Aboriginal Courtwork Program, Summative Evaluation

3.  FINDINGS (cont'd)

• 3.6.  Linkages with communities and other justice initiatives
• 3.7.  Impact in enabling Aboriginal accused to receive fair and equitable treatment
• 3.8.  Tripartite collaboration
• 3.9.  Other impacts and effects
• 3.10.  Factors determining the effectiveness of the Program
• 3.11.  Opportunities for improvement identified by stakeholders

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

3. FINDINGS (cont'd)

3.6. Linkages with communities and other justice initiatives

3.6.1. Linkages with communities

The Program has helped to strengthen the relationship between the Aboriginal community and the formal justice system

In addition to working with clients, most courtworkers interact directly with the community by serving on various committees and promoting the Program through presentations, brochures and promotional material, meetings, forums, workshops and other means. The types of committees, associations and community boards in which courtworkers are involved range from those with a justice focus, such as justice programs and AJI, networking groups focused on justice issues, and correctional and police committees to those with a broader focus, such as youth services, regional health boards, mental health associations, drugs and substance abuse associations, cultural associations, women groups, and employment agencies.

Through courtworkers’ efforts within the community, progress has been made in improving understanding of the justice system and raising the profile of the ACW Program within the Aboriginal community. In addition, the presence of the courtworker in the formal justice system helps to improve the credibility of the justice system among Aboriginals, build greater trust in the system, and reduce the sense of alienation. As an illustration, when community stakeholders were asked to rate the impact of the ACW Program in reducing the sense of alienation felt by members of the Aboriginal community regarding the justice system, members of the Aboriginal community provided an average rating of 3.9 on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact at all and 5 is a major impact. However, while significant progress has been made, more work needs to be done.

Active involvement in community programs and initiatives also benefits the Program by increasing the familiarity of courtworkers with language, culture, background and history of the community, which in turn enables courtworkers to better understand the specific needs of the clients and to communicate these needs to justice officials.

3.6.2. Aboriginal justice initiatives

There are different federal, provincial and territorial approaches aimed at reducing the rate of Aboriginal incarceration, each attempting to make the justice system more responsive and culturally sensitive. These include expanded Aboriginal policy and program initiatives within the judicial system, cross-cultural education for those involved in the justice system, and the use of diversion and alternative measures such as sentencing circles, community justice committees and healing lodges. The implementation of these approaches reflects a growing understanding that Aboriginal offenders have unique needs and require alternative programs.

Under the Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS), the federal government has provided funding for various types of community-based justice initiatives including diversion/alternative measures programs, community sentencing programs and mediation, each of which is described below:

• Diversion/alternative measures programs are designed to divert Aboriginal accused from the formal court system into alternative community processes. Diversion is usually an informal process while alternative measures programs are typically authorized by and established under provisions of the Criminal Code or Youth Criminal Justice Act. Alternative measures provide justice officials with an array of programs including victim-offender mediation and diversion; youth programming; sentencing circles; family group conferencing; healing circles; crime prevention workshops; after-care reintegration initiatives; section 81 initiatives; probation; and other programs that focus on healing and the use of First Nations’ traditions and healing models. Restorative justice programs are similar except their objective is to repair the harm caused by crime and restore the parties to a state of wellness or wholeness which was disturbed by the criminal act. These programs are similar to alternative justice programs, often offering the following three core programs: victim-offender reconciliation/mediation, family group conferencing, and circles (sentencing circles, healing circles, releasing circles, etc.). Properly designed, diversion/alternative measures programs are less intrusive, more culturally appropriate and more expeditious than a formal court-based response.
• Community sentencing programs provide for the participation of the community in the preparation and provision of advice to sentencing judges about the appropriate sanction to impose on a person found guilty of an offence, and about the community resources that could be made available to the offender as part of a restorative response.
• Mediation in non-criminal disputes (such as family or civil matters) involves a neutral third party who assists the parties in conflict to come to a resolution. Mediation does not typically deal with criminal disputes.

The AJS funds over 100 community justice initiatives (over three-quarters of the Programs are diversion/alternative measures programs) and serves about 400 communities across Canada annually. In 2004-05, these programs accepted approximately 7,400 clients[9] . No data is available regarding the percentage of these clients who were referred by courtworkers.

