NEXUS Marine Pilot Project
Evaluation Study

March 2006

Table of Contents

• Executive Summary
  • Methodology
  • Summary of Key Findings
  • Key Recommendations
• Introduction and Context
  • Description of the NEXUS Marine Pilot Project
  • Evaluation Purpose
  • Evaluation Methodology
    • Review of CBSA and CBP Documents and Statistics.
    • In-depth Interviews
    • Survey of NEXUS Marine Pilot Project Participants
    • NEXUS Marine Site Visit
    • Literature Review
• Key Findings
  • Management and Implementation
    • To what extent was the management structure for the NEXUS Marine pilot project appropriate?
    • To what extent did staff and external stakeholders contribute to the design and implementation of the pilot project?
    • Did existing legislative and regulatory authorities allow CBSA and CBP officers to ensure travellers’ compliance?
    • To what extent were resources sufficient for the NEXUS Marine pilot project?
    • How effective were the outreach (marketing/advertising) activities for the NEXUS Marine pilot project?
  • Results Achievement (Success)
    • How effective and efficient were NEXUS Marine pilot project application, enrolment, and passage processes?
    • To what extent did NEXUS Marine pilot project participants benefit from participation?
    • To what extent are CBSA and CBP realizing benefits from the NEXUS Marine pilot project?
    • To what extent are other stakeholders realizing benefits from the NEXUS Marine pilot project?
  • Relevance
    • To what extent does the pilot project support CBSA and the Smart Border Declaration (SBD) 32-point Action Plan objectives?
    • What potential is there for the expansion of the NEXUS Marine project?
    • Are there alternative approaches or technologies that may be more efficient and or effective for achieving expected results?
• Conclusion
• Key Recommendations
• Management Response

---

Executive Summary

The NEXUS Marine Detroit River pilot project is a joint initiative of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the United States (U.S.) Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The purpose of NEXUS Marine is to facilitate quick and secure entry into Canada and the U.S. for pre-approved low-risk recreational boaters. It builds on the initiatives of the Smart Border Declaration (SBD) 32-point Action Plan and contributes to the objectives of the secure flow of people and the coordination of information sharing between the two countries. The pilot project was operational during the 2005 boating season from May 1 to September 30, 2005, in the Detroit-Windsor area along the Detroit River, from the mouth of Lake St. Clair to the mouth of Lake Erie.

CBSA’s Evaluation Division conducted this evaluation at the request of the Shared Border Accord Coordinating Committee (SBACC) to inform its decision-making regarding the expansion of NEXUS Marine to other locations. In addition, the evaluation of the pilot project was identified as a deliverable in the Security and Prosperity Partnership Detailed Security Action Plan.

Key evaluation issues examined were:

1. the effectiveness of the management and implementation of the NEXUS Marine pilot project;
2. the extent to which the pilot project demonstrated the potential for expected program results; and
3. the relevance of the pilot project in terms of alignment with the SBD objectives (item 3–a single alternative-inspection system), including its potential for expansion to other sites.

Methodology

The plan for this evaluation was finalized in September 2005 and the research was conducted between September and December 2005. 

The following methodologies were used:

• review of CBSA and CBP documents and statistics;
• in-depth interviews with CBSA and CBP management and staff, and private sector stakeholders;
• survey of NEXUS Marine members;
• NEXUS Marine site visit; and
• literature review.

Summary of Key Findings

This evaluation found that NEXUS Marine has the potential to meet program objectives. However, last year's pilot was implemented without its own policy framework, a proper bi-national governance structure or dedicated resources. In the absence of an overall NEXUS Marine-specific management framework, key management accountabilities and performance measures were not developed or finalized.

NEXUS Marine was designed and implemented at the request of SBACC to test the concept of expedited passage for pre-approved low-risk travellers in the marine mode. NEXUS Marine was implemented as an extension of the existing NEXUS Highway program and the Windsor-St. Clair/Detroit region was selected as the pilot site.

CBP and CBSA regional staff who implemented and managed NEXUS Marine cooperated well, which facilitated the initiative’s implementation. Although the management structure was adequate for the day-to-day operation of the pilot project, the absence of a bi-national governance structure with clearly defined roles and responsibilities was a weakness. While a Bi-national Working Group was established in the early days of the design phase, it stopped meet once implementation started. The Local Working Group consisted of CBSA staff and managers, with little involvement of CBP representatives.

With the exception of $10,000 provided by the CBSA to cover some administrative expenses and travel costs for the CBSA Headquarters implementation team and funding for pamphlets provided by CBP, no additional resources were given to NEXUS Marine. Since the resources came from existing programs and no budget breakdown was available from either CBSA or CBP, it was not possible to determine the exact level of resources used. What is clear is that some aspects of the pilot could have been improved with a greater resource base. These aspects include the continuation of the Bi-national Working Group, the identification and tracking of performance measures, improved Nexus Marine-specific training for officers, more staff and a database identifying NEXUS Marine members as distinct from NEXUS Highway members. 

CBSA NEXUS Marine management requested the addition of NEXUS Marine to a marketing plan already being developed by an external contractor for the NEXUS Highway. The marketing plan arrived too late for the Marine pilot. However, the Communications and Consultation Directorate provided a communications plan and products targeted to audiences in the area of the limited pilot, including a news release, press kits, public notices, generic articles for boating magazines and local papers, a pamphlet, posters, a participants’ guide, and Web messages. Pamphlet and press kit distribution at boat shows and to people crossing the border by car produced some results: as of November 25, 2005, 1,061 member applications had been received and 779 members had enrolled.

NEXUS Marine members reported a high level of satisfaction with the various aspects of the pilot project. They appreciated the convenience that NEXUS Marine afforded them and the time the passage process saved them. Members were somewhat less satisfied with the passage process when entering the U.S. Marina owners and operators regarded NEXUS Marine with optimism, welcoming any initiative that could increase recreational cross-border boating traffic. 

