We do have a process that will document the risk indicators. As I said, this involves using evidence based on assessing cases that have been refused, and looking at and going into the cases. As has been pointed out, we analyze the cases in terms of the kinds of issues that were identified through that process, as well through feedback from our own staff, in terms of where we know interviews have taken place, where issues have been identified, and input that we receive from CBSA and the RCMP.
We will actually substantiate our risk indicators based on that kind of evidence and document it. The intention is that we will be evaluating and re-evaluating the risk indicators on a much more regular basis, but also documenting them, and then establishing a baseline.
Another issue that was identified was that we don't actually have a baseline to compare how we're doing. In fact, part of the program integrity framework is to establish a baseline, and then monitor against that baseline in each and every subsequent period, to assess how we're doing and whether we have improved. Are the trends getting better or worse? Where have our own practices improved or where do there continue to be gaps?