Category Archives: Host Organizations

Recent developments for host organizations

Limits to Getting Useful CRA Data on Your Organization’s CVITP clinic

Leave a Reply

Host organizations need to collect anonymized client data both to show the impact of their CVITP clinic to their stakeholders and to provide the information needed to improve the CVITP service they are offering.

There are two ways that a host organization can get this data: ask the CRA for it or collect it independently.  Last year, we argued the case for why host organizations should ask the CRA for their anonymized client data.

In this article, we recount our own experience earlier this year of helping some host organizations in our area to ask the CRA for the data.  We outline some lessons we learned from that experience.

While we were successful in getting the CRA to share some of its data, read here about the problems we encountered interpreting this data.  Our experience suggests this approach to getting data would be useful only for a limited number of host organizations.  It provides host organizations with one possible benefit but not the full range of advantages one could expect from the data currently collected by the CRA.  For host organizations that want the full range of advantages from the data, the best approach is to collect it themselves.  Advice on this latter approach will be the subject of a future article.

The Evolution of the CVITP – 2023 Update

Leave a Reply

Each year, we present and analyze the Canada Revenue Agency’s data to show how the CVITP is evolving.  Using the CRA’s 2023 data, we review the most recent trends in the numbers of people assisted and returns filed as well as in the value generated (results from CVITP service delivery), in the numbers of volunteers and host organizations recruited and retained (CVITP infrastructure supporting service delivery), and in measures of productivity for CVITP service delivery.  We also identify two positive and two negative factors which could affect CVITP productivity in the future.  Read the summary of our findings as well as the full articles (with data tables and graphs) on service delivery, infrastructure and productivity.

*Watch for a new feature that we will be publishing in the coming months on the Evolution of the CVITP!

What Has The CRA’s Pilot Grant Project Accomplished Between 2021 And 2023?

Leave a Reply

Did you know that the grant funding the Canada Revenue Agency offered to host organizations is a pilot project, not a permanent feature of the CVITP?  This project was planned for three years, running from 2021 to 2023 but has been extended for a fourth year to the end of 2024.  In this article, we review how this pilot project was implemented in the three-year period and what it was supposed to as well as what it really did accomplish.  We also speculate on what the fourth year is likely to yield in the way of results.  We conclude with what we think should happen once the fourth year is completed.

Insights From Visiting 14 Urban Organizations in 5 Provinces

Leave a Reply

Over the last three years, we’ve visited CVITP host organizations in six cities spanning five provinces.  At the risk of overgeneralizing, we see broadly two types of host organizations.  They have different objectives which lead to very different practices and sustainability in providing CVITP services.  One of the two organizations is more common and serves most of the CVITP’s clients across Canada.  Yet it is the weaker of the two types of host organizations.  If the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) wants to expand the CVITP, the current situation presents it with some big operational challenges.

In this article, we outline the main features distinguishing the two types of organizations, show why these differences severely limit the CVITP’s potential for expansion, and suggest some ways in which the CRA could constructively meet this challenge.  Find out which of the two types of organizations yours is most alike, see if there are any defining characteristics we’ve missed, and let us know if you agree with our reasoning that this presents a problem for the CRA as well as with our proposed solution for building on these differences to the CVITP’s advantage.

Using Municipal Poverty Data to Better Target CVITP Service

Leave a Reply

In a previous article, we argued that the CVITP is not serving enough of Canada’s poor.  In that article, we looked only at the national picture.  Under the most generous assumptions, we determined that the CVITP served at best only one in every five poor people in Canada.

In this article, we look briefly at 2020 provincial and territorial level data (the most recent year available) to establish CVITP coverage (again, using a very generous assumption).  Our estimates reconfirm that CVITP service to the poor remains surprisingly low across Canada (with the lower populated regions doing a comparatively better job).