CBSA administers both the Customs Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The authorities given by these acts in terms of cross-border boating were not fully understood by those interviewed. Related issues had a bearing on the integrity of the pilot project. Allowing NEXUS Marine members to dock at private property where the CBSA may not have the authority to search the vessel, and the procedures with respect to on-water enforcement actions are examples of issues that need to be addressed through policy development before the program is expanded to other locations. 

NEXUS Marine supports the Smart Border Declaration and contributes to the two agencies’ ability to distinguish between lower and unknown or higher-risk travellers and manage the border accordingly.

Key Recommendations

The overall recommendations for NEXUS Marine are:

1. Continue NEXUS Marine as a pilot in the current Detroit/Windsor pilot zone for one more season, and expand it to include the 48 additional designated sites along Lake Erie, Lake St. Clair and St. Clair River that are within the boundaries of the CBSA Windsor/St. Clair Region. Keeping NEXUS Marine as a pilot for another year would allow the agencies to dedicate resources and track resource expenditures, establish an appropriate governance structure, gather performance information for sufficient evidence to support a business case to fund its expansion to another pilot site or nationally, and enrol more members.
2. Based on the experience of the NEXUS Marine pilot, have program management refine Agency policies related to recreational boating examination, as well as those pertaining to designated sites. [ 1 ]
3. Develop a Results-Based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF) to address issues pertaining to:
   • NEXUS Marine’s mandate, objectives and expected results;
   • the governance structure, with accountabilities, roles and responsibilities; and
   • the development of a performance-measurement strategy for collecting the necessary data to measure and monitor progress against plan. 

Introduction and Context

The Canada Border Services Agency’s (CBSA) Evaluation Division conducted the evaluation of the NEXUS Marine pilot project at the request of the Shared Border Accord Coordinating Committee (SBACC) to guide its decision-making regarding the potential expansion of NEXUS Marine to other areas. The evaluation was also identified as a deliverable in the Security and Prosperity Partnership Detailed Security Action Plan.

Description of the NEXUS Marine Pilot Project

The NEXUS Marine Detroit River pilot project is a joint initiative of CBSA and the United States (U.S.) Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The pilot project is one of several joint CBSA-CBP Trusted Travellers programs designed to expedite low-risk cross-border traffic, while focusing resources on those representing higher and unknown risks. It builds on the initiatives of the Smart Border Declaration (SBD) 32-point Action Plan and the strength of the Canadian CANPASS Private Boat program. [ 2 ] It is part of the NEXUS family of programs for expedited processing of travellers in the highway, air and marine modes.

The pilot project was operational during the 2005 boating season from May 1 to September 30, 2005, in the Detroit-Windsor area along the Detroit River, from the mouth of Lake St. Clair to the mouth of Lake Erie. The pilot project allows members to clear customs and immigration of either country by using the Telephone Reporting Centre (TRC) feature. Membership is open to citizens and permanent residents of Canada and citizens and resident aliens of the U.S. who have resided in either country, or a combination of both countries, for the last three consecutive years.

The NEXUS Marine pilot project is an extension of the NEXUS Highway program. As a result, NEXUS Highway members can use the NEXUS Marine reporting process when crossing the border by boat, and NEXUS Marine members can cross the border by car using dedicated NEXUS Highway lanes. [ 3 ]

NEXUS Marine has three distinct processes: application, enrolment and passage. In the application process, prospective participants complete and submit hard-copy application forms, with a non-refundable processing fee of CAN$80.00 (US$50.00), to the CBSA Processing Centre (CPC) in Niagara Falls, Ontario. [ 4 ] Staff at CPC enter the applicants’ information into the database and submit paper-based files with this information to CBP. Since applications must be approved by both CBSA and CBP, the agencies conduct separate risk assessments for each applicant using various law-enforcement, customs and immigration databases.

If both organizations are satisfied that the applicant meets the program eligibility criteria, a letter is sent inviting the applicant to come to the Enrolment Centre in Detroit to complete the enrolment process. At the Enrolment Centre, CBSA officers interview applicants who are U.S. citizens and resident aliens; CBP officers interview Canadian citizens and permanent residents. CBP officers take fingerprints of applicants’ index fingers, after which the U.S. officials conduct further automated systems checks to verify that prospective participants are low-risk. CBSA and CBP officers confirm the identity of individuals who pass these assessments by authenticating and validating their identification documents. Once officers are satisfied that all program requirements have been met following  an in-person interview at the Enrolment Centre, the officer decides whether to admit the applicant into the program as a member.

A digital photo of the member’s face is then taken and a NEXUS photo identification card produced. Before new members leave the Enrolment Centre, additional information about the NEXUS program’s terms and conditions is provided, including showing a video describing how the NEXUS Highway program works.[ 5 ]

In the passage process, NEXUS Marine members obtain passage permission by calling the TRC between 30 minutes and 4 hours before their estimated time of arrival. [ 6 ] Members are asked to report their destination and estimated time of arrival, as well as to provide relevant information about the individuals on board and whether they have goods to declare. [ 7 ] The officer at the CBSA TRC records the information in the automated TRC database. [ 8 ] If any duty on goods brought into Canada is payable, the amount is charged to the caller’s credit card. When entering the U.S., the caller is instructed on the method of payment. Once satisfied that the reporting is complete, the TRC officer gives the caller a report number, which must be produced if requested by CBSA officers.

If the TRC officer decides to refer a boat for examination, the member is instructed to go to a designated marine reporting site. The officer then contacts the verification office to request the examination. In Canada, the TRC officer also assists by retrieving information on the member, passengers or the boat’s historical passage data from the database. 