Some provinces such as Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia have designated justice branches or directorates to deal with Aboriginal issues and develop appropriate policies. The Aboriginal-specific policies found within the provinces and territories follow the same general principles/philosophies found at the federal level. The only significant differences between the policies implemented at the different levels would be the number of programs offered. Aboriginal-specific programs include Aboriginal Liaison Services, Traditional Spiritual Practices, Substance Abuse Treatment, Aboriginal Literacy and Educational Programs, Cultural Skill, Community Reintegration, Sweat Lodge Ceremonies, Employment Training, Anger Management and Family Violence Programs. The programs offered depend upon the demands within specific regions of the country. Provincial and territorial governments have also recognized the importance of proactive approaches to crime and created new policy designs to meet the needs of First Nations youth. Examples of approaches include diversion programs, bush camps, and Aboriginal Youth Justice Committees.

3.6.3. Impact on community-based justice initiatives

Courtworkers have developed relationships that complement community-based justice initiatives.

Courtworkers commonly develop relationships with representatives of various AJIs . For example, when representatives of AJIs were asked to rate how familiar they are with the ACW Program on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all familiar and 5 is very familiar, they provided an average response of 3.6. Many of the representatives indicated that they regularly interact with courtworkers (in some instances, almost on a daily basis).

The ACW Program is broadly viewed as supporting and complementing other AJIs. When asked to rate the extent to which the Program has contributed to the success of other community-based programs and initiatives on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all, 3 is somewhat and 5 is significantly, the average rating varied from 3.6 among AJI representatives themselves to 4.4 among the courtworkers.

To what extent does the ACW Program contribute to the success of other Aboriginal justice iniatives?

[ Description ]

The work of Aboriginal courtworkers has been evolving beyond the traditional court-based role to meet the needs of Aboriginal people involved in the criminal justice system. As part of this evolving role in the community, courtworkers are becoming increasingly involved in helping facilitate alternative justice models, cooperating with community councils, and coordinating client participation in diversion programs. More specifically, courtworkers complement these other initiatives by serving as a vital source for referrals (in effect, courtworkers serve as the frontline for many of these initiatives by identifying suitable clients), creating awareness of the programs within the legal system and with the accused, working together with representatives from various alternative measures and diversion programs and sharing information with them with respect to particular clients as well as broader issues, sharing resources and best practices, sitting on Aboriginal justice committees or committees established to oversee specific initiatives and, in some cases, taking a lead role in the development of community-based initiatives. The Program is often seen as the frontline to Aboriginal justice with the courtworker playing an essential role in the measures that are taken after their initial meeting with the client.

Most stakeholders see opportunities to further improve coordination between the ACW Program and other Aboriginal justice initiatives.

Is there a need for coordination between the ACW Program and other iniatives.

[ Description ]

Particular areas where improvements could be made include increasing the level of information sharing and communication, further increasing awareness of the initiatives and options available to Aboriginal accused, improving the services provided to the clients and the effectiveness of the available programs, clarifying the respective roles of the courtworkers and representatives from other diversion and alternative measure programs, and improving the level of coordination to reduce possible areas of overlap or duplication. In some communities, AJIs (particularly alternative measures programs) are not available, which makes the courtworkers’ job more difficult and reduces the options available to clients as well as the justice system. While increasing the level of interaction would further strengthen the Aboriginal justice programs and criminal justice system, the delivery partners and courtworkers note that resource and time constraints may make this difficult to achieve.

3.7. Impact in enabling Aboriginal accused to receive fair and equitable treatment

By ensuring that the Aboriginal accused understand the court environment and that court officials respond in a manner that best addresses the needs of the accused, it is anticipated that the accused will receive fair, equitable and culturally sensitive treatment before the courts.

The ACW Program has made significant progress towards enabling Aboriginal accused who are assisted by courtworkers to receive fair and equitable treatment before the courts.

One indicator of this is the perceptions of the key stakeholders who were interviewed. When asked to rate the impact of the Program in contributing to help Aboriginal accused to receive fair and equitable treatment before the courts on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact at all and 5 is a major impact, the average rating ranged from 3.9 among justice officials to 4.3 among representatives of community justice initiatives and other stakeholders and courtworkers, and to 4.4 among representatives from SDAs and provincial/territorial partners.

How much of an impact has the Program had in helping Aboriginal accused to receive fair and equitable treatment before the courts?

On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact and 5 is a major impact

[ Description ]

The Aboriginal accused were generally satisfied with the outcome of the court proceedings. According to the survey of Aboriginal accused, 54% of clients were satisfied with the outcome of their case (including 21% who were very satisfied), 9% were dissatisfied, and 36% did not yet know the outcome.

