Secondary school has not been completed (i.e., no diploma obtained) and the applicant has no trade or apprenticeship educational credentials = 0 points
Secondary school educational credential =5 points
One year post-secondary educational credential, other than a university credential, and at least 12 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies =12 points
One year post-secondary educational credential, other than a university educational credential, and at least 13 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies =15 points
One year university educational credential at the bachelor’s level, and at least 13 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies =15 points
Two year post-secondary educational credential, other than a university educational credential, and at least 14 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies =20 points
A university educational credential of two years or more at the bachelor’s level, and at least 14 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies =20 points
Three year post-secondary educational credential, other than a university educational credential, and at least 15 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies = 22 points
Two or more university educational credentials at the bachelor’s level and at 22 least 15 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies =22 points
University educational credential at the master’s or doctoral level and at least 17 years of completed full-time or full-time equivalent studies=25 points

Knowledge of official languages - R79
A maximum of 24 points should be awarded for proficiency in English and French as follows:
• a maximum of 16 points for proficiency in the “first” official language (that identified by the principal applicant on the application form as the one in which they are more proficient);
• a maximum of 8 points for proficiency in the “second” official language.

First official language (Read Write Listen Speak)
High proficiency 4 4 4 4
Moderate Proficiency 2 2 2 2
Basic proficiency 1 1 1 1
No ability 0 0 0 0

Second Language (Read Write Listen Speak)
High proficiency 2 2 2 2
Moderate Proficiency 2 2 2 2
Basic proficiency 1 1 1 1
No ability 0 0 0 0

R79(1). Points are awarded for proficiency in English and/or French based on:
a) language test results, submitted at time of application from an approved organization or institution;
b) other evidence in writing, submitted at time of application, of the applicant’s proficiency
Officers may no longer assess language proficiency at interview; rather, they must either:
a) rely on the results of a test done by an approved testing organization as conclusive evidence of an applicant’s level of language proficiency (R79(1)(a)) (refer to Section 10.5); or
b) evaluate written evidence of proficiency submitted by the applicant against the Canadian Language Benchmarks 2000 / Standards linguistiques canadiens 2006 (R79(1)(b)) (refer to Section 10.10).

It is the responsibility of the applicant to choose which of these two options to follow, and outline the consequences of this decision. We strongly advise taking a test from an approved organization if English and/or French is not the applicant's native language;
Unless applicants believe they can clearly establish the proficiency levels they claim through the means of a written explanation detailing training in and usage of the language and supported by written proof of education and/or employment using the language, they should undertake an approved test and provide results.

Note: Points for the applicant’s language proficiency are generally awarded according to evidence provided at the time the application is made. However, if further study, training, or testing is completed and documentation submitted between the time of application and the time of assessment, officers will use the most current results to determine point allocations. In terms of designated language test results, officers will NOT select the highest score for each language ability from a variety of test score submissions. It is always the most recent group of tests that will be considered by officer as it is the most current assessment of the applicant’s four language abilities.

10.6. Approved testing organizations

English Language Testing Organizations
1. International English Language testing System (IELTS) CIC accepts the ‘General Training’ tests for reading and writing.
2. Applied Research and Evaluation Services (ARES), University of British Columbia administers the Canadian English Language Proficiency Index Program (CELPIP)
3. The University of Cambridge Local Examination Syndicate, Education Australia

French language testing organizations
The Paris Chamber of Commerce and Industry administers the Test d’Évaluation de Français
(TEF). For CIC purposes, applicants must submit results for the following tests of the TEF modules:
compréhension écrite (reading); compréhension orale (listening); expression écrite (writing);
expression orale (speaking). The lexique et structure (grammar and structure) test is not required
for Canadian immigration purposes. However, test candidates take it as part of the reading and
listening module.

Language test results must not be older than one year at the time of application. R79(4) establishes these test results as “conclusive evidence” of the applicant’s proficiency in that language.Officers cannot:
• consider any claim made by the applicant that the test results are an inaccurate reflection of
their true abilities;
• override the test results and substitute their own evaluation of language abilities;
• award points based on the results of any language test that is not administered by an organization that has been approved by CIC. Non-designated test results may only be considered as one part of an overall written submission and are not “conclusive evidence” of an applicant’s official language proficiency.