Given the CVITP’s very limited delivery capacity, we believe that the best way to serve more of the poor is with better targeting.  But to do this effectively, host organizations need poverty data at the local level.  By this we mean both reaching out to specific groups to encourage them to use the service and greater selectivity in whom the service is provided to.

A new Statistics Canada website where poverty data for most Canadian municipalities can be found offers the CRA and host organizations the information needed to devise strategies to improve access to CVITP services for those who need it the most.  But we argue it is unclear whether either group has the will to make this happen.

One Way to Get Useful Data on Your CVITP Clinic: Ask the CRA for it

Leave a Reply

We have previously made the case for host organizations to collect and analyse data from their CVITP clinics to demonstrate the impact of their work to stakeholders and to improve their clinics in future years.  There are two ways to get this data: the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) could provide it or host organizations could collect it themselves.  In this article, we look at the first of these methods, showing how the CRA could and why it should provide the data.

But even if the CRA could and should provide the data to participating organizations, the CRA may not do this on its own initiative.  Host organizations are going to have to ask the CRA for the data.  To make it easier for them to do this, we provide a template of a letter which can be used or modified and sent to the CRA.  To get commitment from senior managers within the host organization who may be less familiar with the subject, we also provide a background note that a CVITP clinic coordinator can use internally to brief them.

If a host organization thinks it is a good idea, now is the time to send in this letter.  It will give the CRA ample time to plan for any changes in practice before the 2024 tax season.

However, we are not naïve in believing that the CRA would do this just because a handful of host organizations ask for it.  As it represents an important change in institutional practice, it will likely require a sustained letter writing campaign over the longer term by many host organizations to convince the CRA to make the technical, demographic, economic and benefit-related data available to each of its participating organizations for the CVITP service they are providing and the populations they are serving.

In the short term, what does a host organization do to get the data it needs to improve its CVITP service and to demonstrate the impact of this service?  This will be the subject of a forthcoming article.

Assessing Year #2 of the CRA’s Three Year Pilot Project

Leave a Reply

This article looks at the implementation in the second year (2022) of the Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) three-year pilot grant project in support of CVITP host organizations.  (We reviewed the first year of implementation in 2021 here.)

The first part of this article looks at the second year of funding.  Increases to the grant amounts on offer were announced late in the calendar year, after all the second-year implementation of this pilot project was finished.  These increases were probably a response to the very low grant payments for the first year of operation.  But while the CRA’s stated objectives for the program suggest the funding is intended to serve as incentive for host organizations to ramp up their services, the timing of the announcement was strange as it would have no effect on the results obtained in the second year.  According to the CRA, 1,067 host organizations had applied for grant funding in the second year and the CRA anticipated disbursing $2.4 million (up from just over $900,000 in the first year).

The second part of the article looks at the results obtained in the second year and compares these with results from the first year.  In doing this, use is made of the objectives and performance targets the CRA identified for this pilot grant program:

  1. While the first objective is to cover some of the participating (host) organizations’ administrative costs, no performance measure is given.  That said, it is strange for an element of the project design to be a stated objective of the pilot project.
  2. Whereas the number of participating organizations was expected to grow by 5% per year, between 2021 and 2022 the number grew by 692%.  However, as we observed when the grant program was launched over two years ago, the CRA will have difficulty disaggregating the rebound in the numbers due to the pilot project from a return to normal after the deleterious effects of COVID in 2020 and, to a lesser extent, in 2021 as well as the natural growth in the numbers that the program has previously known.
  3. Although increased retention of participating organizations is a stated objective and a performance measure is given, the CRA publishes no data which allow this to be assessed.
  4. Expansion in the reach of participating organizations is listed as another objective.  But no performance measure is given so this cannot be assessed.
  5. Expansion to vulnerable population segments is also listed as another objective.  But, again, no performance measure is given so this cannot be assessed.
  6. Even though it is not a stated objective, the CRA identifies an increase in the number of volunteers associated with grant recipient organizations as a performance measure.  As the CRA does not distinguish in its published data between host organizations which are grant recipients and those which are not, this cannot be assessed.
  7. The CRA also identifies an increase in the number of returns filed by grant recipient organizations as a performance measure.  However, this too cannot be assessed because the CRA does not distinguish in its published data between host organizations which are grant recipients and those which are not.  Surprisingly, the growth in returns filed is not a stated objective.  Yet a simple measure of success could be whether more individuals get served and, by extension, more returns get filed.

