analysis or operations analysis
      • Exclude projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies intended for on-going monitoring of an activity.
    • Activities associated with standards compliance
      • Exclude projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies intended to support standards compliance.
    • Specialized routine medical care such as routine pathology services
      • Exclude projects of a routine nature, with established methodologies intended for on-going monitoring of an activity.

Response text:

  • In 2019
  • In 2020
  • No planned in-house R&D expenditures

10. In 2019, what are this organization's planned expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?

Exclude payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 15.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

If precise figures are not available, please provide your best estimate.

Report '0' for no R&D expenditures.

In 2019, what are this organization's planned expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?
  CAN$ '000
a. 2019 - Total current in-house R&D expenditures within Canada  
b. 2019 - Total capital in-house R&D expenditures within Canada
Exclude capital depreciation.
 

11. In 2020, what are this organization's planned expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?

Exclude payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 15.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

If precise figures are not available, please provide your best estimate.

Report '0' for no R&D expenditures.

In 2020, what are this organization's planned expenditures for R&D performed in-house within Canada?
  CAN$ '000
a. 2020 - Total current in-house R&D expenditures within Canada  
b. 2020 - Total capital in-house R&D expenditures within Canada
Exclude capital depreciation.
 

Payments for R&D performed by other organizations

12. In 2018, did this organization make payments to other organizations to perform R&D within Canada or outside Canada?

Include:

  • funding or grants provided to other organizations to perform R&D
  • contracted out expenditures for R&D.

Exclude services of self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this organization's R&D projects, which should be reported in question 8.

Select all that apply.

  • Within Canada
  • Outside Canada
  • No payment made to others to perform R&D

13. In 2018, what were this organization's R&D payments to other organizations within Canada or outside Canada?

Include:

  • funding or grants provided to other organizations to perform R&D
  • contracted out expenditures for R&D.

Exclude services of self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this organization's R&D projects, which should be reported in question 8.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

Report '0' for no R&D expenditures.

Include payments made through contracts, grants, donations and fellowships to another company, organization or individual to purchase or fund R&D activities.

Exclude expenditures for on-site R&D contractors.

Companies include all incorporated for-profit businesses and government business enterprises providing products in the market at market rates.

Private non-profit organizations include voluntary health organizations, private philanthropic foundations, associations and societies and research institutes. They are not-for-profit organizations that serve the public interest by supporting activities related to public welfare (such as health, education, the environment).

Industrial research institutes or associations include all non-profit organizations that serve the business sector, with industrial associations frequently consisting of their membership.

Federal government includes all federal government departments and agencies. It excludes federal government business enterprises providing products in the market.

Provincial or territorial governments include all provincial or territorial government ministries, departments and agencies. It excludes provincial or territorial government business enterprises providing products in the market.

Provincial or territorial research organizations are organizations created under provincial or territorial law which conduct or facilitate research on behalf of the province or territory.

Other organizations - individuals, non-university educational institutions, foreign governments including ministries, departments and agencies of foreign governments.

In 2018, what were this organization's R&D payments to other organizations within Canada or outside Canada?
  Within Canada
CAN$ '000
Outside Canada
CAN$ '000
a. Companies    
b. Other private non-profit organizations    
c. Industrial research institutes or associations    
d. Hospitals    
e. Universities    
f. Federal government departments and agencies    
g. Provincial or territorial government departments, ministries and agencies    
h. Provincial or territorial research organizations    
i. Other organizations
e.g., individuals, non-university educational institutions, foreign governments
   
2018 - Total payments for R&D performed by other organizations    

14. In 2019 and 2020, does this organization plan to make payments to other organizations to perform R&D ?

Include:

  • funding or grants provided to other organizations to perform R&D
  • contracted out expenditures for R&D.

Exclude services of self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this organization's R&D projects, which should be reported in questions 10 and 11.

Select all that apply.

  • In 2019
  • In 2020
  • No planned payments to others to perform R&D

15. In 2019 and 2020, what are this organization's planned payments to other organizations to perform R&D within Canada or outside Canada?

Include:

  • funding or grants provided to other organizations to perform R&D
  • contracted out expenditures for R&D .

Exclude services of self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this organization's R&D projects, which should be reported in questions 10 and 11.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

Report '0' for no R&D expenditures.

Include payments made through contracts, grants, donations and fellowships to another company, organization or individual to purchase or fund R&D activities.

Exclude services of self-employed individuals or contractors who are working on-site on this organisation's R&D projects, which should have been reported earlier in the section "In-house research and development (R&D) expenditures".

In 2019 and 2020, what are this organization's planned payments to other organizations to perform R&D within Canada or outside Canada?
  Within Canada
CAN$ '000
Outside Canada
CAN$ '000
a. 2019    
b. 2020    

Summary of R&D expenditures from 2018 to 2020

16. Summary of R&D expenditures from 2018 to 2020

Summary of R&D expenditures from 2018 to 2020
  2018
CAN$ '000
2019
CAN$ '000
2020
CAN$ '000
Total current in-house R&D expenditures within Canada      
Total capital in-house R&D expenditures within Canada      
Total in-house R&D expenditures within Canada      
Total payments for R&D performed by other organizations      
Total R&D expenditures      

Geographic distribution of in-house R&D expenditures within Canada in 2018

17. In 2018, in which provinces or territories did this organization have expenditures for R&D performed in-house?

Exclude:

  • payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 13
  • capital depreciation.

Select all that apply.

  • Newfoundland and Labrador
  • Prince Edward Island
  • Nova Scotia
  • New Brunswick
  • Quebec
  • Ontario
  • Manitoba
  • Saskatchewan
  • Alberta
  • British Columbia
  • Yukon
  • Northwest Territories
  • Nunavut

18. In 2018, how were this organization's total expenditures for R&D performed in-house distributed by province or territory?