According to the program logic, the pilot project should contribute to CBSA’s strategic outcome of “efficient and effective border management that contributes to the security and prosperity of Canada” by expediting the flow of travellers and enhancing security at the border. The main components of the pilot designed to result in these ultimate outcomes are the applicant registration process (“Application Processing/Risk Assessment” and “Finalizing Enrolment”) and the NEXUS Marine border process (“Passage Processing”). The registration process is expected to ensure that applicants are low-risk and meet program eligibility criteria, thereby expanding CBSA and CBP’s knowledge and identification of low-risk travellers. The NEXUS Marine passage process is intended to expedite the border processing of pilot project members. This should enable a focus of resources on higher and unknown-risk individuals.

Evaluation Purpose

The purpose of this evaluation study was to examine:

• the effectiveness of the management and implementation of the NEXUS Marine pilot project;
• the extent to which the pilot project demonstrated the potential for expected program results; and
• the relevance of the pilot project in terms of alignment with the SBD objectives (item 3–a single alternative-inspection system), including its potential for expansion to other sites.

Evaluation Methodology

The Evaluation Division completed the evaluation plan in September 2005, including an evaluation framework with evaluation questions, relevant indicators, sources of information and data collection methods. Data collection took place between September and December 2005. A description of the methodologies used in this evaluation is presented below.

Review of CBSA and CBP Documents and Statistics

The following were reviewed to obtain a better understanding of the pilot project, including its context within CBSA and CBP mandates and objectives:

• NEXUS Marine pilot project documentation, including internal records of the project’s design and implementation, and CBSA’s regional NEXUS Marine review;
• SBACC and Bi-national NEXUS Marine Working Group documents and meeting proceedings;
• CBSA and CBP documents on shared border security issues;
• CBSA statistics [ 9 ]; and
• CBSA, CBP and other government and business group Internet sites.

In-depth Interviews

Thirty-three individuals were interviewed. The purpose of these interviews was to obtain information on the design and implementation of the pilot project and to explore stakeholder positions regarding NEXUS Marine’s continued relevance and potential for expansion to other sites. Interviewees included:

• CBSA management and staff in the Innovation, Science and Technology (IS&T), Admissibility and Enforcement branches;
• CBSA management in the Windsor/St. Clair, Northern Ontario and Pacific regions [ 10 ];
• CBP management and staff responsible for the management of the NEXUS Marine pilot project;
• Marina operators and other business people in the region; and
• Ontario Provincial Police.

Survey of NEXUS Marine Pilot Project Members

A telephone survey of NEXUS Marine members was conducted to find out how members first heard about the pilot project, their reasons for participating, their expected and realized benefits, and their levels of satisfaction with the application, enrolment and passage processes.

EKOS Research Associates Inc. was retained to conduct the survey. A total of 241 interviews were carried out from October 24 to November 9, 2005. As the total population of NEXUS Marine members and users of the NEXUS Marine reporting process was lower than expected, the initial target of surveying 350 was not possible. Since NEXUS Marine members are recreational boaters and often travel with family members who are also members, only one member of a household [ 11 ] was interviewed. Of the survey respondents, 43%  were Canadian citizens or residents, with the remainder from the U.S. [ 12 ] The survey provided a confidence level of 95% and an error rate of ±4%, considering a universe of 402. [ 13 ]

NEXUS Marine Site Visit

Members of the evaluation team visited the NEXUS Marine pilot project area between September 21 and 23, 2005. The team participated in a number of activities that provided useful information relevant to the evaluation, including visiting the Enrolment Centre in Detroit and the CBSA Telephone Reporting Centre (TRC) in Windsor; attending a pilot project review meeting with the Windsor regional NEXUS Marine team and Headquarters (HQ) representatives of the IS&T and Admissibility branches; and touring the area on the Canadian side to understand marine enforcement challenges better. The U.S. TRC facility was not visited.

Literature Review

The purpose of the literature review was to identify published materials, available on the Internet or otherwise, to explore whether any alternative approaches or technologies may be more efficient or effective for achieving expected results.

This review, conducted by EKOS Research Associates Inc., searched for initiatives with a similar purpose or comparable objectives to NEXUS programs in countries other than the U.S. or Canada. The literature review revealed that there are few, if any, programs like NEXUS Marine for recreational boaters crossing borders. EKOS also identified and collected documents on the use and effectiveness of biometric and non-biometric technologies for expedited border processes in other countries. [ 14 ] NEXUS Marine uses fingerprints to risk-assess applicants, but it does not use any biometric technologies to verify the identity of a member who enters either country. 

Key Findings

1. Management and Implementation

1.1 To what extent was the management structure for the NEXUS Marine pilot project appropriate?

The management structure for piloting the NEXUS Marine concept was reasonably adequate—but would  not be appropriate for a fully implemented bi-national program.

NEXUS Marine was implemented as an extension of the NEXUS Highway program. As a result, NEXUS Marine came under an existing management structure whereby the CBSA NEXUS Highway coordinator in the region also became responsible for NEXUS Marine. In addition, the pilot project built on the experience and infrastructure of existing Trusted Travellers programs, such as CANPASS Private Boat. Similarly, the CBP built on the U.S. Canadian Border Boat Landing program (I-68). Using existing management structures made the implementation of the pilot project possible and relatively quick.

The operation of NEXUS Marine was primarily a regional responsibility. According to CBSA and CBP regional and HQ staff and management, regions were given sufficient decision-making authority, and this facilitated the implementation of the pilot project. Furthermore, a high level of cooperation between CBP and CBSA staff and management at both the regional and HQ levels also contributed to the pilot’s implementation.

A joint U.S. and Canada NEXUS Marine Working Group was established in 2003 to lead the expansion of the NEXUS program into the marine mode. [ 15 ] The Working Group met a few times in 2003 and 2004 and provided leadership for the design of the pilot project. The group ceased to meet after the launch of the pilot project, with governance documents still in draft form. However, issues relevant to the pilot project continued to be discussed at other CBSA and CBP joint meetings, including SBACC meetings. 

The local CBSA NEXUS Marine Working Group met once every two months and as needed to monitor progress and address emerging issues. The CBP, not a permanent part of this Working Group, attended one meeting. 

