Aboriginal Courtwork Program, Formative Evaluation

4. Recommendations and Managemant Response

4.1. Effectiveness of the Tripartite Working Group (TWG)

TWG priorities

The Tripartite Working Group (TWG) mandate is clear and for the most part remains relevant. However, for a number of reasons, the TWG is not fully meeting its mandate. 

While the TWG has established annual priorities, the list is overly ambitious, and as a result, a few of the priorities have not been adequately addressed. In addition, over the past few years, the agenda of TWG meetings has focussed to a large extent on the Department of Justice's  accountability requirements, leaving little time and resources for other issues. Service Delivery Agencies feel they have insufficient opportunity to discuss program delivery issues. On the other hand, provinces and territories are of the view that the TWG focus should be on strategic issues.

Recommendation 1:
It is recommended that the TWG rank its annual priorities in terms of importance and develop a work plan for addressing them.

Management Response:
We agree with the conclusion and recommendation. However, the ability to achieve consensus is highly dependent upon collaboration by other members of the TWG.

Recommendation 2:
It is recommended that the Department of Justice develop a strategy for obtaining input on the federal accountability requirements from the TWG members without encumbering the TWG agenda.

Management Response:
We agree with the conclusion and recommendation.

Recommendation 3:
It is recommended that the TWG consider a third chair selected from among the SDA directors to ensure that issues of concern to SDA are included on the agenda.

Management Response:
We agree that consideration be given to including a third co-chair representing the Service Delivery Agencies. The idea was discussed at the May 1, 2007 TWG meeting and a number of provinces and territories supported it.

Operation of the TWG

There are concerns with the operation of the TWG, notably that there is unequal participation among working group members, that the working group requires an inordinate amount of time to address issues, that the decisions of the working group are not always clear, and that secretariat support is insufficient.

Recommendation 4:
It is recommended that the TWG contract a facilitator for meetings to assist the TWG in addressing issues more efficiently and in making timely decisions.

Management Response:
We agree that in some cases, facilitation by an outside resource person would help build consensus on complex or long standing TWG issues. In conjunction with the 2006 annual meeting of the TWG (November) a facilitator was used to facilitate a discussion on performance measurement. The TWG provided positive feedback and evaluated the experience as being useful.

Recommendation 5:
It is recommended that the Department of Justice provide more secretariat support to the TWG.

Management Response:
We agree that additional secretariat support for the TWG would be beneficial. DOJ's ability to do so is highly dependent on securing additional resources for the ACW program.

Provincial co-chair

The eligibility criteria, selection process and length of term for the provincial co-chair need to be articulated.

Recommendation 6:
It is recommended that the TWG articulate the eligibility criteria, selection process and length of term for the provincial co-chair.

Management Response:
We agree with the conclusion and recommendation. At the May 1, 2007 annual meeting of the TWG a draft revised mandate was submitted to the TWG for review. It included detailed information on the eligibility, selection process and length of term for the provincial Co-Chair.

Steering Committee

The TWG Steering Committee is not currently an effective mechanism for accomplishing or guiding the work of the TWG.  Its role, mandate and decision-making authority are not documented, nor are they clear to the TWG or indeed to the Steering Committee itself.

Recommendation 7:
It is recommended that the TWG review the role, mandate and decision-making authority of the TWG Steering Committee.

Management Response:
We agree with the conclusion and recommendation. At the May 1, 2007 annual meeting of the TWG a draft revised mandate was submitted to the TWG for review. TWG members agreed that the Steering Committee should be eliminated but that wording that allows the TWG to form sub-committees as required to work on TWG priority areas be added to the new mandate statement. When established, each new sub-committee will be given a clear mandate and a decision making process established by the TWG.

4.2. Funding of the Aboriginal Courtwork (ACW) Program

The 2002-03 increase in federal funding ($1 million) has helped to alleviate some of the immediate pressures on the Courtwork program but according to provincial/territorial officials and/or SDA it was not sufficient to meet the costs associated with the evolving role of courtworkers.

Recommendation 8:
It is recommended that the Department of Justice obtain and analyse information on program costs in order to determine whether enhanced funding is warranted.

Management Response:
We agree with the conclusion and recommendation. Preliminary discussions with provincial/territorial partners have resulted in the TWG submitting a consent item at the June 2007, FPT Deputies meeting seeking and receiving approval to proceed with a renewal strategy for the Aboriginal Courtwork Program.

Performance Measurement

Most provincial and territorial officials are experiencing problems with the definition of client in core performance measure 3.  The information is critical to obtaining to understanding whether the program is meeting its objectives.  

Although the various resources provided by the Department of Justice to support performance measurement have been useful, the SDA have not implemented the survey of clients and court officials/judges due to a number of concerns including the protection of clients' privacy, the appropriateness of courtworkers collecting information from their own clients, and the impact on courtworkers workload in the absence of additional funding.

Recommendation 9:
It is recommended that the Department of Justice work with the provinces, territories and Service Delivery Agencies to clarify the definition of client in core performance measure #3.

Management Response:
We agree with the recommendation. The Department will continue to work with the provinces and territories and Service Delivery Agencies to obtain consensus on a standardized definition of “client”. Without additional resources to develop a national database, there has been and will continue to be difficulty in achieving consensus with the provinces and territories on standardized fields and definitions.

Recommendation 10:
It is recommended that the Department of Justice work with the provinces and territories to develop a revised strategy for the implementation of the client and court officials/judiciary survey, and determine whether additional resources would be required to support the strategy (i.e., training, development of national database, build capacity to support SDA to fulfill the federal accountability requirements.)

Management Response:
We agree with the recommendation to revise the survey strategy to take into consideration the challenges faced by the jurisdictions in administering client and court official/judiciary surveys. The client and court official/judiciary information will be collected during 2007-2008 through the summative evaluation of the Aboriginal Courtwork Program.