ARCHIVE - Evaluation of the Sustaining Grants to National Voluntary Organizations and Contributions under the Departmental Program

Archived Content

Information identified as archived is provided for reference, research or record-keeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Archived

This page has been archived on the Web.

Adobe Acrobat version (PDF 268KB)

Executive Summary

Introduction
The Executive Summary provides a brief overview of the evaluation including background information, the methodologies employed, and the key findings, conclusions and recommendations.

Evaluation Scope and Objectives
In accordance with TBS Evaluation Policy and as identified in the RMAF, the evaluation1 examined issues related to relevance, success, and cost-effectiveness. Process (i.e. service delivery) and performance monitoring issues will also be assessed to guide and improve future programming and performance measurement efforts. The results of this evaluation will be incorporated into the revised terms and conditions and will inform the performance measurement strategy.

Background Information
The Departmental Program provides sustaining grants funding to NVOs totaling $1,796,144 (2005-06) and contributions totaling $1,851,856 (2005-06). The Sustaining Funding (Grants) Program for NVOs provides grants to fourteen NVOs to cover core operating expenses and to maintain a national structure. These organizations work with “department and portfolio agencies through the provision of policy advice, public education activities and community participation in public safety initiatives.

The Departmental Contributions Program supports policy development through allocations to NVOs, public not for profit organizations and local non-government organizations supporting PSEP priorities under the following categories:

Methodology
The data collection for this evaluation spanned about eight weeks, from June 24 to September 12, 2005. The evaluation employed three main lines of evidence:

Key Findings
Relevance
The sustaining grants program was viewed as relevant given the National Voluntary Organization’s role in providing advice and their role in community service delivery (particularly in the provision of after-care services) and public awareness. The contribution program was reported to address needs related to informed policy and program development, and knowledge generation.

There was general agreement that the sustaining grants and departmental contributions program was consistent with PSEP priorities and objectives, particularly those priorities around community safety through partnerships. However, some PSEP respondents felt that the sustaining grants, while consistent with corrections and criminal justice priorities, was not fully aligned with the broader mandate and objectives of PSEP such as those related to emergency preparedness.

Design and Delivery
Transparency of the grants and contributions program is an issue. There was a reported need for the department to make consistent efforts in communicating details of the program, both within the Department and to potential recipients; to disseminate project information; and to expand the reach of the contributions program beyond its traditional and longstanding partners.

Adequacy of Funding was identified as a key issue by the majority of respondents. Sustaining grants were described as insufficient for many NVOs to meet operational costs and to maintain their national structure.

Current contribution funding levels also limit ability to meet increased demand for contributions funding arising from the merging of PSEP. PSEP respondents also cited the need for additional funding to adequately market, communicate and monitor the program.

There were mixed opinions expressed as to whether the Sustained Grants program needs to expand the number of organizations receiving grants. While many respondents advocated maintaining the present grant program, “as is”, given its historical context, continued relevance and limited funding, some suggested that additional review and analysis is required. Suggestions were made to review the mix and number of NVOs to ensure congruence with PSEP’s long term vision and goals and its eligibility criteria and to ensure representation in terms of racial and cultural diversity, victims’ organizations, and the need to be more inclusive of the broader department. Other respondents suggested that new voluntary and professional organizations could be funded through alternative mechanisms to ensure appropriate representation.

Performance reporting, relating to the contributions program, was reported to be inconsistent. While there is some reporting of project results, performance information is not rolled up or summarized systematically in line with the RMAF. Given the lack of systematic monitoring it is difficult to adequately assess the effectiveness and reach of the departmental contribution program on an ongoing basis.

Success
There was general agreement that the NVOs funded through the grant program is effective in helping them to maintain a national structure. Decreasing grant funds concurrent with rising operating costs was reported to erode the ability of many NVOs to maintain their national structure.

The contributions program was noted to improve NGO and NVO capacity that was enhanced not only by the dollar amounts of the contributions, but also by in kind support provided by PSEP. Contribution funding was reported to be instrumental in improving leveraging ability and service delivery.

The grants program was viewed as an effective mechanism for providing PSEP with access to a network of voluntary and community organizations developed by NVOs. Moreover, there was a perception that the NVO network has grown over the years. NVOs and PSEP meet formally at least three times a year through Roundtables. However, the difficulty of networking at the provincial and local levels given resource constraints was raised as a key issue.

The majority of stakeholder and contribution respondents reported strengthened partnerships as a result of the contribution program. Two case studies, the Lanark County Community Justice Program – In Support of Restorative Justice Programs and the Development and Implementation of the Hinton Community Wellness Program, illustrate the increasing capacity of the recipient organizations to network, communicate and partner with other local community agencies and organizations.

The grants and contributions program was perceived as valuable in influencing policy development and government decisions in priority areas for PSEP. The grant program creates a sustained relationship between NVOs and PSEP, providing a foundation for feedback and advice on policy and emerging issues.

By funding strategic research and innovation projects, the contributions program was noted to provide evidence-based input into policy and programming decisions. The value of conferences in contributing to policy development was identified as an issue.

Cost-Effectiveness
The grants and contributions program was viewed as a cost-effective means of achieving results for a number of reasons: the program encourages NVOs and NGOs to leverage other funding; organizations rely on volunteers to conduct many of their activities; and the contribution projects were reported to be aligned with priorities through a strategic planning process.

Summary
Overall, the program is considered effective in generating knowledge, contributing towards policy and program development, strengthening partnerships and building the capacity of voluntary organizations. There was a general consensus that the program should be maintained. However, the evaluation identified a number of issues that deserve additional review and assessment. These issues relate to the program’s congruence with the broader mandate and objectives of PSEP, enhancing program communication and dissemination of results, the need to update and implement the RMAF, and a review of the Terms and Conditions particularly with respect to the contribution categories and multi-year funding.

Recommendations

  1. Ensure there is adequate communication to targeted stakeholders and potential and eligible recipients with respect to the Grants and Contributions program. The objectives, rationale and eligibility criteria for the sustaining grants program should be communicated within the Department and to other eligible recipients. While the current demand for the contributions program exceeds available funding, there was a reported need to more clearly communicate the details the contributions program (e.g. goals and objectives, selection criteria) and to ensure the reach of the program is expanded beyond PSEP’s traditional and longstanding partners.
  2. Review and assess the existing Terms and Conditions of the grants and contribution program with respect to the contribution categories, and length of funding cycle for multi-year contribution projects. Review categories pertaining to research and innovation and implementation to ensure these categories are sufficiently clear and distinct. Assess the feasibility of increasing the length of the funding cycle from three to five years for those projects where additional time may be needed for implementation and assessment of longer-term outcomes. The language of the Terms and Conditions should also be reviewed to ensure it appropriately reflects the scope of the Department’s mandate and work.
  3. Review the grants and contributions program to ensure its alignment with the broader mandate of PSEP. There is a need to ensure the congruence of this program with the PSEP mandate and objectives. The Sustaining Grants to NVOs and Departmental Contributions was established prior to the amalgamation of the Solicitor General, the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness and the National Crime Prevention Centre. The demand for contributions funding has since increased as the program serves more and diverse types of clients.
  4. Ensure an appropriate mix of innovation, research and information exchange type projects. A considerable portion of contribution funding is allocated to information exchange type projects such as Annual Conferences. PSEP representatives should initiate an internal consultation process to assess whether a proportion of funding should be allocated to each contribution category.
  5. Update and implement RMAF to ensure its alignment with PSEP. The current RMAF was completed when the program was under the aegis of the Solicitor General and needs to be updated to reflect the broader mandate of PSEP. In addition, a systematic monitoring system should be implemented that is consistent and appropriate to the type and size of contribution projects. Final project reports should contain enough information to help PSEP assess the project’s effectiveness. In addition to financial expenditures, project final reports could contain the following types of information:
    • a. A project summary
    • b. A description of project objectives
    • c. Whether objectives were met or not and why
    • d. Data that supports the success of the project
    • e. Link project results to Departmental objectives/outcomes identified in the RMAF
  6. Improve dissemination of project results. The evaluation found that project results were not consistently disseminated. Project results should be consistently disseminated to targeted stakeholders and generally made available on the PSEP website. 