The absence of a joint local CBP-CBSA Working Group and the fact that the Bi-national Working Group stopped meeting early on do not appear to have had a significant negative impact on the pilot project. However, with the continuation and expansion of NEXUS Marine, a bi-national governance structure with clearly defined roles and responsibilities of those involved, as well as performance measures, will be needed to address issues unique to NEXUS Marine fully.

1.2 To what extent did staff and external stakeholders contribute to the design and implementation of the pilot project?

CBSA and CBP staff and management responsible for the implementation of the pilot project made significant contributions to its design and implementation. The contribution of external stakeholders and other CBSA and CBP branches, however, was limited by the tight timelines under which the pilot project was implemented.

The IS&T Branch led the design of NEXUS Marine, with direction from the bi-national NEXUS Marine Working Group. Other CBSA branches were involved marginally only. For instance, since SBACC had already decided to move forward with the pilot project, the Enforcement Branch was given short notice to provide input on the compliance and verification strategy. The pilot project started before a key concern of the Branch—allowing NEXUS Marine members to land at private docks—was resolved. In fact, this issue remained unresolved for the 2005 boating season. In addition, Admissibility and Operations branches were not sufficiently involved in NEXUS Marine’s design and implementation.

An expanded NEXUS Marine program would probably be managed by the Admissibility Branch, with the Enforcement Branch as the functional lead for the security screening of applicants and the development of relevant policies and guidelines. Thus, the early involvement of these and other key CBSA branches as well as CBP is important for two reasons:

1. to facilitate the smooth transition of the pilot project into a national program; and
2. to design a program that reflects the diverse environment in which it is to be implemented. 

The regional CBSA and CBP NEXUS Marine teams held informal consultations with select marina owners and operators, yacht clubs and boaters on both sides of the border, both before and during the implementation of the pilot project. These meetings were helpful in that they allowed CBSA and CBP to learn about boaters and marina owners’ interests and concerns. 

Interviews with CBSA and CBP staff, as well as with other stakeholders, revealed that some implementation challenges—limited membership, late start of the pilot project (May 1), problems with the application form, and the design of the telephone reporting database—could have been minimized with greater consultation. 

1.3 Did existing legislative and regulatory authorities allow CBSA and CBP officers to ensure travellers’ compliance?

The lack of clarity around CBP and CBSA legislative and regulatory authorities pertaining to conducting examinations on private property meant that a NEXUS Marine feature, that of members being able to dock anywhere in the pilot zone, created a potential examination and enforcement challenge.

As the creation of the CBSA brought together separate organizations, the Agency currently administers both the Customs Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The authorities under these Acts continue to be integrated. Whether the lack of clarity compromised the integrity of the pilot project remains in question, although there is no evidence that this was the case. The risk associated with not being able to examine boats and boaters on private property relates to the fact that boaters must be referred to designated marinas for inspection. In such cases, boaters know ahead of time that they might be searched, and this potentially reduces the effectiveness of enforcement efforts.

The risk assessment that NEXUS Marine members undergo is based on the premise that past history is a good predictor for future behaviour. A person who has been law-abiding in the past is likely to stay law-abiding. It is for this reason that those managing the program considered NEXUS Marine safe and did not see the permission to land at a private dock as a risk to the integrity of the pilot project. In fact, the widely held view is that border security has improved with the introduction of NEXUS Marine because the pilot project has made it possible to separate boaters representing low risk from those who may warrant greater scrutiny. 

The CBSA shares the border security responsibility with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Other law-enforcement groups, including the Ontario Provincial Police  and local police also patrol the Detroit River. Similarly, CBP works with local police and the U.S. Coast Guard, among others. These law-enforcement groups have a long history of good working relationships. For example, CBSA’s marine units can obtain other organizations’ assistance for fast access to designated sites or areas that are not easily reached by car. 

In general, those interviewed consider continuing the partnership between CBP, CBSA and other law-enforcement groups as a good approach to border control. These partnerships, although not formalized, help optimize the use of scarce resources.

1.4 To what extent were resources sufficient for the NEXUS Marine pilot project?

NEXUS Marine processes were implemented primarily using NEXUS Highway and existing marine program resources. Dedicated resources could have enhanced several areas of the pilot project. 

During the initial stages of the pilot project’s design, it was decided that NEXUS Marine would be offered as an extension of the NEXUS Highway program. The pilot project neither received dedicated resources nor were its expenditures tracked. The integration of NEXUS Marine into existing programs has made it difficult for the evaluation team to assess the actual cost of the pilot project. Apart from HQ and regional CBP and CBSA staff, including officers on the marine teams who spent some of their time on NEXUS Marine, about $10,000 was provided by the CBSA to cover some administrative expenses and   travel costs for the HQ implementation team. CBP covered the costs of printing brochures.

According to the CBP and CBSA staff and management interviewed for this evaluation, the resources available to them were sufficient. They also reported that the resource requirements of the NEXUS Marine pilot project were small and easily absorbed within the existing budgets—and that they were too negligible to have a financial impact on existing programs. Notwithstanding these views, additional resources could have enhanced several areas of the pilot project. 

The Bi-national Working Group ceased to meet just after NEXUS Marine was implemented because the pilot project was operating smoothly, and because of resource constraints, according to CBSA management interviewed for this evaluation. 

Printed materials on how to declare goods upon arrival in Canada and how to report a landing are given to new members at the Enrolment Centre. A video, which was prepared for the NEXUS Highway program and did not include features unique to NEXUS Marine, is also shown to them.

Many CBSA and CBP officers were not adequately trained on the unique features of NEXUS Marine passage processes and reporting requirements. This meant that officers were, at times, unable to answer NEXUS Marine members’ questions. Officers at the Enrolment Centre indicated to the evaluation team that they did not feel they had enough knowledge about the pilot project to respond to boaters’ questions accurately. NEXUS Marine members surveyed also revealed that they did not always get clear direction from CBP and CBSA officers on how to report a landing properly.