Second-language experts established the equivalencies between the four levels of language proficiency indicated in the Regulations, and the results of the language tests listed above. Thus, officers should award points based on the appropriate equivalency chart

10.10. Other written evidence
If the applicant provides a written explanation and supporting documentation in lieu of test results, officers must assess it against the Canadian Language Benchmarks 2000, and/or the Standards Linguistiques Canadiens 2006. R79(2) establishes the following equivalencies between the four proficiency levels and the Canadian Language Benchmarks:

Proficiency Level Benchmark equivalencies
High Benchmark 8 or higher
Moderate Benchmark 6 or 7
Basic Benchmark 4 or 5
No proficiency Benchmark 3 or lower

Points for Work Experience

Number of years Less than 1=0 1 year=15 2 years=17 3 year= 19 More than 4= 21

To be eligible for points, the applicant’s work experience must:
• have occurred during the 10 years immediately preceding the date of application submission;
• be in occupations listed in the National Occupational Classification (NOC) under Skill Type 0
or Skill Level A and B;

A) One-year continuous full-time experience: this means one year in one skilled occupation to demonstrate an ability to establish oneself economically; or
(B) The equivalent in continuous part-time employment in one or more occupations. Part-time employment could be made up of two part-time jobs held simultaneously or of one part-time job held over the equivalent of one year of full-time employment.

Once the qualifying year has been established, further experience in one or more occupations can be calculated by adding up the number of months spent in full-time and/or part-time work in one or more of the NOC categories.
Officers must:
• take into account both paid full-time work and paid part-time work (equalizing part-time work
to full-time years) (R80(1));
• consider only those occupations which the applicant has specified and for which the applicant
has provided the four-digit NOC code on their application form (R80(6));

Note: While the Regulations clearly place responsibility on applicants to undertake research of the NOC and provide the NOC coding for the occupations in which they claim qualifying experience, officers are expected to exercise discretion where applicants may have made minor errors or omissions in correlating work experience and NOC coding.
Officers should not take into account whether the applicant meets the “Employment requirements” description set forth in the NOC for the occupation(s) listed;
• award points only if the applicant has performed the actions described in the lead statement
of the particular NOC description and has performed at least a substantial number of the
duties described in the “Main Duties” summary – including all the essential duties (R80(3));

Note: Neither the NOC nor the Regulations distinguish between “essential” and “non-essential” duties or provide guidance as to what constitutes a “substantial number”. This is left as a matter for assessment on a case-by-case basis. If officers have concerns about whether or not the applicant has carried out “a substantial number of the main duties including all of the essential duties,” they should give the applicant an opportunity to respond to these concerns. Officers should take into account any years of experience that occur between application and assessment, and for which the applicant has submitted the necessary documentation (R77).

Points for Age
Pursuant to R81, up to 10 points are awarded to an applicant who is at least 21 and less than 50
years of age at the time the application is made. Two points are subtracted, to a maximum of 10
points, for each year the applicant is less than 21 or over the age of 49.

Age Points
20 or 50 years of age= 10
19 or 51 years of age= 8
18 or 52 years of age= 6
17 or53 years of age = 4
Less than 17 or greater than 53 years of age = 2
Under 16 or over 54 = 0

Points for Arranged employment (R82)
10 points will be awarded in this section if the client has arranged employment.
5 more points will be awarded under adaptability section.

1. Occupations must be in Skill Type 0,A or B of the NOC.
2. HRSDC will approve the job offer and notify the visa office.
3. The applicant must be able to perform and is likely to accept and carry out the employment. Officers may take into account the applicant’s education and training, background, and prior work experience to determine if the applicant meets this requirement.

Arranged employment points also awarded for the following type of workers:

(1) the applicant is currently working in Canada on an HRSDC- confirmed temporary work permit (including sectoral confirmations), pursuant to R82(2)(a), the work permit is valid at the time of the permanent resident visa application and at the time the visa is issued; and the employer has made an offer to employ the applicant on an indeterminate basis if the permanent resident visa is issued.

(2) the applicant is currently working in Canada pursuant to R82(2)(b) in a confirmation-exempt category
under the North America Free Trade Agreement, the General Agreement on Trade and Services,
or the Canada-Chile Free Trade Agreement; in a significant-benefit category, such as an intra- company
transferee in the category where limited access to the labour market is granted for public policy reasons
(i.e., post-graduate work, spouse/common-law partner of the work permit is valid at the time
of the permanent resident visa application and at the time the visa is issued; and • the employer has made an offer to employ the applicant on an indeterminate basis if the permanent resident visa is issued.