1.0 Introduction

GGI is pleased to present this Evaluation Report of the Sustaining Grants to National Voluntary Organizations (NVOs) and Contributions under the Departmental Program to the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (PSEP). This section provides background information on PSEP and the sustaining grants and contributions program and outlines the methodology utilized for this evaluation. The next section (2.0) presents the key evaluation findings with respect to relevance, design and delivery, success and cost-effectiveness issues. Section 3 outlines the key conclusions and recommendations of the evaluation.

1.1 Sustaining Grants to NVOs and Contributions Program

1.1.1 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

The Department of the Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (PSEP) fulfills the fundamental role of government to ensuring the safety and security of Canadians. The Portfolio of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness is responsible within the Government of Canada for crisis and emergency preparedness, national security, policing and law enforcement oversight, corrections and conditional release of federal offenders, crime prevention and protection of Canada’s borders and critical infrastructure.2 PSEP consists of the Department and six Agencies, namely the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC), and the National Parole Board (NPB), Canadian Firearms Centre (CFC), and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), and three review boards (the RCMP External Review Committee, the Commission for Public Complaints Against the RCMP, and the Office of the Correctional Investigator).

The Department's role is to provide advice to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness on policy and operational issues across the criminal justice, public safety and emergency management sectors and within the Portfolio. An integrated, cohesive approach solidifies horizontal collaboration across the Portfolio and ensures that timely, responsive advice is provided to the Minister. This approach further ensures that a strategic policy and legislative framework is maintained and that threats to Canadian security are assessed thoroughly and addressed with measured, thoughtful action commensurate with the threat level.

In addition, PSEP delivers a range of programs designed to promote community safety, improve our collective capacity to handle emergencies provide disaster assistance relief, better protect our critical infrastructure and increase our science and technology capacity. Through these programs, PSEP is building safer, more resilient communities through partnerships.

The Department advises supports and assists the Minister in all her responsibilities as they relate to:

The Departmental Program provides sustaining grants funding to NVOs totaling $1,796,144 (2005-06) and contributions totaling $1,851,856 (2005-06).

1.1.2 Sustaining Grants to NVOs

According to Treasury Board’s Policy on Transfer Payments, a grant “is a transfer payment made to an individual or organization which is not subject to being accounted for or audited, but for which eligibility and entitlement may be verified or for which the recipient may need to meet pre-conditions.”

The Sustaining Funding Program for NVOs was established in 1983 to consolidate the funding previously provided separately by the former Department of the Solicitor General, Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) and the National Parole Board (NPB). The Terms and Conditions for the grants require NVOs to demonstrate their continuing eligibility by meeting specific criteria and by reporting on their activities and finances over the preceding year. The Portfolio Liaison Committee on Relations with the Voluntary Sector reviews Grant applications.

The Sustaining Funding Program for NVOs provides grants to fourteen NVOs to cover core operating expenses and to maintain a national structure. These organizations3 work with “department and portfolio agencies through the provision of policy advice, public education activities and community participation in public safety initiatives.”4

Funding provided to NVOs is disbursed over a one-year funding cycle, subject to annual Parliamentary appropriations. The criteria for receiving a grant under the program include the following:

1.1.3 Departmental Contributions

The Departmental Contributions Program supports policy development through allocations to NVOs, public not for profit organizations and local non-government organizations supporting PSEP priorities under the following categories:

The transfer payment policy specifies that contributions are a “conditional transfer payments to an individual or organization for a specified purpose pursuant to a contribution agreement that is subject to being accounted for and audited. Should the individual or organization use the transfer payment in the manner specified by the contribution agreement, the government does not expect to receive any goods or services directly in return, to be repaid or to receive a financial return.”

The selection and approval process for contributions varies according to the amount of the proposed contribution:

Contributions of $20,000 and below are discretionary within the program area. Program officials and Corporate Management Branch/Accountability Division review project proposals to ensure that they are in line with the Department's mandate and priorities, program terms and conditions, the Policy on Transfer Payments and other applicable policies and legislation. The Contribution Agreements drafted from these proposals are routed through the Corporate Management Branch/ADM for review and recommendations and approved within the Directorates by individuals with delegated financial signing authority.

Contributions over $20,000 follow the same process as those of $20,000 and below with the exception that it must be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Contribution Review Committee (CRC) prior to entering the Corporate Management Branch approval process and that Legal Services is added into the routing process. The Contribution Agreements drafted from these proposals are approved by individuals with financial signing authority.

It should be noted that within the Contribution Program funding allocation of $1.8M, there is $1.2M allocated to specific areas of priorities5 or “fence funding”. The remaining $652,000 is allocated on a pro-rated basis based on a combination of need and priorities listed in their Annual Contribution Plan and following discussions between program officials and CRC members.

Contribution Review Committee (CRC)
The CRC is made up of representatives from all the directorates that may use the terms and conditions of the Departmental Contributions Program, as well as a representative from the National Crime Prevention Centre, the RCMP, Correctional Services Canada and the National Parole Board. The Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Management Branch, chairs the CRC.

In addition to reviewing and recommending projects, the CRC provides strategic focus in terms of budget, importance and alignment of the Department's contribution funding with its mandate. With regards to budgeting, the CRC is the forum through which annual contribution funding is allocated. Each PSEP Branch/Directorate seeking to access these funds submits a contribution plan for the upcoming fiscal year, which outlines in general terms information about each planned/potential contribution as well as the overall amount of funding being requested from the Departmental Contribution Program. Following discussions between program officials and CRC members, budgets are allocated on a pro-rated basis based on a combination of need and priorities, and availability of funds.

1.2 Scope and Objectives of the Evaluation

In accordance with TBS Evaluation Policy and as identified in the RMAF, the evaluation will examine issues related to relevance, success, and cost-effectiveness. Process (i.e. service delivery) and performance monitoring issues will also be assessed to guide and improve future programming and performance measurement efforts. The list of issues used for this evaluation is presented in Appendix A of this report.

The results of this evaluation will be incorporated into the revised terms and conditions and will inform the performance measurement strategy. The deadline for the renewal of the Terms and Conditions of the Departmental Sustaining Grants to NVOs and the Departmental Contributions Program is December 31, 2005. 

1.3 Methodology

The data collection for this evaluation spanned about eight weeks, from June 24 to September 12, 2005. The evaluation relied on three main lines of evidence:

1.3.1 Key Informant Interviews

Key informant interviews were conducted with the following respondents:

Appendix B provides a list of those interviewed for this evaluation. The two largest grant recipients (John Howard Society and Elizabeth Fry) and four other grant recipients, selected at random, were interviewed. Interviews were also conducted with recipients receiving the largest contribution amounts (n=2). Ten other contribution recipients were randomly selected utilizing a stratified sampling technique by Branch/Division. Contributions under $10,000 were excluded from the sample in order to obtain a better understanding of the impacts of larger contribution amounts.

1.3.2 Document and File Reviews

A number of documents were reviewed for this evaluation. Please see Appendices C and D for a list of those documents. A total of 13 files were reviewed (5 of which provided evidence for the case studies). An outline of the documents and files reviewed for this evaluation can be found in Appendix B and C.