Exclude:

  • payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 13
  • capital depreciation.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

For in-house R&D activities on federal lands, please include in the closest province or territory.

In 2018, how were this organization's total expenditures for R&D performed in-house distributed by province or territory?
  Current in-house R&D expenditures
CAN$ '000
Capital in-house R&D expenditures
CAN$ '000
a. Newfoundland and Labrador    
b. Prince Edward Island    
c. Nova Scotia    
d. New Brunswick    
e. Quebec    
f. Ontario    
g. Manitoba    
h. Saskatchewan    
i. Alberta    
j. British Columbia    
k. Yukon    
l. Northwest Territories    
m. Nunavut    
2018 - Total current and capital in-house R&D expenditures    
2018 - Total current and capital in-house R&D expenditures previously reported from question 8    

Sources of funds for in-house R&D expenditures in 2018

19. In 2018, what were the sources of funds for this organization's total expenditures for R&D performed in-house?

Include Canadian and foreign sources.

Exclude:

  • payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 13
  • capital depreciation.

Select all that apply.

Help text:

  • Funds from this organization
    • Amount contributed by this organization to R&D performed within Canada (include interest payments and other income).
  • Federal government grants or funding
    • Funds from the federal government in support of R&D activities not connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • Federal government contracts
    • Funds from the federal government in support of R&D activities connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • Provincial or territorial government grants or funding
    • Funds from the provincial or territorial government in support of R&D activities not connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • Provincial or territorial government contracts
    • Funds from the provincial or territorial government in support of R&D activities connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • R&D contract work for private non-profit organizations
    • Funds received from non-profit organizations to perform R&D on their behalf.
  • Other sources
    • Funds received from all other sources not previously classified.

Response text:

Funds from this organization

Include interest payments, fundraising and other income.

Companies

Federal government grants or funding

Include R&D grants or funding or R&D portion only of other grants or funding.

Federal government contracts

Include R&D contracts or R&D portion only of other contracts.

Provincial or territorial government grants or funding

From which province or territory did this organization receive provincial or territorial government R&D grants or funding?

Select all that apply.

  • Newfoundland and Labrador
  • Prince Edward Island
  • Nova Scotia
  • New Brunswick
  • Quebec
  • Ontario
  • Manitoba
  • Saskatchewan
  • Alberta
  • British Columbia
  • Yukon
  • Northwest Territories
  • Nunavut

Provincial or territorial government contracts

From which province or territory did this organization receive provincial or territorial government R&D contracts?

Select all that apply.

  • Newfoundland and Labrador
  • Prince Edward Island
  • Nova Scotia
  • New Brunswick
  • Quebec
  • Ontario
  • Manitoba
  • Saskatchewan
  • Alberta
  • British Columbia
  • Yukon
  • Northwest Territories
  • Nunavut

Private non-profit organizations

Other sources

e.g., universities, foreign governments, individuals

20. In 2018, what were the sources of funds for this organization's total expenditures of [amount] for R&D performed in-house?

Exclude:

  • payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 13
  • capital depreciation.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

Report '0' for no R&D expenditures.

  • Funds from this organization
    • Amount contributed by this unit to R&D performed within Canada (include interest payments and other income).
  • Federal government grants or funding
    • Funds from the federal government in support of R&D activities not connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • Federal government contracts
    • Funds from the federal government in support of R&D activities connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • Provincial or territorial government grants or funding
    • Funds from the provincial or territorial government in support of R&D activities not connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • Provincial or territorial government contracts
    • Funds from the provincial or territorial government in support of R&D activities connected to a specific contractual deliverable.
  • R&D contract work for private non-profit organizations
    • Funds received from non-profit organizations to perform R&D on their behalf.
  • Other sources
    • Funds received from all other sources not previously classified.
In 2018, what were the sources of funds for this organization's total expenditures of [amount] for R&D performed in-house?
  Canada
CAN$ '000
Foreign
CAN$ '000
a. Funds from this organization
Include interest payments, fundraising and other income.
   
b. Companies    
c. Federal government grants or funding
Include R&D grants or funding or R&D portion only of other grants or funding.
   
d. Federal government contracts
Include R&D contracts or R&D portion only of other contracts.
   
Provincial or territorial government grants or funding    
e. Newfoundland and Labrador    
f. Prince Edward Island    
g. Nova Scotia    
h. New Brunswick    
i. Quebec    
j. Ontario    
k. Manitoba    
l. Saskatchewan    
m. Alberta    
n. British Columbia    
o. Yukon    
p. Northwest Territories    
q. Nunavut    
Provincial or territorial government contracts    
r. Newfoundland and Labrador    
s. Prince Edward Island    
t. Nova Scotia    
u. New Brunswick    
v. Quebec    
w. Ontario    
x. Manitoba    
y. Saskatchewan    
z. Alberta    
aa. British Columbia    
ab. Yukon    
ac. Northwest Territories    
ad. Nunavut    
Private non-profit organizations    
ae. Organization 1
GST number (9-digit business number (BN) or charitable registration number):
Organization name:
   
af. Organization 2
GST number (9-digit business number (BN) or charitable registration number):
Organization name:
   
ag. Organization 3
GST number (9-digit business number (BN) or charitable registration number):
Organization name:
   
ah. Other sources
e.g., universities, foreign governments, individuals
   
2018 - Total in-house R&D expenditures by sources of funds by origin    
2018 - Total in-house R&D expenditures (Canadian and foreign sources)    
Total in-house R&D expenditures previously reported from question 8    

Fields of research and development for in-house R&D expenditures within Canada in 2018

21. In 2018, how were this organization's total expenditures of [amount] for R&D performed in-house within Canada distributed by fields of research and development?