(3) the applicant does not intend to work in Canada before being issued a permanent resident visa and does not hold a work permit [R82(2)(c)]. The applicant has a full-time job offer that has been approved by HRSDC, pursuant to an arranged employment opinion outlined in R82(2)(c). The applicant meets any required Canadian licensing or regulatory standards associated with the job. The employer has made an offer to employ the applicant on an indeterminate basis if the permanent resident visa is issued.

(4) the applicant holds a work permitpursuant to R82(2)(d): The circumstances referred to in R82(2)(a) or (b) do not apply—for example the applicant has a job offer from an employer other than the one for whom they are currently working; or the applicant’s job is in a confirmation-exempt category other than those outlined in R82(2)(b). The applicant has a full-time job offer that has been approved by HRSDC, pursuant to an arranged employment opinion outlined in R82(2)(c) the applicant meets any required
Canadian licensing or regulatory standards associated with the job. The employer has made an offer to
employ the applicant on an indeterminate basis if the permanent resident visa is issued

If significant time has lapsed since the date of application, officers may want to contact the employer to verify that the offer of permanent employment still exists. If the case is being convoked for interview, the officer should check CAIPS/FOSS about eight weeks in advance of the interview date to confirm that the AEO has not been withdrawn or cancelled. Arranged employment opinion decisions can be revoked at any time by HRSDC. Before issuing a visa, the officer should confirm in FOSS/CAIPS that the opinion has not been cancelled or withdrawn.

Points for Adaptability Maximum 10 points
Points for previous study in Canada, previous work in Canada, and relatives in Canada are awarded only once - either to the principal applicant or the spouse or common-law partner, but not to both.

a) Educational credentials of the accompanying spouse or common-law partner:
Evaluate credentials as if the spouse or common-law partner were the principal applicant then award points as follows: 25 points = 5 points, 20 or 22 points = 4, 12 or 15 points =3 points

b) Previous study in Canada:
5 points if the applicant or accompanying spouse or common- law partner completed a program of full-time study of at least 2 years’ duration at a post-secondary institution in Canada, if this occurred after the age of 17 and with valid study permits. (The person is not required to have obtained an educational credential for these 2 years of study in Canada to earn the points, but simply to have completed at least 2 years of study.)

c) Previous work in Canada:
5 points for a minimum of 1 year of full-time work in Canada on a valid work permit for an applicant or accompanying spouse or common-law partner.

d) Relatives in Canada:
5 points if the applicant or accompanying spouse or common- law partner has a relative (parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, child of a parent, child of a grandparent, or grandchild of a parent) who is residing in Canada and is a Canadian citizen or permanent resident.

e) Arranged employment:
5 points if the applicant has earned points under the Arranged employment in Canada factor (Factor 5).

Note: Pursuant to R77, these requirements and criteria must be met at the time the application is made, as well as at the time the visa is issued. Therefore if an applicant’s spouse or common-law partner is no longer accompanying them, then any points that they may have received for their adaptability cannot be counted. If an applicant adds a spouse or common-law partner to their application between application and assessment, and submits the necessary documentation, points must be counted, if applicable, for that person under the adaptability criteria. If the applicant or their spouse or common-law partner completes further study, works in Canada, arranges employment in Canada, or gains relatives in Canada between application and assessment, and submits the necessary documentation, points must be awarded accordingly.

Use of interviews
Selection standards are objective and clearly defined, and eligibility can be assessed in straightforward cases through the information provided on the application for permanent residence forms and the accompanying supporting documentation. In most cases, officers should be able to make selection decisions—either to approve or refuse applications—from the documentation provided. However, in some cases, an interview may be necessary.

Any concerns officers have regarding the accuracy or authenticity of information or documentation should be communicated to the applicant, whether these concerns are raised as the result of site visits, telephone checks or other means. Concerns can be communicated to the applicant in writing or at interview.

Officers may conduct interviews with applicants to:
• ensure that information submitted on the application is truthful and complete;
• detect and deter fraudulent information and documents;
• clarify specific information;
• conduct quality control.
Officers may not conduct interviews to:
• assess language abilities;
• determine personal suitability (as this factor no longer exists).

Note: Visa offices will be expected to undertake both targeted and random verifications to detect and deter fraud. The number and percentage of cases subjected to verification should be high enough to act as a meaningful disincentive to those who would attempt such practices. A40 makes material misrepresentation a ground for inadmissibility in its own right and prescribes a two-year ban on those both directly and indirectly involved in such practices.