1.3.3 Case Studies

Five (5) mini case studies of NVO grant recipients (n=2) and contribution recipient projects (n=3) were prepared to assess challenges and the achievement of results. In addition, the case studies document lessons learned and best practices. Key informant interviews (i.e. grant and contribution recipient representatives and stakeholders) and relevant files/documents were the primary sources of information for the case studies.

2.0 Evaluation Findings

2.1 Relevance

Overall, key informants agreed that there was a need for both the sustaining grants to National Voluntary Organizations (NVOs) and for the contributions under the departmental program. There is a strong demand for contribution funding with the demand exceeding the availability of funding. The Contribution program was reported to address needs related to knowledge generation and information exchange for informed policy and program development.

The sustaining grants were felt to address several needs relating to the role of the NVOs in providing PSEP with external views and perspectives, provision of community service delivery (particularly with respect to after-care agencies), and enhanced community awareness. The difficulties of leveraging other funds was a challenge frequently cited by both PSEP and grant recipient key informants, particularly for infrastructure and administrative costs. Added to this was the reported difficulty for NVOs in securing funds for a less visible constituency (i.e. prisoners).

Overall, recipients and PSEP respondents agreed that the sustaining grant and departmental contributions program was consistent with PSEP priorities and objectives, particularly those priorities around community safety through partnerships6 . However, some PSEP respondents felt that the sustaining grant program, while consistent with corrections and criminal justice priorities, was not fully aligned with the broader mandate and objectives of PSEP such as those related to emergency preparedness.

Regarding the consistency of specific contribution projects with PSEP priorities, both key informant interviews and the file review showed that each contribution application contained a narrative as to how the project aligned with PSEP priorities and objectives. Moreover, contribution funding is allocated to each Branch (Policing and Law Enforcement, Emergency Management and National Security, and Community Safety and Partnerships) in keeping with the broader priorities of the Department.

PSEP respondents also indicated that some contribution projects are also aligned with the objectives of specific initiatives such as the Effective Corrections Initiative, Crime Prevention and Public Safety Initiative and the Aboriginal Community Corrections Initiative7 . For example, contribution projects aligned with the Effective Corrections Initiative were reported to facilitate the advancement of the Department’s priority of promoting effective corrections through examination of approaches that ensure the safe and effective management of offenders in the community.

2.2 Design and Delivery

2.2.1 Grant Eligibility Requirements

The majority of respondents agreed that the grant eligibility requirements are appropriate – primarily that these organizations should be national, not for profit, volunteer organizations. Some respondents indicated, however, that clarification was needed as to whether national professional associations are eligible for funding under this program. A minority of respondents indicated that the criteria should be expanded to include professional associations. Other respondents, however, stated that this was in conflict with the overall intent of the program, which is to support national voluntary organizations.

While many grant recipient and PSEP respondents advocated maintaining the present program given its historical context, continued relevance and limited funding, some suggested that additional review and analysis is required. Suggestions were made to review the mix and number of NVOs to ensure congruence with PSEP’s long term vision and goals and its eligibility criteria and to ensure representation8 in terms of racial and cultural diversity, victims’ organizations, and the need to be more inclusive of the broader department9 .

According to one respondent, “the focus of the sustaining grants program remains heavily focused on corrections while other organizations could contribute in other priority areas, for example policing, national security and emergency management.” This view is corroborated through a departmental staff survey, which indicated that NVO representation does not entirely meet the merging departmental mandate10 .

Both key informant and document evidence indicate that previous attempts to expand the program, both in terms of increasing the recipient’s current grant levels and including other organizations have not been successful11 . A Grants and Contributions Review Working Group previously concluded that it was more feasible to have new organizations supported through other funding mechanisms.

Caution was advised by those advocating changes that adjustments should only be made subsequent to careful review and analysis, and consultation with recipients and stakeholders. Some grant respondents noted that existing NVOs need additional funds prior to any consideration of expanding the number of funded NVOs.

2.2.2 Contribution Selection and Management Processes

The Contributions Review Committee is chaired by the ADM of Corporate Management and is comprised of a Director (or delegate) of each program area in addition to representation from the agencies (RCMP, NPB and CSC). As was mentioned previously, the CRC reviews and recommends contribution projects of more than $20,000 for funding. The committee also provides strategic focus in terms of budget, importance and alignment of the department’s contribution funding with its mandate. Each PSEP Division submits a strategic plan to the committee and funds are allocated according to the plans. Prior to the development of the plan, PSEP contacts voluntary sector partners to canvass for ideas and possible upcoming projects.

Overall, PSEP respondents agreed that the overall selection process is appropriate and that the committee functions well. Some PSEP respondents noted that timeliness was an issue and suggested that the process could be expedited by submitting annual strategic plans earlier in the fiscal year. Another suggestion was to streamline the approval process for smaller contribution projects. Some streamlining, however, was noted: as of August 2005, review by Legal Services is no longer required for projects under $20K unless deemed necessary by the Accountability Division.

There were also some reported inconsistencies by PSEP respondents as to how each Division prioritizes and selects projects particularly with respect to the emphasis placed on research and innovation projects versus information exchange projects. Some PSEP respondents questioned the extent to which the contributions program should fund conferences. As it stands presently more than half of the contributions funding has been spent on conferences in the last few years. One PSEP official noted the need for more innovation projects related to policing, organized crime, terrorism and drug initiatives.

While many contribution recipients expressed little knowledge of the selection process, there was general agreement that the application process was appropriate. A number of contribution recipients noted that they received good support and feedback from PSEP during the application and selection process.

The need for enhanced capacity to manage contributions was cited as a key issue by a number of PSEP respondents as inconsistencies in managing contributions were noted. There were number of noted positive examples by contribution recipients and other stakeholder respondents of the effective management, feedback and support they received from PSEP representatives. Nonetheless, there was a reported need by PSEP respondents for training at the project officer and support staff levels across the department to help ensure more consistent and effective contribution selection and management practices. According to some contribution recipients, effective project management was hindered by the high degree of project staff turnover during the duration of the project. Many contribution recipients also cited funding delays as a key concern. They noted that such delays were of particular hardship to voluntary organizations operating on streamlined budgets. Some contribution recipients indicated that funding delays impacted negatively on the project’s effectiveness.

2.2.4 Terms and Conditions

The most frequently cited issues raised by PSEP respondents related to the appropriateness of the contribution categories and the need to extend multi-year funding to five years. Mixed opinions were expressed by PSEP respondents as to whether these categories required modification. Specific suggestions by PSEP respondents for enhancing the terms and conditions are outlined below:

2.2.5 Adequacy of Communications and Dissemination of Information

Extent Grants and Contributions Program Known to Voluntary Sector
Most respondents agreed that knowledge of the grants program is limited primarily to corrections and criminal justice-based NVOs. Respondents pointed out that enhanced marketing of the grants program is not appropriate given that the eligible NVOs are named in the Terms and Conditions. However, some PSEP respondents noted that the sustaining grants program and the rationale for inclusion of specific NVOs needs to be clearly communicated within the department and to other stakeholders to enhance its transparency.

There were mixed opinions as to the extent that the contributions program is known to the voluntary sector and potential recipients. Some PSEP respondents noted that there is a need to advertise the contributions program, to extend its reach as it tends to be better known to national voluntary organizations and to those with a funding history with PSEP. It was also reported that there is less awareness of the program for those stakeholders involved in policing, emergency management and security. The program was reported by some respondents to be well known among corrections based/ criminal justice voluntary organizations and the university research community.