When the TRC is closed, NEXUS Marine members’ calls are forwarded to the International Tunnel in Windsor/Detroit to complete the passage process. Officers taking these calls were not always able to respond to the callers’ questions adequately. In addition, these officers did not have access to the TRC database and this reduced their ability to access the passage history of the caller and make informed decisions on whether the caller should be referred for verification. Furthermore, information related to such passages is not keyed into the TRC database immediately, a fact which increases the likelihood of the passage not being captured—or not being captured correctly.

1.5 How effective were the outreach (marketing/advertising) activities for the NEXUS Marine pilot project?

CBSA and CBP regional staff’s outreach activities were supported by Communications products and targeted the boating community in the region, but were conducted in the absence of a comprehensive corporate marketing strategy.

Outreach activities included NEXUS Marine briefings to local marina and yacht club owners in the pilot project zone. A news release was issued to the local media. Press kits were distributed at boat shows. NEXUS Marine information was posted on CBP and CBSA Web sites. Articles were published in boating magazines and local newspapers, and NEXUS Marine pamphlets were distributed to NEXUS Highway members who crossed the border by car in the Windsor/Detroit area. Letters were sent to CANPASS Private Boat participants, informing them about NEXUS Marine. CBP’s Web site included information on their policy of allowing boaters to use a NEXUS Marine membership in lieu of the I-68 process to land in the U.S. 

CBSA NEXUS Marine management requested the addition of NEXUS Marine to a marketing plan already being developed by an external contractor for NEXUS Highway. The marketing plan arrived too late for the Marine pilot. However, the Communications and Consultation Directorate provided a communications plan and targeted products to support the launch of the limited pilot, including a news release, press kits, public notices in select media, generic articles for boating magazines and local papers, a pamphlet, posters, a participants guide and Web messages. Pamphlet and press kit distribution at boat shows and to people crossing the border by car produced some results: as of November 25, 2005, 1,061 member applications had been received and 779 members had enrolled. [ 16 ]

No target was set for enrolments during the boating season. However, informally, it was hoped to have about 1,000 NEXUS Marine members to test the processes and concept. On the whole, NEXUS Marine attracted a reasonable level of interest given the limited geographical area and small-scale marketing and outreach activities. The member survey shows that most boaters first learned about NEXUS Marine through word of mouth (see Table  1). 

Table 1: How Members First Learned About NEXUS Marine

"How did you first learn about the NEXUS Marine Program?"
Word of mouth	34%
Brochure/flyer/poster	14%
U.S./Canada border officer	13%
Marina, sailing, yacht club	10%
Boat show presentation	8%
Letter from CBSA	7%
Radio/TV/newspaper ad	5%
CBSA, CBP or other Web site	4%
While applying for an I-68 permit	2%
Through your employment	1%
DK/NR	1%

% indicating response
Percentages may not add to 100 per cent due to rounding
n=245

Several private sector stakeholders saw NEXUS Marine as a beneficial program—to the point that they advertised the initiative using their own resources. Marina owners and operators saw NEXUS Marine as an initiative that could bring more cross-border boat traffic and thus improve their business. One marina operator paid for a NEXUS Marine advertisement in a promotional publication, even though his marina is outside the current pilot area. Several business groups, including the Canadian Society of Customs Brokers, Vanguard Global Services, and municipalities in the area also posted information on their Web sites on the various reporting programs, including NEXUS Marine. [ 17 ]

2. Results Achievement (Success)

2.1 How effective and efficient were NEXUS Marine pilot project application, enrolment and passage processes?

Application process

Application processing time was within the established standards, with published processing time between 20 and 30 days and a NEXUS Marine application averaging 30 days.

An application is processed anywhere between 17 and 81 days. Applicants who submit incomplete and wrongly filled application forms cause most of the delays. [ 18 ] The time it takes to enrol one NEXUS Marine member, including application processing, risk assessments, interview at the Enrolment Centre, is approximately 2.5 hours.

The information is entered into the CBSA database and risk is assessed by both CBSA and CBP. One weakness of the application process is related to the fact that the CBSA transfers the information to CBP on paper file, which CBP, in turn, must key into its systems to do the background check for each applicant.

Between February and November 2005, a total of 1,061 NEXUS Marine applications were received. Of these, 779 individuals were enrolled, 21 files were waiting at the Enrolment Centre for the applicants to finalize enrolment in person, 240 applications were rejected for administrative reasons (i.e., incomplete applications) and 21 were rejected because the applicants did not meet program criteria. [ 19 ]

NEXUS Marine members who responded to the survey were highly satisfied with all aspects of the pilot project application process. Almost 80% were satisfied with the clarity of the information guide and application form, 73% with the time it took to receive the letter inviting them to the Enrolment Centre to complete the process, and 63% with the amount of the application fee. The proportion of members who were dissatisfied with any element of the application process was 11% or less.

The records of NEXUS Marine members are not kept separate from NEXUS Highway members in CBSA’s member database—Global Enrolment Component (GEC)—and not kept electronically on the CBP side. This lack of differentiation in CBSA’s database relates to the integrated nature of the NEXUS Highway and Marine programs. From an evaluation point of view, this was a challenge and required the examination of application paper files to complete a list of NEXUS Marine members for the survey. 

CBP keeps members’ information, including passage information on hard copy files. The fact that member and passage information is not available electronically on the CBP side limits the two agencies’ ability to share passage information. 

Enrolment process

NEXUS Marine members were highly satisfied with the various aspects of the enrolment process.

Only between 4% and 11% of members surveyed reported dissatisfaction with any aspect of the process. The main concerns related to the location of the Enrolment Centre. Those that lived some distance away saw having to travel to the centre to complete the enrolment process as a hindrance. About 15% of the U.S. residents and five percent of the Canadian residents were unhappy with the location of the Enrolment Centre, primarily because they felt unsafe in that area.