Exclude:

  • payments for R&D performed by others (e.g., funding, grants or contracted out R&D expenditures), which should be reported in question 13
  • capital depreciation.

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

Report '0' for no R&D expenditures.

Fields of research and development

Medical and health sciences

  • Basic medicine
    • Anatomy and morphology (plant science under Biological science), human genetics, immunology, neurosciences, pharmacology and pharmacy and medicinal chemistry, toxicology, physiology and cytology, pathology.
  • Clinical medicine
    • Andrology, obstetrics and gynaecology, paediatrics, cardiac and cardiovascular systems, haematology, anaesthesiology, orthopaedics, radiology and nuclear medicine, dentistry, oral surgery and medicine, dermatology, venereal diseases and allergy, rheumatology, endocrinology and metabolism and gastroenterology, urology and nephrology and oncology.
  • Health sciences
    • Health care sciences and nursing, nutrition and dietetics, infectious diseases and epidemiology, parasitology and occupational health.
  • Medical biotechnology
    • Health-related biotechnology, technologies involving the manipulation of cells, tissues, organs or the whole organism, technologies involving identifying the functioning of DNA, proteins and enzymes, pharmacogenomics, gene-based therapeutics, biomaterials (related to medical implants, devices, sensors).
  • Other medical sciences
    • Forensic science and other medical sciences.

Natural and formal sciences

  • mathematics
  • physical sciences
  • chemical sciences
  • earth and related environmental sciences
  • biological sciences
  • other natural sciences.

Engineering and technology

  • civil engineering
  • electrical engineering, electronic engineering and communications technology
  • mechanical engineering
  • chemical engineering
  • materials engineering
  • medical engineering
  • environmental engineering
  • environmental biotechnology
  • industrial biotechnology
  • nanotechnology
  • other engineering and technologies.

Software-related sciences and technologies

  • software engineering and technology
  • computer sciences
  • information technology and bioinformatics.

Agricultural sciences

  • agriculture, forestry and fisheries sciences
  • animal and dairy sciences
  • veterinary sciences
  • agricultural biotechnology
  • other agricultural sciences.

Social sciences and humanities

  • psychology
  • educational sciences
  • economics and business
  • other social sciences
  • humanities.
In 2018, how were this organization's total expenditures of [amount] for R&D performed in-house within Canada distributed by fields of research and development?
  CAN$ '000
Medical and health sciences  
a. Basic medicine  
b. Clinical medicine  
c. Health sciences  
d. Medical biotechnology  
e. Other medical sciences  
Total medical and health sciences  
Other fields of research and development  
f. Natural and formal sciences  
g. Engineering and technology  
h. Software-related sciences and technologies  
i. Agricultural sciences  
j. Social sciences and humanities  
2018 - Total in-house R&D expenditures within Canada by field of research and development  
Total in-house R&D expenditures previously reported from question 8  

Nature of R&D for in-house R&D expenditures within Canada in 2018

22. In 2018, how were this organization's total expenditures of [amount] for R&D performed in-house within Canada distributed by nature of R&D?

Basic research is experimental or theoretical work undertaken primarily to acquire new knowledge of the underlying foundation of phenomena and observable facts, without any particular application or use in view.

Applied research is original investigation undertaken in order to acquire new knowledge. It is, however, directed primarily towards a specific, practical aim or objective.

Experimental development is systematic work, drawing on existing knowledge gained from research and practical experience and producing additional knowledge, which is directed to producing new products or processes or to improving existing products or processes.

(OECD 2015. Frascati Manual: Proposed Standard for Surveys on Research and Experimental Development, 2015)

In 2018, how were this organization's total expenditures of [amount] for R&D performed in-house within Canada distributed by nature of R&D?
  Percentage of total in-house R&D expenditures
a. Basic research  
b. Applied research  
c. Experimental development  
Total percentage
Total should equal 100%
 

Results of R&D expenditures from 2016 to 2018

23. During the three (3) years 2016, 2017 and 2018, did this organization's total expenditures for R&D performed in-house and payments for R&D made within or outside Canada lead to new or significant improvements to the following?

Goods

Goods developed through new knowledge from research discoveries include determination of effectiveness of existing treatment protocols, establishment of new treatment protocols (including diagnostic procedures, tests and protocols), and creation of new service delivery models and reference tools (including electronic applications).

During the three (3) years 2016, 2017 and 2018, did this organization's total expenditures for R&D performed in-house and payments for R&D made within or outside Canada lead to new or significant improvements to the following?
  Yes No
a. Goods
Include goods developed through new knowledge from research discoveries.
   
b. Services
Include on-going knowledge transfer to physicians, first responders, patients and the general public.
   
c. Methods of manufacturing or producing goods and services    
d. Logistics, delivery or distribution methods for this organization's inputs, goods or services    
e. Supporting activities for this organization's processes, such as maintenance systems or operations for purchasing, accounting or computing    

In-house R&D personnel in 2018

24. In 2018, how many in-house R&D personnel within Canada did this organization have in the following R&D occupations?

Full-time equivalent (FTE)

R&D may be carried out by persons who work solely on R&D projects or by persons who devote only part of their time to R&D, and the balance to other activities such as testing, quality control and production engineering. To arrive at the total effort devoted to R&D in terms of personnel, it is necessary to estimate the full-time equivalent of these persons working only part-time in R&D.

Full-time equivalent (FTE) = Number of persons who work solely on R&D projects + the time of persons working only part of their time on R&D.

Example calculation: If out of four scientists engaged in R&D work, one works solely on R&D projects and the remaining three devote only one quarter of their working time to R&D, then: FTE = 1 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 = 1.75 scientists.