Extent Details of Contributions’ Eligibility Requirements Known to Recipients/Voluntary Sector
With respect to the contributions program, the majority of contribution recipient respondents indicated that key terms and conditions, program rationale, and eligibility requirements need to be adequately communicated to stakeholders and to potential contribution recipients. While potential recipients may be aware that some funding is available they are less likely to be aware of the specifics of the contributions program.   

Extent Program/Project Results Disseminated
With respect to dissemination of contribution project outcomes, some PSEP respondents felt that more could be done to consistently communicate contribution outcomes through a systematic departmental -wide process. However, lack of resources was a noted barrier here. Project descriptions and results are not consistently posted on the website. Information sharing as to project results was noted to occur at various conferences (e.g. Emergency Preparedness Week, International and National Conferences on Criminal Justice Issues, Roundtables between NVOs and PSEP).

Most multi-year research innovation projects usually culminate with a departmental publication. These publications may be posted on the PSEP website and distributed to key stakeholders (e.g. Aboriginal Peoples Collection has a database of 4000 contacts – relevant information and publications are distributed to these contacts).

2.2.6 Adequacy of Reporting

Sustaining Grants
With respect to the grant program, annual reporting and audits were cited by PSEP and grant recipient respondents as sufficient to meet accountability requirements.

Departmental Contributions
Some PSEP respondents noted that contribution reporting was inconsistent, varying by branch and type and size of contribution project.

Most contribution recipients noted that they provided activity and financial reports to PSEP. The majority or recipients further reported that the reporting was appropriate given the type of project. One recipient noted that a reporting guide would be useful to help guide them as to what type of information should be collected and reported.

Both interview and file review evidence show detailed quarterly narrative progress and final reports with respect to some of the larger projects. In some instances PSEP program officers also conducted regular site visits of larger, multi-year contribution projects to assess progress (e.g. Hinton Community Wellness Program, Rankin Inlet Spousal Abuse Program). For smaller projects (under $20,000 and of shorter duration), contribution recipient respondents indicated that they were generally required to produce the deliverable(s) (e.g. conference or research report) or a brief activity report and a financial statement.

While there is some reporting and dissemination of project results, the departmental contribution performance information is not rolled up or summarized systematically in line with the RMAF. It is therefore difficult to assess the overall level of reach and effectiveness of the contribution program on an ongoing basis.

2.2.7 Adequacy of Funding

Many grant recipient respondents stated that the proportion of grant monies allocated to each NVO was appropriate. However, there was a general consensus that the overall level of funding was inadequate for many NVOs in helping them to maintain a national structure and to cover core operating costs. Funding cutbacks were experienced during the 1980s and 1990s. For example, in 1993 the NVOs received a total of $2,113,109 compared to the current $1,796,144 annual allotment. In addition grant recipients reported rising costs in a number of areas such as administration and insurance. The case study of the Canadian Training Institute12 highlights the difficulties experienced by NVOs in dealing with the reduced funding levels.

The process for allocating contribution funds among PSEP Branches and in accordance with annual Strategic Contributions Plans was described as appropriate by most PSEP respondents. The contributions program was described as a competitive process where demand exceeds available funding. Funding pressures have increased since the amalgamation of the Solicitor General, the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness (OCIPEP) and the National Crime Prevention Center (NCPC) into a larger department has means that the same amount of funding dollars has to serve more and diverse types of clients.

2.3 Success of the Program

2.3.1 Impact of Sustaining Grants and Contribution Program on the Capacity of NVOs and NGOs

There was general agreement that the grant contributed to maintaining a national structure, particularly for those NVOs receiving larger funding amounts. While overall funding levels have decreased during the past two decades, the stability of funding provides at least some portion of funding for administration and infrastructure, for communications and for networking. NVOs noted that it is difficult to secure alternative funding for these types of expenses. For example, in the case of the John Howard Society, a substantial portion of their grant monies are allocated to the local JHS branches allowing the national office to set minimum standards for service delivery to ensure adequate service standards for JHS aftercare agencies. Sustained funding was also reported by grant recipient respondents to enhance their ability to leverage other funds.

However, many respondents also pointed out that their ability to maintain a national structure was being eroded by decreasing grant funds concurrent with rising operating costs. For some NVOs the funds do not cover basic office and administration support. Some NVOs have been carrying deficits for a number of years in a row. Many of the funded NVOs do not have the capacity to fund local or provincial branches making it difficult for these organizations to maintain effective local networks, therefore limiting their effectiveness as a national organization. Grant respondents also noted that the funding provided them with a stable means to hire appropriate staff. However, insufficient funds resulted in challenges around retaining more qualified staff for longer periods of time.

There was a general consensus that the contributions program improved NGO and NVO capacity. This capacity is not only reported to be enhanced by the dollar amounts of the contributions, but also by in kind support provided by PSEP (e.g. provision of information, documentation, and keynote speakers to events and conferences). Contribution recipients involved in service delivery also reported that the innovation projects funded through contributions helped to improve their services by “allowing them to test out new ideas and to learn what works and what doesn’t.” Another contribution recipient noted that the contributions for conferences helped the police develop capacity in gap areas not covered internally through police training.

Some contribution recipients indicated that the contribution enhanced the capacity of their organization to leverage funds and improve service delivery:

“The contributions program built our capacity and our ability to leverage other funds. It elevated our agency and its credibility. It helped us get larger grants and contributions from other funders and increased our human resources capacity to deliver services.”

2.3.2 Impact of Sustaining Grants and Contributions on PSEP and Government Policy and Decision-Making

Overall, respondents stated that the sustaining grant program creates an ongoing relationship between PSEP and NVOs, building a good foundation for provision of feedback/advice on policy, innovative ideas and potential research projects. Moreover, funded NVOs can provide direct input to government as representatives are called as expert witnesses before parliament or senate to provide perspectives on certain issues. Through formal (e.g. Roundtables, conferences) and informal meetings and communications between NVOs and PSEP, NVOs can provide useful external perspectives and input on various policy and program issues. All grant respondents noted that PSEP consults with them regularly on emerging issues. For example, an increasing number of offenders are being released on their Warrant Expiry Date (WED) where they are not subject to release conditions and there are few services/support available to them upon their release. NVOs provided advice regarding alternatives and services that might be provided to these clients. This led to the creation of a volunteer program where volunteers are available to provide support to offenders released on their WED, thereby increasing the likelihood of safe reintegration into the community.

By way of another example of policy influence, the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies (CAEF) finalized their submissions to the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). As a result the Commission issued a special report entitled: Protecting Their Rights: A Systemic Review of Human Rights in Correctional Services for Federally Sentenced Women13. The report contains 19 recommendations as to how the Correctional Service of Canada could help to alleviate systemic discrimination of federally sentenced women. As stated in CAEF’s Annual Report:

14.

There was overall agreement that the contributions program contributes to a great extent to policy and program development through the generation of evidence-based knowledge and through information exchange events. However, some PSEP respondents indicated that innovation projects (as compared to conferences) had greater impacts on policy and program development.

There were several noted examples of funded projects that have influenced policy development, government legislations, decisions & programs. Two examples are described below:

2.3.3 Impact of Grants and Contributions Program on Partnerships

There is general agreement that the grants program provides PSEP with access to a network of voluntary and community organizations that have been developed by NVOs. Moreover, it is the perception of some PSEP and recipient respondents that the NVO network has grown over the years. NVOs and PSEP meet formally at least three times a year through Roundtables. The National Associations Active In Criminal Justice (NAACJ), a grant recipient, is a coalition of 19 national organizations dedicated to a socially responsible approach to criminal justice. The NAACJ was reported to be valuable in facilitating networking among the member organizations and federal government. However, the difficulty of networking at the provincial and local levels given resource constraints was raised as a key issue by some grant recipients.