Table 2: Percentages of Members Satisfied With Components of the NEXUS Marine Enrolment Process

Aspects of Process	Satisfied (%)	Not satisfied (%)[ 20 ]
Officers’ explanation of program details	89	5
Services received from officers	86	4
Clarity of the participants guide	71	6
Enrolment Centre’s hours of operation	79	4
Enrolment Centre’s location	64	11
Length of time spent in the Enrolment Centre	90	0

Source: EKOS, Survey of NEXUS Marine Pilot Project Members: Final Report. Technical Report

Passage process

From May 1, 2005, to September 30, 2005, a total of 353 NEXUS Marine passages (or just under two percent of all reported recreational boating passages) into Canada involving 745 passengers were reported. The corresponding numbers for the U.S. were 203 and 531.

The low number of reported passages into the U.S. may be due to CBP not having an electronic reporting system for its TRC or boaters not reporting at all. According to the members surveyed, a number of boaters indicated they often do not report when entering the U.S. because all boaters find the reporting system difficult to use.

The majority of the survey respondents were highly satisfied with the passage process. The few aspects of the passage process that caused some dissatisfaction related to the time it takes to enter the U.S. This is mainly a result of the officers asking the same personal information every time a boater reports at a border crossing because the CBP does not keep electronic records of NEXUS Marine members (see Table 3). 

Table 3:  Level of Satisfaction with NEXUS Marine Passage Process, Entering Canada/U.S. [ 21 ]

Aspect of Process	Entering Canada/U.S. *	Extremely Dissatisfied or Dissatisfied (%)	Extremely Satisfied or Satisfied (%)
The ability to land at a location of your choice in Canada/U.S.	Canada (n=91)	5	89
	U.S. (n=88)	5	86
The time it takes to clear the border using the NEXUS Marine process	Canada (n=89)	6	86
	U.S. (n=84)	29	60
The frequency with which you are stopped to answer border officers' questions, boat and belongings checked, etc.	Canada (n=35)	0	86
	U.S. (n=35)	6	77
The time you have to wait for officers to come and check your boat at your chosen landing site	Canada (n=32)	7	85
	U.S. (n=42)	7	77
The amount of time you save by using the NEXUS Marine process	Canada (n=89)	6	82
	U.S. (n=83)	20	64
The Telephone Reporting Centre when calling to report a landing (i.e., live person answer, time it takes to report, service provided)	Canada (n=85)	13	78
	U.S. (n=76)	38	50

* Shows differences between entering Canada and entering the U.S.
Source: EKOS, Survey of NEXUS Marine Pilot Project Members: Final Report. Technical Report

2.2 To what extent did NEXUS Marine pilot project participants benefit from participation?

NEXUS Marine members reported considerable satisfaction with the time saved and NEXUS Marine’s convenience for crossing the border.

On average, members reported saving almost 20 minutes on each passage compared with the regular passage process. NEXUS Marine’s convenience and the sense that it is better than the I-68 program top the list of reasons for their high level of satisfaction with the pilot project (see Table 4).

Table 4 : Reasons for Being Extremely Satisfied with NEXUS Marine

"Why are you extremely satisfied with NEXUS Marine?"
Convenience	34%
Better than I-68 (5yrs; cheaper)	33%
Less trouble/hassle	32%
Saves time	26%
Low risk/secure/safe	16%
Can call ahead	13%
Polite/friendly people	9%
Covers road travel too	9%
Can land anywhere	5%
Other	4%
DK/NR	2%

% indicating reason
Multiple responses would be given; therefore percentages sum to greater than 100 per cent.
n=97

Overall, almost three quarters of those surveyed were satisfied with the pilot project, whereas only five percent expressed some dissatisfaction. In fact, members’ most recommended change to NEXUS Marine was to expand it to other border crossing areas.

The following comments exemplify why they like NEXUS Marine:

“It simplifies the process. You know that when you go out in your boat, you are, in a sense, already clearing customs. It is one less hassle that you have to worry about. Generally makes it more enjoyable to use your boat.”

“I'm extremely satisfied with NEXUS because it saves time and I like the extra feeling of security: I feel safer with the NEXUS id, knowing security is checking people out.”

Constraints identified as diminishing the potential benefit of participation include the limited geographical area within which members can use the NEXUS Marine border crossing process and the fact that they cannot enjoy this benefit if they have non-NEXUS members on board. Additionally, a number of members, particularly those who report boating with family members, find the membership fee high.

2.3 To what extent are the CBSA and CBP realizing benefits from the NEXUS Marine pilot project?

The CBSA and CBP have realized benefits in terms of increased access to information on low-risk recreational boaters and more “eyes and ears” to ensure border security.

A NEXUS Marine membership decision is based on the assessment of someone’s admissibility into the U.S. and Canada and meeting the established program eligibility criteria ahead of passage. This risk assessment has increased the knowledge that CBP and CBSA have about the boating community generally and low-risk recreational boaters specifically. It has become possible to separate the low-risk boaters from those that represent unknown or high risk. This is a first step in a risk-based approach to border security in the marine mode, and a key reason for continuing NEXUS Marine.

Enabling the CBSA and CBP to focus resources on higher-risk boaters was not achieved to a noticeable degree since NEXUS Marine was a pilot project, had a small membership base and was implemented with no dedicated resources. However, with the harmonization of all Trusted Travellers programs, and members being able to cross the border using a NEXUS passage process in all modes, this objective may be met in the future. In fact, about 90% of those using the NEXUS Marine reporting process to enter Canada by the first week of September 2005 were NEXUS Highway members. [ 22 ]

There is no evidence that the rate of compliance has improved as a result of the NEXUS Marine pilot project. Examinations of NEXUS Marine members showed compliance with program terms and conditions (three warnings for minor reporting errors were given) and no violations of program requirements were reported by CBSA and CBP during the 2005 boating season. 