R&D personnel

Include:

  • permanent, temporary and casual R&D employees
  • independent on-site R&D consultants and contractors working in your organization's offices, laboratories, or other facilities
  • employees engaged in R&D -related support activities.

Researchers and research managers are composed of:

  • Scientists, social scientists, engineers and researchers are professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge. They conduct research and improve or develop concepts, theories, models, techniques instrumentation, software or operational methods. They may be certified by provincial or territorial educational authorities, provincial, territorial or national scientific or engineering associations.
  • Senior research managers plan or manage R&D projects and programs. They may be certified by provincial or territorial educational authorities, provincial, territorial or national scientific or engineering associations.

R&D technical, administrative and support staff are composed of:

  • Technicians and technologists and research assistants are persons whose main tasks require technical knowledge and experience in one or more fields of engineering, the physical and life sciences, or the social sciences, humanities and the arts. They participate in R&D by performing scientific and technical tasks involving the application of concepts, operational methods and the use of research equipment, normally under the supervision of researchers. They may be certified by provincial or territorial educational authorities, provincial, territorial or national scientific or engineering associations.
  • Other R&D technical, administrative support staff include skilled and unskilled craftsmen, and administrative, secretarial and clerical staff participating in R&D projects or directly associated with such projects.

On-site R&D consultants and contractors are individuals hired 1) to perform project-based work or to provide goods at a fixed or ascertained price or within a certain time or 2) to provide advice or services in a specialized field for a fee and, in both cases, work at the location specified and controlled by the contracting company or organization.

In 2018, how many in-house R&D personnel within Canada did this organization have in the following R&D occupations?
  Number of full-time equivalents
Researchers and research managers  
a. Scientists, social scientists, engineers and researchers
Include software developers and programmers.
 
b. Senior research managers  
Total researchers and research managers  
R&D technical, administrative and support staff  
c. Technicians, technologists and research assistants
Include software technicians.
 
d. Other R&D technical, administrative and support staff  
Total R&D technical, administrative and support staff  
Other R&D occupations  
e. On-site R&D consultants and contractors  
Total in-house R&D personnel within Canada  

25. Of this organization's total in-house R&D personnel reported above, what percentage performed software-related activities?

Software-related sciences and technologies

  • Software engineering and technology: computer software engineering, computer software technology and other related computer software engineering and technologies.
  • Computer sciences: computer science, artificial intelligence, cryptography and other related computer sciences.
  • Information technology and bioinformatics: information technology, informatics, bioinformatics, biomathematics and other related information technologies.

Percentage of software-related activities:

26. In 2018, how were the [amount] total in-house R&D personnel distributed by province or territory?

Please report in full-time equivalents (FTE).

R&D personnel

Include:

  • permanent, temporary and casual R&D employees
  • independent on-site R&D consultants and contractors working in your organization's offices, laboratories, or other facilities
  • employees engaged in R&D -related support activities.

Researchers and research managers are composed of:

  • Scientists, social scientists, engineers and researchers are professionals engaged in the conception or creation of new knowledge. They conduct research and improve or develop concepts, theories, models, techniques instrumentation, software or operational methods. They may be certified by provincial or territorial educational authorities, provincial, territorial or national scientific or engineering associations.
  • Senior research managers plan or manage R&D projects and programs. They may be certified by provincial or territorial educational authorities, provincial, territorial or national scientific or engineering associations.

R&D technical, administrative and support staff are composed of:

  • Technicians and technologists and research assistants are persons whose main tasks require technical knowledge and experience in one or more fields of engineering, the physical and life sciences, or the social sciences, humanities and the arts. They participate in R&D by performing scientific and technical tasks involving the application of concepts, operational methods and the use of research equipment, normally under the supervision of researchers. They may be certified by provincial educational authorities, provincial or national scientific or engineering associations
  • Other R&D technical, administrative support staff include skilled and unskilled craftsmen, and administrative, secretarial and clerical staff participating in R&D projects or directly associated with such projects.

On-site R&D consultants and contractors are individuals hired 1) to perform project-based work or to provide goods at a fixed or ascertained price or within a certain time or 2) to provide advice or services in a specialized field for a fee and, in both cases, work at the location specified and controlled by the contracting company or organization.

Full-time equivalent (FTE)

R&D may be carried out by persons who work solely on R&D projects or by persons who devote only part of their time to R&D, and the balance to other activities such as testing, quality control and production engineering. To arrive at the total effort devoted to R&D in terms of personnel, it is necessary to estimate the full-time equivalent of these persons working only part-time in R&D.
FTE (full-time equivalent) = Number of persons who work solely on R&D projects + the time of persons working only part of their time on R&D.

Example calculation: If out of four scientists engaged in R&D work, one works solely on R&D projects and the remaining three devote only one quarter of their working time to R&D, then: FTE = 1 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 = 1.75 scientists.

In 2018, how were the [amount] total in-house R&D personnel distributed by province or territory?
  Number of researchers and research managers Number of R&D technical, administrative and support staff Number of on-site R&D consultants and contractors
a. Newfoundland and Labrador      
b. Prince Edward Island      
c. Nova Scotia      
d. New Brunswick      
e. Quebec      
f. Ontario      
g. Manitoba      
h. Saskatchewan      
i. Alberta      
j. British Columbia      
k. Yukon      
l. Northwest Territories      
m. Nunavut      
Total in-house R&D personnel within Canada      
Total R&D personnel previously reported from question 24      

Technology and technical assistance payments in 2018

27. In 2018, did this organization make or receive payments inside or outside Canada for the following technology and technical assistance?