Stakeholder and contribution respondents reported strengthened partnerships as a result of the contribution program. Interview and file review evidence shows that PSEP encourages the leveraging of funds. Many contribution recipients reported a strengthened partnership with PSEP and in some instances strengthened partnerships at the local community level. Some contribution recipients noted that collaboration with other government organizations would have been enhanced if roles and responsibilities were clarified at the outset of the project.

Two case studies (see Appendix C), the Lanark County Community Justice Program – In Support of Restorative Justice Programs and the Development and Implementation of the Hinton Community Wellness Program illustrate the increasing capacity of the contribution recipients to network, communicate and partner with other local community agencies and organizations.

2.3.4 Impact of Contributions Program on Knowledge Generation and Information Exchange

Overall respondents agreed that research and/or innovation projects contributed to enhanced knowledge in PSEP priority areas. Evidence-based research and innovative demonstration projects were reported to provide knowledge that contributes to enhanced decision-making. However, some respondents noted that the 3-year funding cycle made it difficult to adequately collect and assess longer-term outcome data for innovation projects.

The majority of contribution respondents who received funding for research/ innovation projects stated that the project had met or exceeded its objectives. Many of these respondents also noted that through their involvement in these projects they were able to gain invaluable knowledge with respect to best practices and lessons learned.

Contribution recipients reported that information exchange events, such as conferences, were of value with respect to sharing best practices and emerging issues. Contribution recipients who received funding for conferences reported that the conference proceedings were well disseminated through their website and distribution to appropriate stakeholders.

An example of an effective information exchange project is reported below:

2.4 Cost-effectiveness

PSEP and recipient respondents agreed that the Department receives a good return on investment outweighing the dollars invested. NVO and stakeholder respondents indicated that NVOs operate on very streamlined budgets utilizing many volunteer hours to conduct their activities. A 2002 audit of the grants program concluded that the overall coordination and management of the program was sound.

Overall, respondents agreed that the grants and contribution program was the most cost-effective alternative that could not be achieved at lower costs. The majority of PSEP respondents noted that contribution funds are targeted strategically to ensure they align with priorities. PSEP respondents reported that they do an initial screening of stakeholder and partner needs each year. Moreover, the contributions program actively encourages leveraging of other resources.

Many grant and PSEP respondents indicated that the sustaining grant program is the most cost-effective and appropriate alternative, particularly for credible, long-standing voluntary organizations. To rely more fully on contributions funding would entail more time and resources allocated to administering the contributions. Recipients also report that grant funding improves their leveraging ability. Sustainable funding was also reported to enhance the retention of competent staff and enhances the organization’s capacity for strategic planning and service delivery.

Suggestions for Improvement

Respondents most frequently cited the following suggestions for improvement:

3.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

3.1 Conclusions

Relevance

The sustaining grants program is viewed as relevant given the NVOs role in providing advice and their role in community service delivery (particularly in the provision of after-care services) and public awareness. The contribution program was reported to address needs related to informed policy and program development, and knowledge generation.

There was general agreement that the sustaining grants and departmental contributions program was consistent with PSEP priorities and objectives, particularly those priorities around community safety through partnerships. However, some PSEP respondents felt that the sustaining grants, while consistent with corrections and criminal justice priorities, was not fully aligned with the broader mandate and objectives of PSEP such as those related to emergency preparedness.

Design and Delivery

Grants and contributions funding was viewed as inadequate. Sustaining grants were described as insufficient for many NVOs to meet operational costs and to maintain their national structure.

Current funding levels also limit ability to meet increased demand for contributions funding arising from the merging of PSEP. PSEP respondents cited the need for additional funding to adequately market, communicate and monitor the program.

Transparency of the grants and contributions program is an issue. There was a reported need for the department to make consistent efforts in communicating details of the program, both within the Department and to potential recipients; to disseminate project information; and to expand the reach of the contributions program beyond its traditional and longstanding partners.

While many grant recipient and PSEP respondents advocated maintaining the present grant program given its historical context, continued relevance and limited funding, some suggested that additional review and analysis is required. Suggestions were made to review the mix and number of NVOs to ensure congruence with PSEP’s long term vision and goals and its eligibility criteria and to ensure representation in terms of racial and cultural diversity, victims’ organizations, and the need to be more inclusive of the broader department. Other respondents suggested that new voluntary and professional organizations could be funded through alternative mechanisms.

Performance reporting, relating to the contributions program, was reported to be inconsistent. While there is some reporting of project results, performance information is not rolled up or summarized systematically in line with the RMAF. Given the lack of systematic monitoring it is difficult to adequately assess the effectiveness and reach of the departmental contribution program on an ongoing basis

Success

There is general agreement that the NVOs funded through the grant program is effective in helping them to maintain a national structure. Decreasing grant funds concurrent with rising operating costs was reported to erode the ability of many NVOs to maintain their national structure.

The contributions program was noted to improve NGO and NVO capacity that was enhanced not only by the dollar amounts of the contributions, but also by in kind support provided by PSEP. Contribution funding was reported to be instrumental in improving leveraging ability and service delivery.

The grants program was viewed as an effective mechanism for providing PSEP with access to a network of voluntary and community organizations developed by NVOs. Moreover, there was a perception that the NVO network has grown over the years. NVOs and PSEP meet formally at least three times a year through Roundtables. However, the difficulty of networking at the provincial and local levels given resource constraints was raised as a key issue.

The majority of stakeholder and contribution respondents reported strengthened partnerships as a result of the contribution program. Two case studies15., the Lanark County Community Justice Program – In Support of Restorative Justice Programs and the Development and Implementation of the Hinton Community Wellness Program illustrate the increasing capacity of the contribution recipients to network, communicate and partner with other local community agencies and organizations.

The grants and contributions program was perceived as valuable in influencing policy development and government decisions in priority areas for PSEP. The grant program creates a sustained relationship between NVOs and PSEP, providing a foundation for feedback and advice on policy and emerging issues.

By funding strategic research and innovation projects, the contributions program was noted to provide evidence-based input into policy and programming decisions. The value of conferences in contributing to policy development was identified as an issue.

Cost-Effectiveness

The grants and contributions program was viewed as a cost-effective means of achieving results for a number of reasons: the program encourages NVOs and NGOs to leverage other funding; organizations rely on volunteers to conduct many of their activities; and the contribution projects were reported to be aligned with priorities through a strategic planning process.

Summary

The program is considered effective in generating knowledge, contributing towards policy and program development, strengthening partnerships and building the capacity of voluntary organizations. The grants program was viewed as an effective mechanism for providing PSEP with access to a network of voluntary and community organizations developed by NVOs. However the ability of sustaining grant organizations to maintain a national structure is reportedly being eroded by decreasing grant funds concurrent with rising operating costs.

By funding strategic projects, the contributions program was reported to provide evidence-based input into policy and programming decisions. Several examples of this influence were cited including research on restorative justice16. and the First Annual Symposium on Disaster Risk Reduction. Mixed opinions were expressed, however as to the value of conferences as compared to innovation projects in contributing to policy/program development.

There was general consensus that the grants and contributions program assisted with capacity building of voluntary organizations. Contributions were noted to develop knowledge in gap areas not covered internally by the organization and also enhanced the capacity of the organizations to leverage funds and improve service delivery. Partnerships between voluntary organizations and government (and among local community agencies) were reported to be enhanced as a result of contributions funding and the active encouragement of leveraging by PSEP.