When the project was first launched, we wrote that the pilot grants needed to be targeted differently for the CVITP to better contribute to the poverty reduction objectives set out in the federal government’s 2018 Poverty Reduction Strategy.

In the intervening years, the federal government has further increased its use of the income tax and benefit return (for example, with the one-time top up to the Canada Housing Benefit, the Canada Dental Benefit and the grocery rebate) to achieve its income security and poverty reduction goals.  This has only reinforced our conviction that, upon completion of the pilot, the CRA needs to rethink the design of this program (and not just make the funding permanent and more generous) if it wants the CVITP to improve its contribution to reducing poverty in Canada.

Why Every Volunteer Should Learn How to Use “Autofill My Return”

Leave a Reply

First introduced by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) in 2017, Autofill My Return (AFR) is a great innovation.  We use it all the time.

But when we speak with other volunteers about AFR, we are struck by the large number, many of them quite experienced, who continue not to use it.  (The CVITP end-of-season survey results for 2022  corroborates this picture of low usage: only 35% of survey respondents confirmed that they made use of AFR.)

When we ask why they don’t use it, two of the most common complaints we hear are that it is too complicated and that it takes too much time to use.

This article outlines nine reasons why we think every volunteer should learn how to use AFR.   Let us know if there’s a reason we’ve missed.  We also want to hear from clinic coordinators as to why they think their organizations can offer satisfactory CVITP services without insisting that their volunteers use AFR.  

The Evolution of the CVITP – 2022 Update

Leave a Reply

Canada Revenue Agency’s (CRA) recently released Departmental Results Report for fiscal year 21/22 allows us to complete the 2022 update for the evolution of the CVITP.  We have divided this subject into three short articles.  The first focuses on the results from delivering CVITP service to clients.  It includes all the data with accompanying commentary on individuals assisted, returns filed and value generated.  The second focuses on the CVITP infrastructure needed to provide this service.  It also provides all the data with accompanying commentary on host organizations and volunteers.  The third is a new feature which provides some simple measures of CVITP productivity.

Short on time?  Here are the key developments:

NO INCREASE IN CVITP SERVICE IN 2022

  • While the CRA calls the number for individuals assisted in the 2022 tax season an approximation, it is roughly the same as in the 2021 tax season; in other words, there has been no increase in service.  The 2021 tax season saw a partial rebound in numbers after the sharp decline in 2020 but it was still well below the numbers reached in 2016 and far from the peak in 2019. 
  • The trend for returns filed largely mirrors that of individuals assisted.
  • While the CVITP was making progress in filing more of its clients’ prior year returns up until and including the 2020 tax season, its performance in this area declined in 2022.
  • For the first time, the CRA has reported in its Departmental Result Report on value of the refund and benefits generated through the CVITP.  This is a very welcome development, and we hope that the CRA continues this practice in the future.  As the main rationale for offering a CVITP clinic is not to help individuals pay income tax but to help them maintain access to many poverty-reducing benefits, this figure provides tangible evidence of the real value generated for CVITP clients.

NUMBER OF HOST ORGANIZATIONS REBOUNDS BUT NUMBER OF VOLUNTEERS CONTINUES TO DECLINE

  • The number of host organizations offering CVITP service has largely rebounded in the 2022 tax season following the precipitous decline due to COVID health restrictions.
  • The trend in volunteers has been in decline since it peaked in the 2019 tax season.  The small rebound in the CRA count for 2022 is, we believe, misleading.  This is due to an unusual interpretation which the CRA makes in whom it classifies as a volunteer.  In partially correcting for this with an adjusted estimate, we show that the small rebound in 2022 is illusory and that the number of volunteers continues to decline.