Front-line officers often view NEXUS Marine with suspicion, thinking that Trusted Travellers programs allow members to circumvent customs and immigration requirements. While there is little evidence to substantiate these fears, programs such as NEXUS Marine depend on occasional checks and examinations to ensure their integrity. 

The initial risk assessment of each applicant gives reasonable certainty that those allowed to participate in the program are low-risk because they do not have any previous customs or immigration violations or criminal convictions. A NEXUS membership can be revoked should a member not comply with customs and immigration regulations and/or legislation, and should the annual risk assessment deems a member to have had any of the above violations or convictions or otherwise be high-risk. The assumption is that those who become members will continue to be fully compliant, and that focusing more attention on other boaters would help achieve improved border security. In addition, if the pilot results are an indication of NEXUS Marine members being compliant, an increase in membership should result in increased compliance.

The marine reporting programs CBP and CBSA had before NEXUS Marine were significantly different from each other, resulting in confusion for boaters. By removing these differences and thereby making reporting less complicated, it is believed that NEXUS Marine has increased the level of reporting and compliance.

Unexpected benefits to the agencies from the pilot project include reports from marina owners and NEXUS Marine members on suspicious activities they observed on water. According to CBSA regional staff, several such reports were received during the pilot project period.  Although these reports did not result in any hits, they demonstrate members’ interest in both protecting the integrity and the continuation of the program.

2.4  To what extent are other stakeholders realizing benefits from the NEXUS Marine pilot project?

The small scale and short duration of the pilot project has not resulted in a noticeable economic gain for businesses in the area. However, the potential of NEXUS Marine to contribute to the bottom line is not lost on the business people interviewed for this evaluation.

Economic downturns and security measures introduced after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks have reduced the number of boaters travelling between Canada and the U.S. As a result, marina and restaurant operators and other business people who rely on tourism for their income have experienced financial strain. From their perspective, any action the CBSA and CBP can take to facilitate the movement of boaters between the two countries is welcome.

3. Relevance

3.1 To what extent does the pilot project support the CBSA and the Smart Border Declaration (SBD) 32-point Action Plan objectives?

NEXUS Marine fully supports CBSA’s strategic outcome of managing the border efficiently and effectively to contribute to Canada’s security and prosperity.  It is also clearly aligned with the SBD 32-point Action Plan objectives.

Through the Smart Border Declaration, Canada and the U.S. undertook to “implement systems to collaborate in identifying security risks while expediting the flow of low-risk travellers” and to “establish a secure system to allow low risk frequent travellers between our countries to move efficiently across the border.” 

All NEXUS programs work on the same premise: the passage processes reduce the time it takes pre-approved low-risk travellers to cross the border into the U.S. and Canada. This approach of expediting border crossing, thereby allowing officers to focus on those of unknown or high risk, is the way of the future. NEXUS Marine supports this approach and by extension, contributes to the goal of border efficiency and security. 

3.2 What potential is there for the expansion of the NEXUS Marine project?

The general success of the pilot project and expressed interests of boaters provide a basis for the continuation of the pilot project in the Detroit/Windsor area. However, before it is expanded to other locations, a few issues need to be addressed.

NEXUS Marine worked reasonably well in Canada because it used existing infrastructure and policy. CBSA marine teams, a functioning TRC with a database to track and report on NEXUS Marine members passages, and a staff base with general knowledge of low-risk recreational boaters programs were in place. 

CBP also had marine teams but it did not have an equivalent to the TRC or an electronic database. This meant incomplete passage information and inefficient information sharing with CBSA. It is expected that these challenges will be minimized soon when CBP has implemented a TRC similar to that of CBSA.

Judging from members’ level of satisfaction and expressed interest in seeing NEXUS Marine expanded, the program has the potential to attract more boaters. In addition, the receipt of more than 1,000 applications over a short time in a small pilot zone, is an indication of interest in and need for the program. Enrolment in other border programs for recreational boaters has stagnated over the last few years. Although there could be a number of other reasons that contribute to this, the fact that NEXUS Marine is accepted both in the U.S. and Canada is one factor that made it more appealing to boaters.

According to the CBSA NEXUS Marine regional team, the total number of boats in the Detroit/Windsor area is estimated to be over 250,000. There were 19,192 non-NEXUS Marine passages reported in Windsor (including 131 CANPASS Private Boats passages) between April 1, 2005, and October 2, 2005. The total non-NEXUS Marine passages reported in Windsor, Hamilton, Victoria and Lansdowne for the same period was 67,282. These numbers indicate untapped NEXUS Marine expansion potential. [ 23 ]

There would be some negative consequences if NEXUS Marine were not expanded. The consequences of termination are limited in the short-term, but more significant in the long run. NEXUS Marine is a pilot project, and the number of members in the program is small. Only a few staff are involved and resource implications are minimal.

Terminating the program would not be consistent with the Shared Border Accord. It would also be inconsistent with the organizations’ long-term visions for traveller processing, particularly since NEXUS Marine, along with the NEXUS programs in other modes, are regarded as building blocks for the future.

3.3 Are there alternative approaches or technologies that may be more efficient and/or effective for achieving expected results?

The use of select technologies is considered by CBP and the CBSA. CBP has tested the use of transponders for recreational boaters and a report is expected in 2006.

NEXUS Marine currently uses minimal technology as reporting passage is done over the phone. Given the small scale and uniqueness of the NEXUS Marine initiative, it was not possible to address the question of whether alternative technologies and approaches might expedite border crossing for recreational boaters. CBP is currently conducting a study on the benefits of using technologies such as transponders and a global positioning system to monitor the movement of boats. The merit of introducing such technologies in Canada is being discussed, although the high cost associated with such technology and privacy-related issues may discourage  their introduction.