Technology and technical assistance payments

Definitions (equivalent to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office)

  1. Patent
    Government grant giving the right to exclude others from making, using or selling an invention.
  2. Copyright
    Legal protection for literary, artistic, dramatic or musical works, computer programs, performer's performances, sound recordings, and communication signals.
  3. Trademark
    A word, symbol or design, or combination of these, used to distinguish goods or services of one person or organization from those of others in the marketplace.
  4. Industrial design
    Legal protection against imitation of the shape, pattern, or ornamentation of an object.
  5. Integrated circuit topography
    Three-dimensional configurations of the elements and interconnections embodied in an integrated circuit product.
  6. Original software
    Computer programs and descriptive materials for both systems and applications. Original software can be created in-house or outsourced and includes packaged software with customization.
  7. Packaged or off-the-shelf software
    Packaged software purchased for organizational use and excludes software with customization.
  8. Databases
    Data files organized to permit effective access and use of the data.
In 2018, did this organization make or receive payments inside or outside Canada for the following technology and technical assistance?
  Made Payments Received Payments Both made and received payments Not applicable
a. Patents        
b. Copyrights        
c. Trademarks        
d. Industrial designs        
e. Integrated circuit topography        
f. Original software        
g. Packaged or off-the-shelf software        
h. Databases
Useful life exceeding one year
       
i. Other technology and technical assistance
Include technical assistance, industrial processes and know-how.
       

28. In 2018, how much did this organization pay to other organizations for technology and technical assistance?

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

Report '1' for payments made between $1 and $999.

Technology and technical assistance payments

Definitions (equivalent to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office)

  1. Patent
    Government grant giving the right to exclude others from making, using or selling an invention.
  2. Copyright
    Legal protection for literary, artistic, dramatic or musical works, computer programs, performer's performances, sound recordings, and communication signals.
  3. Trademark
    A word, symbol or design, or combination of these, used to distinguish goods or services of one person or organization from those of others in the marketplace.
  4. Industrial design
    Legal protection against imitation of the shape, pattern, or ornamentation of an object.
  5. Integrated circuit topography
    Three-dimensional configurations of the elements and interconnections embodied in an integrated circuit product.
  6. Original software
    Computer programs and descriptive materials for both systems and applications. Original software can be created in-house or outsourced and includes packaged software with customization.
  7. Packaged or off-the-shelf software
    Packaged software purchased for organizational use and excludes software with customization.
  8. Databases
    Data files organized to permit effective access and use of the data.
In 2018, how much did this organization pay to other organizations for technology and technical assistance?
  Payments made within Canada
CAN$ '000
Payments made outside Canada
CAN$ '000
Payments made to affiliated organizations    
a. Patents    
b. Copyrights    
c. Trademarks    
d. Industrial designs    
e. Integrated circuit topography    
f. Original software    
g. Packaged or off-the-shelf software    
h. Databases
Useful life exceeding one year
   
i. Other technology and technical assistance
Include technical assistance, industrial processes and know-how.
   
Total payments made to affiliated organizations    
Payments made to other organizations, companies or individuals    
j. Patents    
k. Copyrights    
l. Trademarks    
m. Industrial designs    
n. Integrated circuit topography    
o. Original software    
p. Packaged or off-the-shelf software    
q. Databases
Useful life exceeding one year
   
r. Other technology and technical assistance
Include technical assistance, industrial processes and know-how.
   
Total payments made to other organizations, companies or individuals    
Total payments made to other organizations for technology and technical assistance    

29. In 2018, how much did this organization receive from other organizations for technology and technical assistance?

Please report all amounts in thousands of Canadian dollars.

Report '1' for payments received between $1 and $999.

Technology and technical assistance payments

Definitions (equivalent to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office)

  1. Patent
    Government grant giving the right to exclude others from making, using or selling an invention.
  2. Copyright
    Legal protection for literary, artistic, dramatic or musical works, computer programs, performer's performances, sound recordings, and communication signals.
  3. Trademark
    A word, symbol or design, or combination of these, used to distinguish goods or services of one person or organization from those of others in the marketplace.
  4. Industrial design
    Legal protection against imitation of the shape, pattern, or ornamentation of an object.
  5. Integrated circuit topography
    Three-dimensional configurations of the elements and interconnections embodied in an integrated circuit product.
  6. Original software
    Computer programs and descriptive materials for both systems and applications. Original software can be created in-house or outsourced and includes packaged software with customization.
  7. Packaged or off-the-shelf software
    Packaged software purchased for organizational use and excludes software with customization.
  8. Databases
    Data files organized to permit effective access and use of the data.
In 2018, how much did this organization receive from other organizations for technology and technical assistance?
  Payments received from within Canada
CAN$ '000
Payments received from outside Canada
CAN$ '000
Payments received from affiliated organizations    
a. Patents    
b. Copyrights    
c. Trademarks    
d. Industrial designs    
e. Integrated circuit topography    
f. Original software    
g. Packaged or off-the-shelf software    
h. Databases
Useful life exceeding one year
   
i. Other technology and technical assistance
Include technical assistance, industrial processes and know-how.
   
Total payments received from affiliated organizations    
Payments received from other organizations, companies or individuals    
j. Patents    
k. Copyrights    
l. Trademarks    
m. Industrial designs    
n. Integrated circuit topography    
o. Original software    
p. Packaged or off-the-shelf software    
q. Databases
Useful life exceeding one year
   
r. Other technology and technical assistance
Include technical assistance, industrial processes and know-how.
   
Total payments received from other organizations, companies or individuals    
Total payments received from other organizations for technology and technical assistance    

Notification of intent to web scrape

30. Does this business have a website?

Notification of intent to extract web data

Statistics Canada is piloting a web data extraction initiative, also known as web scraping, which uses software to search and compile publicly available data from organizational websites. As a result, we may visit the website for this organization to search for, and compile, additional information. This initiative should allow us to reduce the reporting burden on organizations, as well as produce additional statistical indicators to ensure that our data remain accurate and relevant.

