Skip to content
Home
Members’ Area
P6 Submission Package Requirements
Report Review Services
Research & Technical Studies
Professional Development Library
How to Videos
PD Webinars
PD Workshops
Members’ Update
Links of Interest
Q&A
Guidelines
Discipline
Membership
Performance Assessment
Practice
Submission Screening
Other CSAP Documents
Secure Online Fee Payment
Stakeholders
Frequently Asked Questions
About Us
News
PD Workshops
Board of Directors
Scholarships
Complaints & Discipline
About Contaminated Sites
Frequently Asked Questions
Events
Upcoming Events
Lunch and Learn
AGM & PD Workshop
Associated Events
Join
Membership Guidelines
Examination Fee Payment
Examination Statistics
Experience Review
Contact Us
Home
Members’ Area
P6 Submission Package Requirements
Report Review Services
Research & Technical Studies
Professional Development Library
How to Videos
PD Webinars
PD Workshops
Members’ Update
Links of Interest
Q&A
Guidelines
Discipline
Membership
Performance Assessment
Practice
Submission Screening
Other CSAP Documents
Secure Online Fee Payment
Stakeholders
Frequently Asked Questions
About Us
News
PD Workshops
Board of Directors
Scholarships
Complaints & Discipline
About Contaminated Sites
Frequently Asked Questions
Events
Upcoming Events
Lunch and Learn
AGM & PD Workshop
Associated Events
Join
Membership Guidelines
Examination Fee Payment
Examination Statistics
Experience Review
Contact Us
Advancing land remediation and economic growth
Performance Assessment Feedback: Approved Professionals
Lindsay Todd
2016-04-07T11:42:55-07:00
Performance Assessment Number:
*
1. Did you receive your stage 1 report within 16 business days of submitting report copies?
*
yes
no
Comments:
2. Would you rate the review as:
*
overly detailed
lacking in detail
informative
Comments:
3. Would you rather receive no comment on items not requiring a written response?
*
yes
no
Comments:
4. Was the CSAP Coordinator available to answer questions (if necessary)?
*
yes
no
Comments:
5. Was the DM available to answer questions (if necessary)?
*
yes
no
Comments:
6. Were you satisfied with the PA review meeting (if held)
*
yes
no
Comments:
a) Were you treated in a respectful manner?
*
yes
no
Comments:
b) Did your responses receive fair hearing?
*
yes
no
Comments:
c) Was there adequate communication during the meeting?
*
yes
no
Comments:
d) Did you obtain a clear understanding of next steps of the PA?
*
yes
no
Comments:
7. If you did not have a meeting:
a) Were you satisfied with the review of your responses and additional information?
*
yes
no
Comments:
b) Were you satisfied with the explanation of next steps?
*
yes
no
Comments:
8. Upon reflection would you agree that the PA process was (check all that apply):
*
not satisfactory
satisfactory
provided useful technical feedback
provided useful feedback as to the level of documentation
required to make a successful submission
technically correct
current reflection of regulatory policy
Comments:
9. If you had been the subject of a PA or audit before, did you find the process this time to be:
*
better
worse
about the same
Comments:
9. Do you have any suggestions for improvement? (please provide details below)
10. Are there any lessons learned that you would like to share with other APs?
NOTE: Respondent's name will be kept confidential by the PA Coordinator. Responses will be reviewed by the PAC in order to benchmark the process and aid in further refinements.