While it was commonly held that the program should be maintained, the evaluation identified a number of issues that deserve additional review and assessment. These issues relate to the program’s congruence with the broader mandate and objectives of PSEP, enhancing program communication and dissemination of results, the need to update and implement the RMAF, and a review of the Terms and Conditions particularly with respect to the contribution categories and multi-year funding.

3.2 Recommendations

  1. Ensure there is adequate communication to targeted stakeholders and potential and eligible recipients with respect to the Grants and Contributions program. The objectives, rationale and eligibility criteria for the sustaining grants program should be communicated within the Department and to other eligible recipients. While the current demand for the contributions program exceeds available funding, there was a reported need to more clearly communicate the details the contributions program (e.g. goals and objectives, selection criteria) and to ensure the reach of the program is expanded beyond PSEP’s traditional and longstanding partners.
  2. Review and assess the existing Terms and Conditions of the grants and contribution program with respect to the contribution categories, and length of funding cycle for multi-year contribution projects. Review categories pertaining to research and innovation and implementation to ensure these categories are sufficiently clear and distinct. Assess the feasibility of increasing the length of the funding cycle from three to five years for those projects where additional time may be needed for implementation and assessment of longer-term outcomes. The language of the Terms and Conditions should also be reviewed to ensure it appropriately reflects the scope of the Department’s mandate and work.
  3. Review the grants and contributions program to ensure its alignment with the broader mandate of PSEP. There is a need to ensure the congruence of this program with the PSEP mandate and objectives. The Sustaining Grants to NVOs and Departmental Contributionswas established prior to the amalgamation of the Solicitor General, the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness and the National Crime Prevention Centre. The demand for contributions funding has since increased as the program serves more and diverse types of clients.
  4. Ensure an appropriate mix of innovation, research and information exchange type projects. A considerable portion of contribution funding isallocated to information exchange type projects such as Annual Conferences.PSEP representatives should initiate an internal consultation process to assess whether a proportion of funding should be allocated to each contribution category.
  5. Update and implement RMAF to ensure its alignment with PSEP. The current RMAF was completed when the program was under the aegis of the Solicitor General and needs to be updated to reflect the broader mandate of PSEP. In addition, a systematic monitoring system should be implemented that is consistent and appropriate to the type and size of contribution projects. Final project reports should contain enough information to help PSEP assess the project’s effectiveness. In addition to financial expenditures, project final reports could contain the following types of information:
    • A project summary
    • A description of project objectives
    • Whether objectives were met or not and why
    • Data that supports the success of the project
    • Link project results to Departmental objectives/outcomes identified in the RMAF
  6. Improve dissemination of project results. The evaluation found that project results were not consistently disseminated. Project results should be consistently disseminated to targeted stakeholders and generally made available on the PSEP website. 

Appendix A: Evaluation Issues

The following issues were discussed in the course of this evaluation:

Program Relevance

Design and Delivery

Success

Cost-Effectiveness and Alternatives

Appendix B: List of Key Informants

PSEP Representatives (n=7)

Grant Recipients (n=6)

Contribution Recipients (n=12)

Stakeholders (n=4)

Appendix C: List of Documents

Appendix D: List of Files Reviewed

Files Reviewed for Case Studies

  1. Canadian Association of Police Boards (CAPB) - CAPB's 15th Annual Meeting & Conference held in August 2004.
  2. Lanark County Community Justice Program Inc. - In support of restorative justice programs FY 2004-05
  3. Hinton Friendship Centre Society. Development & Implementation of the Hinton Community Wellness Progrm. FY 2002-03 to 2005-06
  4. John Howard Society
  5. Canadian Training Institute

Reviewed Files (Selected at Random)

Contribution Recipients

  1. Canadian Red Cross
  2. Native Counseling Services of Alberta
  3. Ottawa Police Services
  4. Summit Institute Society
  5. Office of Research Services (Ottawa University)
  6. National Association Active In criminal Justice
  7. Chippewas of Mnjikaning First Nations
  8. Pulaarvik Kablu Friendship Centre

Appendix E: Case Studies

Project Title

In Support of Restorative Justice Programs

Contribution recipient
Type of Contribution Category
Duration of Project
Total Contribution Amount
PSEP Branch

Lanark County Community Justice Program Inc.
Innovative and Implementation
FY 2002/03, 2003/04, 2004/05
$109,472 (for the last FY only)
Corrections Research

Description

This restorative demonstration project was developed and supported by the Lanark County community. Subsequent to a serious local case of arson, community members wanted to see offender accountability, victim participation and community involvement in the aftermath of the crime. Volunteer community members sought support from various agencies such as the police and the Crown Attorney. From this Lanark County Community Justice Program Inc. was born, led by a board of directors made up of community members. This project aims to use community justice forums to work towards repairing the harm done when people break the law. A Community Justice Forum is a structured voluntary process that brings together in a face to face meeting, the victims, the offender, support people and people from the community, with a trained, volunteer facilitator. All forum participants come to an agreement on how the offender can repair harm caused by his/her behaviour. The process is used at pre and post charge stage and can also be used in schools. Training is large part of this program, with focus on volunteer education and professional development as well as mentoring and public education events.

Lanark County Community Justice Program submitted a proposal to the Solicitor General for a three-year Demonstration Project designed to evaluate rural grass-roots restorative justice program and compare it to other methods. The project was approved for an initial six months commencing in October of 2002. A second six months of funding was approved commencing on November 2003 contingent on obtaining funding partners for the project. After another funding gap a second full year of funding was approved.

There is strong community support for this project from the Crown Attorney, local police agencies, Victim/Witness Assistance Program, the Lanark Leeds & Grenville Legal Clinic, North Lanark County Community Health Centre, schools, and members of the community, including the volunteers.

While the majority of funding came from the departmental contributions, additional funds were leveraged from Trillium Foundation of Ontario, Lanark County, and donations from local Service Clubs.

Project Objectives
While the program generally targets those in conflict with the law, most referrals are youth. The objective of the project is to conduct evaluation of the program to assess its effectiveness and the value added of this approach to crime prevention.

The project objectives are as follows:

Relevance

Under the Effective Corrections initiative, the Department is committed to research and development work that will advance best practices in Corrections. Restorative justice was specifically identified in the initiative as a focus for research and development in the community. The project allows the department to evaluate a community-based restorative approach to dealing with offending. The project is expected to add to knowledge of the processes and impacts of restorative justice approach. There are few demonstration projects in restorative justice with formal evaluations. There was a reported need for more research on the impacts on participants and the criminal justice system to identify some of the limits to restorative justice.

Challenges

There were a number of challenges associated with starting up a new not for profit organization in a rural community. The start up tasks, hiring, developing committees and work processes took more time than originally anticipated. There were also some challenges in securing additional funding partners and pressures to process more cases.

The biggest challenges arose from funding delays, with a lengthy gap cited between the approval process and receipt of funding (about 3 months). The delays impacted on the project’s effectiveness, as they had to lay off staff and refuse referrals. After each funding delay, they had to take additional time to restart the project.

Success

The project was cited to be successful for a number of reasons. The project achieved a number of deliverables including the provision of professional development activities for volunteers; facilitation of facilitator training courses, orientation sessions, public education events; an increased number of fully trained active facilitators; and establishment of written protocols for referrals from police, the Crown Attorney, schools and the general public. In addition, the contribution funding increased the capacity of the voluntary organization by enabling them to hire staff, train volunteers, build infrastructure, and develop policies and program. The empirical results of the program, once available, “will have policy implications with respect to restorative justice.”