We will do our utmost to ensure the data are collected in a manner that will not affect the functionality of the website. Any data collected will be used by Statistics Canada for statistical and research purposes only, in accordance with the agency's mandate.

For more information regarding Statistics Canada's web scraping initiative, please visit About us.

To learn more about Statistics Canada's transparency and accountability, please visit Transparency and accountability.

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact Statistics Canada Client Services, toll-free at 1-877-949-9492 (TTY: 1-855-382-7745) or by email at infostats@canada.ca. For more information regarding this survey, please visit Information for survey participants.

Changes or events

1. Indicate any changes or events that affected the reported values for this business or organization, compared with the last reporting period.

Select all that apply.

  • Outsourcing of R&D project(s)
  • Initiation of new R&D project(s)
  • Completion of existing R&D project(s)
  • Major change in funding of R&D project(s) (loss of funding)
  • Major change in funding of R&D project(s) (increase in funding)
  • Organizational change that affected R&D activities (expansion, reduction, restructuring)
  • Economic change that affected R&D activities
  • Lack of availability of qualified R&D personnel
  • Other reason
    Specify the other changes or events:
  • No changes or events

Contact person

1. Statistics Canada may need to contact the person who completed this questionnaire for further information. Is [Provided Given Names], [Provided Family Name] the best person to contact?

  • Yes
  • No

Who is the best person to contact about this questionnaire?

  • First name:
  • Last name:
  • Title:
  • Email address:
  • Telephone number (including area code):
  • Extension number (if applicable):
    The maximum number of characters is 5.
  • Fax number (including area code):

Feedback

1. How long did it take to complete this questionnaire?

Include the time spent gathering the necessary information.

  • Hours:
  • Minutes:

2. Do you have any comments about this questionnaire?

Annual Miller's Survey - 2018-2019

Introduction

Survey purpose

This survey collects information on grains milled, production of flour and offal as well as stocks. Data collected are part of the supply-disposition statistics of major grains and allow the calculation of the domestic disappearance of grains for human use. These data are used by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, provincial governments and industry associations.

Your information may also be used by Statistics Canada for other statistical and research purposes.

Security of emails and faxes

Statistics Canada advises you that there could be a risk of disclosure during facsimile or email. However upon receipt, Statistics Canada will provide the guaranteed level of protection afforded all information collected under the authority of the Statistics Act.

Note: Our online questionnaires are secure, there is no risk of data interception when responding to Statistics Canada online surveys.

Confidentiality

The Statistics Act protects the confidentiality of information collected by Statistics Canada.

Data-sharing agreements

To reduce respondent burden, Statistics Canada has entered into data-sharing agreements with provincial and territorial statistical agencies and other government organizations, which have agreed to keep the data confidential and use them only for statistical purposes.

Information on confidentiality, data-sharing agreements and record linkages can be found on the last page of this questionnaire.

Reporting instructions

Please print in ink.

Business or organization and contact information

1. Verify or provide the business or organization's legal and operating name and correct where needed.

Note: Legal name modifications should only be done to correct a spelling error or typo.

  • Legal name
  • Operating name (if applicable)

2. Verify or provide the contact information of the designated business or organization contact person for this questionnaire and correct where needed.

Note: The designated contact person is the person who should receive this questionnaire. The designated contact person may not always be the one who actually completes the questionnaire.

  • First name
  • Last name
  • Title
  • Preferred language of communication
    • English
    • French
  • Mailing address (number and street)
  • City
  • Province, territory or state
  • Postal code or ZIP code
    Example: A9A 9A9 or 12345-1234
  • Country
  • Email address
    Example: user@example.gov.ca
  • Telephone number (including area code)
    Example: 123-123-1234
  • Extension number
    (if applicable)
  • Fax number (including area code)
    Example: 123-123-1234

3. Verify or provide the current operational status of the business or organization identified by the legal and operating name above.

  1. Operational - Go to question 4
  2. Not currently operational
    e.g., temporarily or permanently closed, change of ownership

Why is this business or organization not currently operational?

  • Seasonal operations - Go to question 3a.
  • Ceased operations - Go to question 3b.
  • Sold operations - Go to question 3c.
  • Amalgamated with other businesses or organizations - Go to question 3d.
  • Temporarily inactive but will re-open - Go to question 3e.
  • No longer operating due to other reasons - Go to question 3f.
  • 3a. Seasonal operations
    • When did this business or organization close for the season?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • When does this business or organization expect to resume operations?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • Go to question 4
  • 3b. Ceased operations
    • When did this business or organization cease operations?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • Why did this business or organization cease operations?
      • Bankruptcy
      • Liquidation
      • Dissolution
      • Other - Specify the other reasons why the operations ceased
    • Go to question 4
  • 3c. Sold operations
    • When was this business or organization sold?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • What is the legal name of the buyer?
    • Go to question 4
  • 3d. Amalgamated with other businesses or organizations
    • When did this business or organization amalgamate?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • What is the legal name of the resulting or continuing business or organization?
    • What are the legal names of the other amalgamated businesses or organizations?
    • Go to question 4
  • 3e. Temporarily inactive but will re-open
    • When did this business or organization become temporarily inactive?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • When does this business or organization expect to resume operations?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • Why is this business or organization temporarily inactive?
    • Go to question 4
  • 3f. No longer operating due to other reasons
    • When did this business or organization cease operations?
      Date - YYYY/MM/DD
    • Why did this business or organization cease operations?

4. Verify or provide the current main activity of the business or organization identified by the legal and operating name.