PRODUCTIVITY REBOUNDS FOR VOLUNTEERS BUT NOT FOR HOST ORGANIZATIONS

  • Averages of individuals assisted and returns filed per volunteer fully rebound to the peaks achieved in the 2017 tax season.
  • Averages of individuals assisted and returns filed per host organization are only 70% and 71% respectively of the peaks achieved in the 2017 tax season.

For further analysis, charts with trends, tables with data and their sources, see:

How To Coordinate CVITP Clinics, Why It Isn’t Happening And Why It Should

Leave a Reply

We work as CVITP volunteers in a large urban area.  At the height of the tax season, in March and April, there are over 40 host organizations offering CVITP clinics in our area.  Yet they do not coordinate their CVITP efforts between themselves.  We suspect this is true in many urban centres.  Why?

In this article, we give nine examples to illustrate some of the ways in which CVITP host organizations can coordinate by pooling clients, volunteers and information.

We then explore the question of why this doesn’t happen more often.  In a nutshell, many host organizations feel they cannot afford the costs, in the short term, to closer collaboration.  Ideally, the CRA’s regional coordinators could take on the role of leading coordination efforts amongst host organizations within their regions, helping to overcome some of these costs.  However, given the CRA’s generally cautious approach to the CVITP, we do not see this happening anytime soon.

Yet we know that there are cases of closer collaboration between host organizations, even if infrequent.  We offer up the intriguing example of Aspire Calgary to show how 18 host organizations have managed to closely collaborate on a range of activities related to the CVITP, from training to fundraising.  Working together, they have managed to produce impressive results in support of Calgary’s poverty reduction strategy: in 2019, their 572 volunteers filed 8,797 returns in 325 clinics which generated $43 million in government benefits for people on low incomes.  We briefly outline three notable features of Aspire Calgary’s model which support this collaboration.

Such cases demonstrate that some organizations are willing to incur the short-term costs associated with better collaboration.   Why?  We believe it is because they have realized that the short-term costs are outweighed by the benefits over the medium term.  Chief amongst these benefits is better client service: more clients can be assisted; they can be assisted by volunteers who better understand their particular circumstances and the service can be offered on a more flexible basis.

Finally in our article, we set out a challenge in 2023 for host organizations who are willing to take the first step toward closer collaboration with others in their region.  We propose volunteer training, an area we find to be neglected at many host organizations we know and an important element for improving service to clients.

Collecting and Analyzing Data to Improve Service and Demonstrate Impact

Leave a Reply

When personal information is stripped from client returns and the remaining information is aggregated, a host organization can make at least two uses of the ensuing data.  It can use the demographic and economic data to learn more about the population currently served and to improve targeting efforts in the design of future tax clinics.  The host organization can also use data on the benefits and credits generated for clients to demonstrate to its various stakeholders the impact of the current CVITP service on their clients’ financial situations.

Annually, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) strips the personal information from returns and provides the demographic and economic data to Statistics Canada for publication.  Infrequently, the CRA has also aggregated the data from returns on benefits and credits at the national and provincial levels and shared the figures publicly.  Given the advent of the CVITP Organization Identification Number or COIN in 2021, it is now technically feasible for the CRA to do all this for each individual host organization as well.

There are two reasons why we believe it is in the CRA’s own interest to do this.  First, by providing data to individual host organizations on the benefits and credits generated by their CVITP clinics for their clients, the CRA would be helping them to make the case to donors.  Increased donor funding would alleviate a serious resource constraint for many host organizations.  In turn, this could reduce some of the pressure on the CRA to provide funding while, at the same time, increase client access to CVITP services.