Interviews, site visits and telephone checks have proven to be the most effective ways to detect and to combat fraud. The information gained at interviews where fraud is detected will help officers to identify current trends and patterns and to refine their profiles for ongoing use.

11.3. Substituted evaluation
R76(3) makes possible substituted evaluation by an officer. This authority may be used if an officer believes the point total is not a sufficient indicator of whether or not the applicant may become economically established in Canada. Substituted evaluation is to be considered on a case-by-case basis. The scope of what an officer might consider as relevant cannot be limited by a prescribed list of factors to be used in support of exercising substituted evaluation. There are any number and combination of considerations that an officer might cite as being pertinent to assessing, as per the wording of R76(3): “. . . the likelihood of the ability of the skilled worker to become economically established in Canada. . . .”

Frequency of use will vary from visa office to visa office, as some will find in their caseloads more situations of disconnect between the point total and establishment prospects than will others. The fact that the applicant “almost attained” a pass mark is not, in itself, grounds to recommend the use of substituted evaluation. Rather, the officer needs to identify and document the facts demonstrating that the points awarded are not a sufficient indicator of the applicant's ability to become economically established in Canada. For legal clarity, officers should employ the terms used in legislation, such as “substituted evaluation” or “ability to become economically established.”

If an officer decides to use negative substituted evaluation
Then the officer will communicate their concerns to the applicant and provide sufficient opportunity to the applicant to respond to these concerns, through correspondence or an interview and obtain written concurrence from a designated officer the applicant did not meet the pass mark (i.e., positive substituted evaluation). The officer will obtain written concurrence from a designated officer.

Substituted evaluation is not to be confused with humanitarian and compassionate authority, which enables the Minister or his/her delegates to override inadmissibility and grant admission to Canada in a range of situations involving sufficiently compelling circumstances. Substituted evaluation cannot be used to override:
• a refusal due to insufficient funds [R76(3)]
• a failure to meet the definition of a skilled worker as outlined in R75 (R75(3) clearly states that
a failure to meet the requirements of a skilled worker as outlined in R75(2) will result in an
application being refused)
• a failure to meet the Ministerial Instructions

Officers do not need the concurrence of the designated officer to deny requests for the use of positive substituted evaluation.

Medical requirements:
Applicants and their family members, whether accompanying you or not, must undergo and pass a medical examinations and must not have a condition that is is a danger to public health or safety or would cause excessive demand on health or social services in Canada. Applicants must see a physician on Canada’s list of Designated Medical Practitioners at www.cic.gc.ca/dmp-md/medical.aspx. The medical examination results are valid for 12 months from the date of the first medical examination.

Police certificates
All applicants must submit police certificates/clearances as part of the application process.
Category 1 Applicants do not submit police certificates with applications. If the application is recommended for further assessment they will be required to submit the police certificates along with the full application to the Canadian Visa Office indicated on the application.
Applicants and family members who are 18 years of age and older and are not permanent residents or Canadian citizens have to provide a valid police certificate, or police clearance, or record of no information.

These documents are to be provided for each country other than Canada, in which applicants have lived for six consecutive months or longer since reaching the age of 18.
Note: If applicants or family members were under 18 years of age (16 years of age in certain jurisdictions) for the entire time you lived in a particular country, you do not need to provide a police certificate for that country. The certificate must have been issued no more than 3 months prior to submitting the application. If the original certificate is neither in English nor in French, applicants must submit both the certificate and the original copy of a translation prepared by an accredited translator.

Immigration may also do their own background checks. For more information on obtaining police clearances go to: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/security/police-cert/index.asp

Translation of documents
Any document that is not in English or French must normally be accompanied by the English or French translation and an affidavit from the person who completed the translation and a certified copy of the document. Note: An affidavit is a document on which the translator has sworn, in the presence of a commissioner authorized to administer oaths in the country in which the translator is living, that the contents of their translation are a true translation and representation of the contents of the original document. Translations by family members are not acceptable.

Certified copies or notarized documents
To have a copy certified, an authorized person must compare the original document to the photocopy and must print the following on the photocopy:
“I certify that this is a true copy of the original document” and the name of the original document, the date of the certification, his or her name, official position or title and signature

People authorized to certify copies include the following:
In Canada: a commissioner of oaths, a notary public, a justice of the peace
Outside Canada: a judge, a magistrate, a notary public, an officer of a court of justice, a commissioner authorized to administer oaths in the country in which the person is living