Conclusion

As the preceding Key Findings section indicates, the NEXUS Marine pilot project was successfully implemented and shows the potential to meet program objectives. It supports the Smart Border Declaration and contributes to the two agencies’ ability to distinguish between lower and unknown or higher-risk travellers.

CBP and CBSA regional staff who implemented and managed NEXUS Marine cooperated well, which facilitated the implementation of the pilot project. Although the management structure was adequate for the day-to-day operation of the pilot project, the absence of a bi-national governance structure with clearly defined roles and responsibilities was a weakness. While a Bi-national Working Group was established in the early days of the design phase, it ceased to meet once the project was implemented. The Local Working Group consisted of CBSA staff and managers, with little involvement of CBP representatives.

With the exception of $10,000 provided by CBSA to cover some administrative expenses and travel costs for the CBSA Headquarters implementation team and funding for pamphlets provided by CBP, no additional resources were given to NEXUS Marine. Since the resources came from existing programs and no budget breakdown was available from either the CBSA or CBP, it was not possible to determine the exact level of resources used. What is clear is that some aspects of the pilot project could have been improved with a greater resource base. These aspects include the continuation of the Bi-national Working Group, the identification and tracking of performance measures, improved Nexus Marine-specific training provided to officers, more staff and the creation of a separate platform within GEC to house NEXUS Marine to facilitate the differentiation of NEXUS Marine and NEXUS Highway members.

CBSA NEXUS Marine management requested the addition of NEXUS Marine to a marketing plan already being developed for NEXUS Highway by an external contractor. The marketing plan arrived too late for the Marine pilot. However, the Communications and Consultation Directorate provided a communications plan and products targeting audiences in the area of the limited pilot, including a news release, press kits, public notices, generic articles for boating magazines and local papers, a pamphlet, posters, a participants guide and Web messages. Pamphlet and press kit distribution at boat shows and to people crossing the border by car produced promising results: as of November 25, 2005, 1,061 member applications had been received and 779 members had enrolled.

NEXUS Marine members reported a high level of satisfaction with the various aspects of the pilot project. They appreciated the convenience of NEXUS Marine and the time the passage process saved. Members were somewhat less satisfied with the passage process when entering the U.S. Marina owners and operators regarded NEXUS Marine with optimism, welcoming any initiative that could increase recreational cross-border boating.

CBSA administers both the Customs Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The authorities given by these acts in terms of cross-border boating were not fully understood by those interviewed, and related issues had a bearing on the integrity of the pilot project. Allowing NEXUS Marine members to dock at private property, where CBSA may not have the authority to search the vessel, and the procedures with respect to on-water enforcement actions are examples of issues that need to be addressed through policy development before the program is expanded to other locations. 

NEXUS Marine supports the Smart Border Declaration and contributes to the two agencies’ ability to distinguish between lower and unknown or higher-risk travellers and to manage the border accordingly.

Key Recommendations

1. Continue NEXUS Marine as a pilot in the current Detroit/Windsor pilot zone for one more season, and expand it to include the 48 additional designated sites along Lake Erie, Lake St. Clair and St. Clair River that are within the boundaries of CBSA Windsor/St Clair Region. Keeping NEXUS Marine as a pilot for another year would allow the agencies to dedicate resources and track resource expenditures, establish an appropriate governance structure, gather performance information for sufficient evidence to support a business case to fund its expansion to another pilot site or nationally, and enrol more members. 
2. Based on the experience of the NEXUS Marine pilot, have program management refine Agency policies related to recreational boating examination, as well as those pertaining to designated sites. [ 24 ]
3. Develop a Results-Based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF) to address issues pertaining to:
   • NEXUS Marine’s mandate, objectives and expected results;
   • the governance structure, with accountabilities, roles and responsibilities; and
   • the development of a performance measurement strategy for collecting the necessary data to measure and monitor progress against plan. 

Management Response

Recommendation 1: Continue NEXUS Marine as a pilot in the current Detroit/Windsor pilot zone for one more season, and expand it to include the 48 additional designated sites along Lake Erie, Lake St. Clair and St. Clair River that are within the boundaries of CBSA Windsor/St Clair Region.

The CBSA will continue the pilot during the 2006 boating season from May18 to October 31, 2006. The CBSA will slightly expand the pilot to avoid offering NEXUS Marine for a portion of Lake Erie only. To be fair to boaters and avoid confusion as to where the NEXUS Marine passage process can take place, the pilot will be expanded to all of the Windsor/St. Clair Region and the balance of Lake Erie, as well as to the Upper Niagara River within the Fort Erie/Niagara Region. A larger number of designated sites will allow the CBSA to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the pilot.

Expanding NEXUS Marine to these areas will result in two Regions and two Telephone Reporting Centres being involved. Additional training and tracking will be provided to ensure the smooth operation of the initiative.

Recommendation 2: Based on the experience of the NEXUS Marine pilot, it is recommended that program management refine Agency policies related to recreational boating examination, as well as those pertaining to designated sites.

The privilege for NEXUS Marine members to dock at private property has been removed for the 2006 boating season. Unless amendments are made to the Presentation of Persons (2003) Regulations and/or there is a need to use this option, NEXUS Marine members will be required to arrive at designated sites only.

As well, removing the feature of allowing NEXUS Marine members to dock at private property will allow time to engage internal stakeholders to develop an Agency-wide approach and to integrate CBSA authorities under the Customs Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which are both administered by the Agency.

Management will initiate the appropriate policy analysis to ensure that all legislative and/or regulatory authorities necessary to support NEXUS Marine are in place. This will be pursued in concert with pilot expansion. 

The NEXUS Marine project team is taking steps to improve the NEXUS Marine training offered to Agency employees and roll it out to those who will deliver the program in the Fort Erie/Niagara Region.

Recommendation 3: Develop a Results-Based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF) for NEXUS Marine.

Agency management supports and has initiated the development of a Results-Based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF) to improve accountability and monitoring in the future.