A number of other achievements were reported:

Best Practices and Lessons Learned

While start-up was challenging, project representatives reported that good support from PSEP at the proposal and project design stages helped them address these challenges. Through this experience, project representatives reported that they were able to enhance governance of their organization. A critical lesson learned is to avoid delay in transfer of funds as this impacts on the efficient and effective delivery of services.

Project Title CAPB’s 15th Annual Meeting & Conference held in August 2004

Contribution recipient
Type of Contribution Category
Duration of Project
Total Contribution Amount
PSEP Branch

Canadian Association of Police Boards (CAPB)
Communication/ Information Exchange
FY 2004
$10,000
PLEIB

Description

The Canadian Association of Police Boards (CAPB) is a non-profit incorporated organization dedicated to the delivery of effective police governance in Canada, working in partnership with the federal government, national, provincial and local agencies.

The CAPB’s conference theme in 2004 ‘Protecting Our Children’ was selected in response to feedback17 from last year’s conference. The Minister made a keynote address to conference delegates. The Acting Deputy Minister of Policing and Law Enforcement Interoperability Branch made a presentation highlighting key departmental priorities and initiatives.

Plenary Sessions included the following list of topics:

Workshops / Discussion Groups included the following:

Other funds were leveraged through registration fees, and funding from local boards, and the B.C. Ministry of Justice.

Objectives

The conferences were noted to provide opportunities for information sharing and improved police governance in a modern policing environment.

Relevance

PSEP has a public policy leadership role in the area of policing and law enforcement. The CAPB is one of the Department’s primary policing-related stakeholders. The department’s ability to formulate sound and relevant policy and to exercise national leadership is enhanced by engaging the input of police boards and by maintaining a strong working partnership with the CAPB. The CAPB was noted to provide an external perspective and is considered an important stakeholder that should be included in consultation processes. The conferences had noted potential benefits of providing PSEP with a mechanism for communicating with and obtaining feedback from CAPB members and conference participants.

Success

The conference was reported to achieve its objectives with respect to knowledge generation and information sharing. Attendance rates were high with representation from members, various levels of government and police agencies. The conference proceedings were disseminated through the CAPB newsletter and is posted on their website.

The conference provided opportunities for PSEP and other attendees to participate in various resolutions. These resolutions form the basis for CAPB’s lobbying efforts and for draft policies and legislation pertaining to policing.

Federal staff were able to share information about PSEP priorities. The conferences also have a reported public relations benefit to those involved. PSEP’s contribution is included in all public communications including press releases, published reports, radio and television program, and public meetings.

The conference was reported by the project representative to be effective in enhancing partnerships between PSEP and NVOs, NGOs and community organizations, as well as other levels of government and policing authorities at various levels.

Challenges

Project representatives report rising expectations from members, government and stakeholders over the last 16 years. Funding was reported to be inadequate to meet these rising expectations. Given nature of the organization (i.e. NGO), it was argued that sustained funding was needed to support the activities, such as conferences, of the CAPB.

There were noted challenges around obtaining contributions funding in instances where the conference generates revenue. Some contribution recipient key informants perceived this to be unfair given that NGOs have limited resources and that conferences were an important revenue-generating source of funds. As boards are public agencies, it was also reported to be difficult to obtain private sector funding, leaving the Association with insufficient resources to be self-sustaining.

Best Practices and Lessons Learned

Sustained government support was considered critical to help NGOs fulfil their mission and to aid in that organization’s capacity to provide effective policy input and advice.

It was also noted that better learning and enhanced partnerships occur when there are enhanced opportunities for interaction at Conferences. Participatory workshops were noted be more popular and useful.

Project Title Development and Implementation of the Hinton Mamowiechihitowin Community Wellness Program (CWP)

Contribution Recipient

Hinton Friendship Centre Society

Type of Contribution Category

Implementation and Innovation

Duration of Project

FY 2002/03 to 05/06

Total Contribution Amount

$270,000

PSEP Branch

Aboriginal Corrections

Description

The Hinton Friendship Centre Society is an Aboriginal not for profit organization committed to promoting and supporting a strong native community through programs, services, facilities, and community awareness. The Hinton Community Wellness Program (CWP) started in 2003 and was based on a previous program (Yellowhead Family Sexual Assault Program).

The Community Wellness Program (CWP) was given approval by regional Elders and named Mamowiechihitowin (All Working Together). CWP is an alternative to incarceration and provides a holistic approach to healing that works with the whole family. While treatment involves the whole family, attending to the needs of the individual (victim, offender, other family members) is the first step in the treatment process. The program is designed to treat sexual offenders that would benefit from intensive therapy more than from incarceration, to prevent recidivism, and promote wellness within the family unit. The program includes training for RCMP, children services, Crown Prosecutors, and community support workers.

For the clients to be fully accepted in the intensive program, they must satisfy a number of conditions – all family must agree to enter program; offender must admit guilt; court must direct an assessment be conducted; all addictions must be dealt with prior to entering therapy; conditional sentence will be placed on offender by court; and offender must reside where there are no minor children.

Program partners and stakeholders include the municipal, provincial, and federal government and primary partners, such as Aseniwuche Winnewak Nation of Canada; Edson Friendship Centre; Family and Community Support Services in Hinton, Community Outreach Support Services in Jasper; community elders; and native counselling services. Alberta Health and Wellness, Alberta Justice and United Way also provide some funding for the project.

Goals and Objectives

The overall goal of this project is to reduce and prevent sexual abuse through the operation and evaluation of the Community Wellness Program.

The objectives of the project are as follows:

Relevance

Aboriginal Corrections has been a priority of the Solicitor General since the early 1970s because of the chronic and extensive over-representation of Aboriginal people in federal corrections. Specifically, the project aligns with the objectives of the Aboriginal Community Corrections Initiative as it is dedicated to reducing this over-representation by offering treatment in the context of the community healing process.

Success

While the final phases of the innovation project are still underway, an evaluation of Phase I, key informant interviews and a file review indicate that the project is progressing well towards its objectives. The project has had an increasing number of referrals and disclosures of abuse. Community liaison was reported to be good with quarterly meetings with all major partners, distribution of newsletters, web page and interagency meetings in each community. RCMP officers were participated in the Family Violence Investigators Program ranked the training program highly commenting that it provided them with a good understanding of the treatment process involved at CWP.

The program is seen to be innovative and culturally appropriate therapeutic treatment, designed to work with entire families to break the cycle of intergenerational abuse. The 2004 Evaluation18 found the program was successful in establishing trust among the Aboriginal community, raising awareness and educating the community on the issue of child abuse, effectively engaging Elders into the program development and decision-making, and not least, that it was respectful of Aboriginal Culture. The program is well known in Aboriginal communities and has a broad Aboriginal client base.

Challenges

Delays in Project implementation – There were some delays in project implementation due in part to court delays and the difficulty in finding interpreters. It was noted to be difficult to find interpreters not related to the accused and that speak the same Cree.
Securing Sustainable Funding – At present, the project relies primarily on PSEP funding. The organization is currently working with INAC and Children Services of Alberta to obtain sustain levels of funding through fee for service. The province of Alberta has agreed to consider providing long-term funding.
Building Additional Capacity – There was a reported need to hire additional qualified staff as the program is full and has started compiling a client waiting list.
Referrals to Mainstream Agencies – There were noted difficulties in making referrals to some mainstream agencies where there is limited understanding and awareness of the Aboriginal culture.

Best Practices and Lessons Learned

“Community development and well qualified therapists” are among the key reported ingredients to success of this project. The project highlights the importance of community development efforts and the importance to spend sufficient time and energy in strengthening and maintaining all community relationships.