Second, by obtaining demographic and economic data on the clients served by its CVITP service, the host organization can learn more about the population currently benefiting from its CVITP service.  Where there is a mismatch between this data and the population the host organization wishes to serve, this information can be used to help better target CVITP services in the next tax season.  In turn, this could increase access to CVITP services by clients who need these the most.

In both instances, the provision of data to host organizations could help the CRA to better contribute to meeting the objectives of the federal government’s Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS).

Quite apart from doing this to fulfill its obligation to support the government’s PRS, we believe the CRA has an obligation, as a good partner, to provide its host organizations with their data.  Currently, most host organizations offer CVITP clinics with little or no support from the CRA.  Providing this data would be one of the most important contributions the CRA could make to help its host organizations.

Although the CRA does not presently do this, some host organizations are collecting and analyzing client data from their CVITP clinics.   However, most are not.  This article explores five challenges host organizations face in doing this:

  • A lack of interest or understanding within the host organization about the importance of this data
  • Addressing client consent considerations
  • Handling client privacy issues
  • Finding staff or volunteer time to collect the data
  • Finding the expertise to analyze the data

Our experience is that host organizations mandated to promote their clients’ financial empowerment are the most successful at present in addressing these challenges.  As they already receive donor funding in support of this mandate, they are well positioned to tackle these challenges.

On the other hand, most host organizations providing CVITP services do not have clients’ financial empowerment as part of their core mandate.  Thus, they probably do not receive donor funding specifically to support their CVITP services.

One final reflection: our article addresses the use of anonymized data found in client returns.  To improve on the delivery of their CVITP services, host organizations also need to find ways to get data on non-filers within their potential client base.

The Evolution of the CVITP – 2021 Final Edition

Leave a Reply

This is a follow up to our early edition on the evolution of the CVITP in 2021.  We consider the CRA’s annual Departmental Results Report the gold standard for CRA reporting because the report is submitted to Parliament.  Even then, data on all four elements – clients, returns, volunteers and host organizations – is hard to come by.  It is growing increasingly difficult for Parliament, the public and the host organizations and volunteers directly involved in making the CVITP a reality to know what’s happening.

In our article, we briefly discuss the numbers and their sources.  We show that the number of clients served rebounded by 43% from the spectacular low of the 2020 tax season.  (Remember: that was the season when host organizations had to stop offering in-person CVITP clinics due to the COVID health restrictions.)  Nevertheless, the number of clients served was still well below the peak achieved during the 2019 tax season.  As the CRA did not report consistently on the number of returns filed, we can only assume that it was greater than the number of clients served.  But we don’t know by how much.

Although the CRA did not report formally on the number of volunteers, we find a number in a statement by the Minister of National Revenue which suggests it declined substantially from the number reported for the 2020 tax season.  The number reported for host organizations represents a spectacular decline from the 2020 tax season.  We note that the numbers provided by the CRA for volunteers and host organizations in the 2020 tax season are misleading in that they likely included those registered with the CRA at the beginning of the season rather than those who were able to adapt to CVITP virtual clinics.  Furthermore, the 2021 figure for volunteers is simply too high to be credible.  In any event, the declines in the number of volunteers and of host organizations over the 2020 and 2021 tax seasons is deeply troubling.

Implementation of CRA’s Pilot Grant Program in Year 1 of 3 – A Slow Start to Missing the Mark

Leave a Reply

In 2021, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) introduced a new pilot grant program that provides financial support to some CVITP host organizations.  When it was introduced, we had a lot to say about it here.

The pilot program has completed the first of its three years.  As is unfortunately typical of the CRA in its reporting on the CVITP, there is a dearth of information on the first year of this pilot.  However, there is one important piece of information cited in the CRA’s Departmental Plan for the 2022-23 fiscal year: “In the first year alone, the CRA sent just under one million dollars to qualifying organizations across Canada to support their efforts to ensure that vulnerable people have the ability to file tax returns and access the benefits and credits designed to support them.”

Remember: the budget for this three-year pilot grant program is $10 million; this amounts to an average of $3.3 million being available each year to support host organizations.  Disbursing less than $1 million in the first of the three years raises serious question about the ability of the pilot grant program to meet its stated objectives: defraying organizations’ costs of hosting CVITP clinics and encouraging more organizations to host CVITP clinics.

In the following article, we show that it has budgeted too much for this pilot or, on the basis of the current budget, it is simply too stingy with the current payments to meet its goals.  We predict that the pilot program will complete its three years well under budget.  There are two design elements we stated when the pilot program was first launched which are likely to contribute to this outcome: administrative arrangements that are burdensome, deterring some host organizations from applying for the grant, combined with grant amount limits that are too low to serve as an incentive for host organizations.

We note that the indicators the CRA has said it will use to determine the success of the pilot are likely to yield misleading conclusions.  This is because the implementation of the pilot program coincides with the period immediately following COVID, when the numbers for the CVITP had plummeted and thus could be expected to rebound anyways.

We also believe that the indicators the CRA is using are the wrong ones as none of them gets at the real purpose of the CVITP.  As noted in one of our articles assessing the pilot program when it was first launched, at its core the CVITP is about the income levels of the clients it serves.  Therefore, the pilot program should aim to increase the number of returns filed by a host organization for clients whose incomes fall at or below the poverty line, not simply the number of returns filed nor, for that matter, host organizations and volunteers enlisted in the CVITP.  Until the CRA draws a closer link between its CVITP and the objectives contained in the federal government’s Poverty Reduction Strategy, it will continue to miss the mark with opportunities like its pilot grant program.

CRA Data and Analysis Suggestions for a More Effective CVITP Strategy

Leave a Reply

As mentioned in a previous article, one priority in her Supplementary Mandate Letter from the Prime Minister (dated January 2021) instructs the Minister of National Revenue to “enhance and expand the Community Volunteer Income Tax Program”.  One thing the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) can do to help achieve this is through placing greater emphasis on another priority mentioned in the same letter, instructing Minister Lebouthillier to “improve the collection and analysis of disaggregated data related to supports and services offered by the CRA.”

Data needs to be collected and analyzed for at least two reasons.  First, to confirm whether or not the CVITP is meeting its intended objective.  And second, where the CVITP is falling short of its intended objective, to help devise strategies to ensure the program can better meet its intended objective.

We think the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) currently has two related problems with respect to CVITP data.  First, it collects the wrong data and publishes too little of what it does collect.  Second, this means the CRA focuses on doing the wrong things.

In this two-part series of articles, we look at data and its use in formulating strategy.

In the first article, entitled “First, the CRA Needs to Collect and Analyze the CORRECT Data”, we examine the data that is collected and analyzed on clients and their returns.  We begin with the uncontroversial observation that data needs to be collected and analysed to confirm whether or not the CVITP is meeting its intended objective.  We then refer to a previous article in which we argued that the CRA presently collects and reports CVITP results data which are not aligned with the purpose and in which we offered alternative performance indicators which we believe do a better job of this.  We also look at the data the CRA currently collects on CVITP host organizations and volunteers – what we call the delivery infrastructure – and make some modest suggestions for additional data to be collected through the annual registration process just prior to the tax season.

In the second article, entitled “Then, the CRA Needs to Build a Strategy With a Focus on Improving EFFICIENCY”, we look at how all this data can be used to devise strategies to ensure the CVITP can better meet its intended objective.  The combination of analyses of data on CVITP results and delivery infrastructure can help to inform the choice of actions to be taken.  The strategic priority we focus on is increasing the number of CVITP clients.  We argue that the CRA should place greater emphasis on increasing efficiencies within the existing delivery infrastructure over increasing the size of the delivery infrastructure.  A few examples are offered to illustrate how data on results and delivery infrastructure could be used to do this.