Note: The described activity was assigned using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

  1. This is the current main activity. - Go to next section
  2. This is not the current main activity.
    • Please provide a brief but precise description of this business or organization's main activity.
      e.g., breakfast cereal manufacturing, shoe store, software development

5. Was this business or organization's main activity ever classified as:

  1. Yes
  2. No - Go to next section

6. When did the main activity change?

Date - YYYY/MM/DD

Operational capacity

1. How many days was this facility in operation in the reference period?

Number of days

2. Please indicate in metric tonnes, the maximum milling capacity of this facility for a typical production day.

Metric tonnes

Wheat milled for the production of flour and other wheat products

3. For the reference period, was wheat milled for the production of flour at this facility?

  1. Yes
  2. No

4. For the reference period, was wheat milled for the production of other wheat products?

  1. Yes
  2. No

Wheat milled for the production of flour

5. For the reference period, what were the quantities of wheat milled for the production of flour at this facility and the year-end wheat stocks?

Include only wheat stocks in bins and storage not licensed with the Canadian Grain Commission.

Exclude wheat stocks owned by your company in elevators licensed by the Canadian Grain Commission.

  1. Canadian Western Red Spring (CWRS) - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Canadian Western Red Winter (CWRW) - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Canadian Western Soft White Spring (CWSWS) - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  4. Canadian Western Amber Durum (CWAD) - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  5. Canadian Prairie Spring (Red or White) - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  6. Canadian Western Hard White Spring (CWHWS) - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  7. Ontario Winter Wheat - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  8. Ontario Spring Wheat - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  9. Quebec Winter Wheat - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  10. Quebec Spring Wheat - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  11. All other wheat — specify all other wheat - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  12. Imports — wheat excluding durum - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  13. Imports — durum wheat - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total — wheat – Excluding imports - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  1. Canadian Western Red Spring (CWRS) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Canadian Western Red Winter (CWRW) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  3. Canadian Western Soft White Spring (CWSWS) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  4. Canadian Western Amber Durum (CWAD) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  5. Canadian Prairie Spring (Red or White) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  6. Canadian Western Hard White Spring (CWHWS) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  7. Ontario Winter Wheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  8. Ontario Spring Wheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  9. Quebec Winter Wheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  10. Quebec Spring Wheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  11. All other wheat — specify all other wheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  12. Imports — wheat excluding durum - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  13. Imports — durum wheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
    Total — wheat – Excluding imports - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Wheat flour production and year-end stocks

6. For the reference period, what were the quantities of flour produced at this facility and the year-end stocks?

Grade of flour

  1. Spring No. 1 or top patent - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. Spring No. 2 patent - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  3. Spring No. 3 patent - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  4. Whole wheat - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  5. Graham flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  6. Soft wheat flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  7. Durum semolina and flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  8. Lower grades of flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  9. All other grades of flour — specify all other grades of flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
    Total — flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Spring No. 1 or top patent - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Spring No. 2 patent - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  3. Spring No. 3 patent - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  4. Whole wheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  5. Graham flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  6. Soft wheat flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  7. Durum semolina and flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  8. Lower grades of flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  9. All other grades of flour — specify all other grades of flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
    Total — flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Wheat millfeeds produced

7. For the reference period, what was the quantity of wheat millfeeds produced at this facility and the year-end millfeeds stocks?

  1. Quantity produced (metric tonnes)
  2. Stocks at year-end (metric tonnes)

Grains and non-grains milled

8. For the reference period, what were the quantities of grains and non-grains milled at this facility?

Report grindings for human consumption only.

Oats – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - oats milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Barley – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - barley milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Rye – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - rye milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Corn – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - corn milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Triticale – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - triticale milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Millet – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - millet milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Quinoa – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - quinoa milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Buckwheat – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - buckwheat milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Kamut (i.e., Khorasan wheat) – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - kamut milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Spelt – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - spelt milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Sorghum – grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - sorghum milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Other grain - specify other grain

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - other grain milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Chickpeas - non-grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - chickpeas milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Lentils (all varieties) - non-grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - lentils (all varieties) milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Dry beans (all varieties) - non-grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - dry beans (all varieties) milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Dry peas (all varieties) - non-grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - dry peas (all varieties) milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Flax - non-grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - flax milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Mustard - non-grains

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - mustard milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Other non-grain - specify other non-grain

  1. Eastern grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  2. Western grown - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
  3. Imported - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)
    Total - other non-grain milled - (Quantity milled)(metric tonnes)

Grains and non-grains year-end stocks

9. For the reference period, what were the year-end stocks of grains and non-grains?

Exclude grain owned by your company in elevators licensed by the Canadian Grain Commission.

Grains

  1. Oats - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Barley - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  3. Rye - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  4. Corn - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  5. Triticale - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  6. Millet - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  7. Quinoa - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  8. Buckwheat - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  9. Kamut (i.e., Khorasan wheat) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  10. Spelt - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  11. Sorghum - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  12. Other grain (reported in question 8) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Non-grains

  1. Chickpeas - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Lentils (all varieties) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  3. Dry beans (all varieties) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  4. Dry peas (all varieties) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  5. Flax - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  6. Mustard - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  7. Other non-grain (reported in question 8) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Grain and non-grain products

10. For the reference period, what were the quantities of grain and non-grain products produced at this facility and the year-end stocks?

Oats - grains

  1. Oat flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. Oat meal - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  3. Rolled oats - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  4. Oat groats - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Oat flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Oat meal - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  3. Rolled oats - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  4. Oat groats - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Barley - grains

  1. Barley flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. Barley meal - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  3. Pot and pearl barley - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Barley flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Barley meal - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  3. Pot and pearl barley - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Rye - grains

  1. Rye flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. Rye meal - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Rye flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Rye meal - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Corn - grains

  1. Corn flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. Corn meal - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  3. Corn grits (all varieties) - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  4. Corn Hominy - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Corn flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Corn meal - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  3. Corn grits (all varieties) - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  4. Corn Hominy - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Triticale - grains

  1. Triticale flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other triticale products - specify all other triticale products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Triticale flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other triticale products - specify all other triticale products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Millet - grains

  1. Millet flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other millet products - specify all other millet products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Millet flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other millet products - specify all other millet products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Quinoa - grains

  1. Quinoa flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other quinoa products - specify all other quinoa products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Quinoa flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other quinoa products - specify all other quinoa products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Buckwheat - grains

  1. Buckwheat flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other buckwheat products - specify all other buckwheat products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Buckwheat flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other buckwheat products - specify all other buckwheat products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Kamut (i.e., Khorasan wheat) - grains

  1. Kamut flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other kamut products - specify all other kamut products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Kamut flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other kamut products - specify all other kamut products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Spelt - grains

  1. Spelt flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other spelt products - specify all other spelt products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Spelt flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other spelt products - specify all other spelt products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Sorghum - grains

  1. Sorghum flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other sorghum products - specify all other sorghum products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Sorghum flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other sorghum products - specify all other sorghum products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Other grain (reported in question 8)

  1. Other grain flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. Other grain products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Other grain flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Other grain products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Chickpeas - non-grains

  1. Chickpea flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other chickpea products - specify all other chickpea products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Chickpea flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other chickpea products - specify all other chickpea products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Lentils (all varieties) - non-grains

  1. Lentil (all varieties) flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other lentil (all varieties) products - specify all other lentil (all varieties) products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)

Dry beans (all varieties) - non-grains

  1. Dry bean (all varieties) flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other dry bean (all varieties) products - specify all other dry bean (all varieties) products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)

Dry peas (all varieties) - non-grains

  1. Dry pea (all varieties) flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other dry pea (all varieties) products - specify all other dry pea (all varieties) products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Dry pea (all varieties) flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other dry pea (all varieties) products - specify all other dry pea (all varieties) products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Flax - non-grains

  1. Flax flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other flax products - specify all other flax products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Flax flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other flax products - specify all other flax products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Mustard - non-grains

  1. Mustard flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other mustard products - specify all other mustard products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Mustard flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. All other mustard products - specify all other mustard products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Other non-grain (reported in question 8)

  1. Other non-grain flour - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  2. Other non-grain products - (Quantity produced)(metric tonnes)
  1. Other non-grain flour - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)
  2. Other non-grain products - (Stocks at year-end)(metric tonnes)

Offal production and year-end stocks

11. For the reference period, what was the quantity of offal produced (bran, hulls, etc.) and the year-end offal stocks?

  1. Quantity produced (metric tonnes)
  2. Stocks at year-end (metric tonnes)

Changes or events

12. Indicate any changes or events that affected the reported values for this business or organization compared with the last reporting period.

Mark all that apply.

  1. Strike or lockout
  2. Exchange rate impact
  3. Price changes in goods or services sold
  4. Contracting out
  5. Organizational change
  6. Price changes in labour or raw materials
  7. Natural disaster
  8. Recession
  9. Change in product line
  10. Sold business units
  11. Expansion
  12. New or lost contract
  13. Plant closures
  14. Acquisition of business or business units
  15. Other changes or events – specify the other changes or events:
  16. No changes or events

Contact person

13. Statistics Canada may need to contact the person who completed this questionnaire for further information.

If the contact person is the same as on the cover page, please check and go to "Feedback"

Otherwise, who is the best person to contact about this questionnaire?

  • First name
  • Last name
  • Title
  • Email address (example: user@example.gov.ca)
  • Telephone number (including area code)
    Example: 123-123-1234
  • Extension number (if applicable)
  • Fax number (including area code)
    Example: 123-123-1234

Feedback

14. How long did it take to complete this questionnaire?

Include the time spent gathering the necessary information.

  • Hours
  • Minutes

15. We invite your comments about this questionnaire.

General information

Confidentiality

Your answers are confidential. By law, Statistics Canada is prohibited from releasing any information it collects that could identify any person, business, or organization, unless consent has been given by the respondent, or as permitted by the Statistics Act. Statistics Canada will use the information from this survey for statistical purposes only.

Data-sharing agreements

To reduce respondent burden, Statistics Canada has entered into data-sharing agreements with provincial and territorial statistical agencies and other government organizations, which have agreed to keep the data confidential and use them only for statistical purposes. Statistics Canada will only share data from this survey with those organizations that have demonstrated a requirement to use the data.

Section 11 of the Statistics Act provides for the sharing of information with provincial and territorial statistical agencies that meet certain conditions. These agencies must have the legislative authority to collect the same information, on a mandatory basis, and the legislation must provide substantially the same provisions for confidentiality and penalties for disclosure of confidential information as the Statistics Act. Because these agencies have the legal authority to compel businesses to provide the same information, consent is not requested and businesses may not object to the sharing of the data.

For this survey, there are Section 11 agreements with the provincial statistical agencies of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. The shared data will be limited to information pertaining to business establishments located within the jurisdiction of the respective province.

Section 12 of the Statistics Act provides for the sharing of information with federal, provincial or territorial government organizations. Under Section 12, you may refuse to share your information with any of these organizations by writing a letter of objection to the Chief Statistician and returning it with the completed questionnaire. Please specify the organizations with which you do not want to share your data.

For this survey, there is a Section 12 agreement with the Prince Edward Island statistical agency.

For agreements with provincial and territorial government organizations, the shared data will be limited to information pertaining to business establishments located within the jurisdiction of the respective province or territory.

Record linkages

To enhance the data from this survey and to reduce the reporting burden, Statistics Canada may combine the acquired data with information from other surveys or from administrative sources.