John Howard Society – National Voluntary Organization

Sustaining Grants Case Study

Description of Organization

The John Howard Society of Canada (JHSC) is an organization of provincial and territorial Societies “whose goal is to understand and respond to problems of crime and the criminal justice system.19 ”

The Society is involved in the following activities in aid of its goal and mission:

The John Howard Society of Canada receives $509,795 annually in sustaining grants. Approximately 80 percent of the grant funding is allocated to its member societies. For all JHS offices across Canada, 1.16 percent of funding is received from the sustaining grant program.

Relevance to PSEP’s Priorities and Objectives

JHSC serves as an advocate for progressive corrections; this aligns with the purpose of Federal Corrections as set out in the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. The Society provides PSEP with access to a national network of member organizations.

Key challenges facing organization

The Criminal Justice System is polarized over a number of issues. The JHSC advocates and responds to crime through social development rather than more traditional, punitive approaches. The media is increasingly sensitive to crime issues. If something happens locally it usually erupts into a national problem. A strong national infrastructure is essential to respond to these problems.

John Howard Society of Canada, like other national voluntary organizations, is faced with decreasing funds. With respect to the sustaining grant funding, there is less money in terms of the dollar amount and in terms of purchasing power as compared to 1982.

Success

The grant program allows the JHSC to maintain a national office, to leverage, and to network and communicate at the national, regional and local levels. The funding enables the national office to set minimum standards for service delivery across the country.

JHSC works closed with the Department and its agencies to provide expert policy advice on a number of correctional issues such as:

Best practices/lessons learned

Adequate and sustainable funding enables national voluntary organizations to build national, provincial and local networks. The funding also enables the JHSC to set minimum service delivery standards to ensure quality and consistency of services.

Canadian Training Institute

Sustaining Grants Case Study

Description of Organization

 “Canadian Training Institute (CTI) plays a unique role among national voluntary organizations as an educational provider to other social services agencies20 ”.

CTI provides ongoing training programs for voluntary organizations in the following:

CTI also provides consulting assistance in a range of areas, including organizational reviews, analysis and redesign, team building, training needs assessment, and action research. “CTI undertakes research and demonstration projects to help bridge the gap between government priorities/objectives and their translation into substantive policies and programs felt at the local and regional levels21 ”.

The Canadian Training Institute receives $109,472 annually in sustained grant funding, providing about 20 to 35 percent of the organization’s funding base.

Objectives

CTI’s mandate is to “provide training, consulting assistance, promote collaborative action and undertake applied research projects in contributing to the effectiveness of services delivered by criminal justice and related human service agencies in Canada. CTI is committed to fostering inclusivity, equality, and life-long learning by enhancing services that assist individuals to participate as responsible, valued, and contributing members of Canadian society. In this respect CTI assists in the development of knowledge, skills and services that reduce crime, promote active participation, and ultimately contribute to healthy individuals, agencies and communities 22 .”

Relevance to PSEP’s Priorities and Objectives

There was reported congruence between CTI’s and PSEP’s priorities and objectives particularly with respect to public safety. CTI also works close with First Nations communities, a priority shared with the federal government and PSEP. They maintain this congruence through regular meetings and communications with PSEP. For example, during Roundtable meetings with PSEP (about 2 to 3 times a year) they regularly discuss alignment of activities.

CTI also conducts a number of education activities in areas of departmental and portfolio priorities. They are also considered to be an important capacity builder among NVOs active in criminal justice issues.

Key challenges/opportunities facing organizatio

Sustained funding was reported to be inadequate to maintain a national infrastructure for many of the NVOs. It was noted to be particularly difficult to maintain provincial and local networks. The inability to maintain provincial committees makes it difficult to provide direct service delivery and to maintain a strong national presence.

Moreover, there is insufficient money to cover operating costs23. As reported in their Annual Report, (2002-03):

Without cost of living increases compounded by a 25 percent cut between 1995 through to 1998, our core capacity has been reduced by 59 percent. This severely restricts CTI’s ability to travel, to work collaboratively with remote First Nation, Metis and Inuit communities, to engage in collaborative community development work aimed at reducing violence and to fully participate in policy development work with various levels of government.

Success

While the ability to maintain a national structure has eroded over recent years with decreased funding, CTI is reported to have a continued national presence. They continue to deliver training through its core staff and contract trainers. “More than five thousand individuals have received certified training through CTI”. In 2002-03, CTI through its core staff and contract trainers delivered 72 training sessions in 1,586 locations throughout Canada24 . Eighty percent of participants rated these programs as very good to excellent. CTI also continues to provide alternative ways of accessing training through partnerships with Community Colleges, Universities and other organizations across Canada (e.g. George Brown College, Humber College, Mohawk College Public Safety Communications Program, Miramichi Community College, Traumatology Training Institute and Psych Inc. Resources, etc.).

CTI has also dedicated considerable efforts to the issue of youth crime and violence. They have partnered with a variety of organizations to address issues around crime prevention and youth violence. Partners have included Ministries of Education, police, parents, students, and public health and community agencies. CTI developed a resource manual entitled, Youth Justice in Canada in an effort to throw light on the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

Best practices/lessons learned

To address funding shortages, CTI has streamlined efforts to areas of highest priority. For example they have established a part-time office, located in Western Canada, to focus on First Nations communities. However, the erosion of funding has resulted in cutting of some key activities, which limits their effectiveness as a national voluntary organization.

Appendix F: List of NVOs Receiving Sustained Grants

These organizations include the following:

Footnote

1 See Appendix A for the list of evaluation issues

2 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada. (2005). Report on Plans and Priorities: 2005-2006, p8, http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/publications/corporate/pdf/rpp_2004_e.pdf.

3 Organizations are listed under Appendix F.

4 Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada. (2004). Report on Plans and Priorities: 2004-2005, p15, http://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/publications/corporate/pdf/rpp_2004_e.pdf.

5 Funding is “fenced” for certain initiatives such as the Effective Corrections Initiative.

6 PSEP. Report on Plans and Priorities, 2004-05.

7 As was noted in the introduction section of this report, a certain portion of contributions funding is “fenced” or set aside for specific initiatives.

8 There was mixed opinions as to the need to ensure representation in terms of racial diversity with some respondents maintaining that the present NVOs adhere to principles of tolerance and respect for diversity. Yet other respondents argued that other organizations such as national victims groups could be supported and therefore adequately represented through other funding mechanisms.

9 A suggestion was made to consider organizations such as the Red Cross as these were felt to align more fully with emergency preparedness priorities

10 The survey was previously conducted through the work of a Grants and Contributions Working Group, Sub-Committee.

11 PSEP. Grants and Contributions Review Working Group, Final Report, November 23, 2004, p. 21.

12 Appendix C

13 Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, Annual Report, 2004.

14 Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, Annual Report, 2004. p. 4.

15 See Appendix C

16 To see a detailed example of an innovative project featuring a Restorative Justice Program see the project entitled: In Support of Restorative Justice Programs in Appendix C.

17 Feedback forms are distributed for each conference and are completed by members and Conference attendees who provide suggestions on topics for the next conference and relevant and emerging issues in the communities.

18 Canadian Research Institute for Law and the Family. October 2004. An Evaluation of the Mamowichihitowin Community Wellness Program: Phase 1.

19 The John Howard Society of Canada Annual Report, 2003/04.

20 File documentation

21 File documentation

22 2003-2004 Annual Report. Canadian Training Institute.

23 There was noted insufficient funds for communication activities such as the updating of the website, publishing of calendar to list CTI’s core courses.

24 Annual Report 2002-03

Date modified: