IRCC stopped assigning immigration applications to inactive officers’ IDs after CBC report

In the wake of a CBC investigation that revealed thousands of immigration applications had been assigned to hundreds of former employees’ IDs and placeholder codes, the federal government conducted a major review and cleaned up its global application system to ensure none had been “forgotten,” CBC News has learned.

Now, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) tells CBC News it has ended the longstanding practice of using inactive officers’ IDs as virtual holding bins for applications to ensure “files do not fall through the cracks.”

On Dec. 12, 2022, CBC first reported that IRCC was assigning tens of thousands of applications to “inactive users” in its Global Case Management System (GCMS), used to process citizenship and immigration applications.

Data showed that in February that year, 59,456 “open, pending or re-opened” applications had been assigned to 779 codes representing a mix of placeholders and former employees, some of whom last logged in and processed files more than a decade ago.

After initially failing to provide CBC with a response by deadline, IRCC explained after the story published that it repurposed codes belonging to inactive users as a method of organizing and holding applications for the next stage of processing. IRCC also said the data obtained by CBC provided only a brief snapshot of a complex system.

New details come to light

Nearly two years after that story was published, and a year and a half after CBC requested documents, IRCC finally released an access to information request containing more details.

Despite officials denying at the time that the applications were ever in “limbo,” emails obtained by CBC show some applications tied to departed employees were reassigned to active employees in the weeks following CBC’s story.

The concern is inactive users and files that may have been lost.– Internal IRCC email

It also appears staff questioned the efficiency of their own file management system.

“It[‘s] fine internally, but we want to avoid … additional eyes on this,” reads one email from an IRCC employee whose team flagged the use of those codes as a concern.

Pressed in Parliament after CBC first published the story, then immigration minister Sean Fraser said “allegations that files resting with officers who do not exist is unequivocally false.” 

In a technical briefing provided a few days later to CBC, an IRCC official again insisted the premise of the original story was “inherently false,” and said none of the applications had been forgotten.

“No files at any point in the process are left unattended,” the official said by phone on Dec. 15, 2022.

But emails reveal that same day, IRCC’s assistant deputy minister’s office issued a network-wide task to its processing offices to review the list published by CBC.

A senior adviser asked teams to make sure all files assigned to inactive users were actually being processed, and to confirm keeping them assigned to those IDs “still makes sense.”

“The objective was to ensure that all files are on track and moving along (and not forgotten because they were sitting assigned to a User ID no one was watching,)” the adviser later explained in another email.

“The concern is inactive users and files that may have been lost,” another official explained to her team.

Files reassigned, IDs ‘deactivated’

Several teams reported back that they’d reassigned some applications and “deactivated” some dormant user IDs in the days following CBC’s report.

For example, IRCC’s Windsor, Ont., office found one open citizenship application “assigned to an employee that left” in early 2022. 

“This application has been reassigned to the current level 2 decision maker,” the email reads. 

The Hamilton and Niagara team said one open case “is now assigned to an active user.”

The Ottawa office said it would be “updating the list to remove any employees who are no longer working” there, and would “focus on the 5 persons identified in the report, but will proactively action other departures in 2022.”

Over at another office, staff “reviewed and corrected” files.

“All … assigned to an inactive user ID have been reviewed and re-assigned,” they wrote. “We will process and correct over the next few weeks.”

Workers also found inconsistencies and flagged some applications that appeared to be cancelled, “not closed off properly” or wrongly assigned.

“To me that doesn’t make sense,” wrote one senior adviser asking why files were “still sitting” at an office in Sydney, N.S., but assigned to workers with another team.

“What should we do about these user ids?” asked another employee.

They also came across several “ghost” applications.

“Based on a quick sampling, I think that many of these are just ghost apps stranded for various reasons, but I would like to see if we can review these apps to make sure that none of them have been lost for any reason,” an email reads.

Staff question system

IRCC staff and even some leaders questioned whether the file management system made sense, with one asking: “Why are we using old employee code?” 

IRCC’s director general of IT operations answered: “I can’t comment on why we are using old employee code but trust that info received is accurate.” 

But some teams were already flagging this issue as early as October 2022, and had asked the GCMS team to create generic bins instead of using “personal codes” as placeholders.

“We need to put pressure on GCMS to have these codes created and activated for use,” part of a redacted November email reads.

That staff member even volunteered their own user ID to be used as a workaround to make sure codes used as placeholder bins came from “current” employees.

After CBC’s original story appeared, an assistant director flagged that earlier email chain, suggesting a “deeper dive into workload management.”

A senior adviser later suggested IRCC embark on a “project” in 2023 “to try and get everyone off of inactive user IDs and switch to generic bins to prevent such questions and confusion from appearing again.”

Officials also questioned whether IT teams “cleaned” the system “on a regular basis.” Initially, even the director general of IT operations was unsure of the answer to those questions.

“We do have a process in place initiated by [the operations team] (if I remember correctly),” the IT official wrote in an email on Dec. 12, 2022. “I remember a few years ago we had an audit including this process. I am scanning my inbox.” 

An operations official later reiterated that IT “seem[s] to be indicating that there is a process in place … but cannot say with certainty if it’s been followed.”

IRCC no longer using inactive IDs

IRCC declined an interview request from CBC to discuss this new information.

In an email, it revealed that four months after CBC’s story — between April and May 2023 — the department transitioned to using “generic IDs” to organize applications moving through its processing system.

IRCC said it created 125 new generic IDs and will add more as needed.

“All potentially inactive user IDs were systematically reassigned to the newly established generic Responsibility Center (RC) IDs,” IRCC said Friday.

“This ensures that files do not fall through the cracks when officers are unexpectedly away, retire, etc.”

Meanwhile, a permanent residency (PR) applicant interviewed by CBC for the initial story said they received their PR just four months after it was published.

“[It’s] a little bit disappointing,” said Andrea Bote, whose case was assigned to code RA9519 at the time.

According to emails, RA9519 was one of seven IDs under which files were incorrectly listed as belonging to the Sydney, N.S., office. They were later transferred to the correct team during the review.

“I hope this kind of leads to an even better overhaul … being more proactive in solving these issues rather than being reactive,” Bote said Thursday.

Immigration lawyer Jamie Liew, who has raised the alarm about the opacity of IRCC’s system, said it’s good the department reviewed the files, even if it was reacting to media attention.

“Having said that, it would be great for the government to be more transparent about what it’s doing now … instead of having this [latest] information come to light through an [access to information] request,” Liew said.

“There are real people behind these files,” Liew reminded bureaucrats. “People’s lives are at stake, and [their] future and their plans.”