The ACW Program has helped to ensure Aboriginal accused have greater access to fair, equitable and culturally sensitive treatment through a number of ways. The presence of Aboriginal courtworkers within the courts helps to ease the imbalance of non-Aboriginal justice officials working with Aboriginal accused. In areas where the Aboriginal populations predominantly speak an Aboriginal language, courtworkers explain the justice process and procedures in a culturally sensitive way (in the language of the accused) which also ensures the accused understand the nature of the charges. In addition, the simple presence of a courtworker often encourages justice officials to be more conscious and aware of the way they treat Aboriginal accused. As described in earlier sections, the courtworkers have been successful in providing support and information to Aboriginal accused, increasing awareness of rights, obligations and resources available to the accused as well as communication within court proceedings between accused and court personnel, and providing information and advice to the formal justice system that is pertinent to the case, all of which contribute to fair, equitable and culturally sensitive treatment.

In the absence of the ACW Program, the justice process for Aboriginal accused would be delayed by issues related to communication, understanding of the process, and access to legal representation. There would be an increase in failures to appear and breaches of conditions, which in turn would further increase the number of cases coming before the courts. In some cases, witnesses would be less likely to appear when scheduled. Clients would be less able to access the Programs, resources and services that are available. The Aboriginal community would feel more fearful, less trustful and more alienated from the justice system.

While significant progress has been made, much more work needs to be done. Interviews with courtworkers and observations through field trips highlight that there are still numerous situations where Aboriginal persons are not being dealt with fairly, equitably or in a culturally sensitive manner. At times, courtworkers even express dissatisfaction with the treatment they themselves have received in the system. Furthermore, the expectation is that much of the significant progress that has been made would dissipate should the services of courtworkers no longer be available.

3.8. Tripartite collaboration

3.8.1. Mandate of the Tripartite Working Group

On a program policy level, the ACW Program operates in a tripartite format (includes federal representatives, provincial-territorial partners, and Aboriginal SDAs) and is guided by a Tripartite Working Group (TWG ). The TWG serves as an important forum for addressing a range of policy and program issues with a focus on developing innovative approaches; sharing information, resources and best practices; undertaking research; investigating the need for services not currently covered under cost-shared agreements; and providing advice to the Deputy Ministers of Justice on the potential impact that new legislative or policy changes may have on the ACW Program.

3.8.2. Existing level of collaboration

There has been tripartite collaboration with respect to the ACW Program.

When asked to rate the extent to which the Program has taken advantage of opportunities for collaboration on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all and 5 is extensively, representatives of the FPT Partners provided an average rating of 3.6 while the SDA representatives provided an average rating of 3.0. The SDA respondents were familiar with the work of the TWG (9 of the 13 SDA respondents interviewed are members of the TWG ).

To what extent has the Program taken advantage of the opportunities for collaboration?

[ Description ]

Workloads, budgets and geography were identified as constraints to increasing the level of collaboration. Examples of areas of collaboration include:

• The formative and summative evaluations.
• Training activities, including the delivery of three national training events (including the recent February 2008 event which brought together courtworkers and key stakeholders from all over Canada), development of a national courtworker curriculum (including recent curriculum updates which also made all of the information available in CD format), Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) training, and Gladue training conducted in Ontario.
• Production of a crystal meth reference guide: "Remember your spirit" .
• Recent upgrades which ensured that every courtworker has an email address.
• Development of and improvements to the Performance Measurement Strategy.
• Creation of a National Database Subcommittee, and
• Commissioning of various research projects such as a literature review, a feasibility study for a National Family Courtwork Program, and an assessment of the impacts of the Program[10] .

In addition, an extensive project is currently underway with the University of Winnipeg which is conducting research into core courtworker competencies, a national certification program, the formalization of regional courtworker roles, and the direction of future training and pay scales. The TWG holds at least three national teleconferences every year with the co-chairs and has the prerogative to call additional meetings as necessary.

These types of collaborative projects and initiatives benefit the ACW Program by increasing opportunities to share best practices and approaches to service delivery, collect valuable data and information, improve understanding of the Program and related initiatives, and perform certain tasks for which SDAs do not have the budget or which are best done on a joint basis (e.g., national training, curriculum development, guidebooks and research).

3.8.3. Areas for future focus

Areas where the partners see opportunities for further collaboration include research into family law issues, delivery of national training events and conferences, development and increase of national standards, sharing of best practices, providing data and information on changes to legislation, and facilitating greater input from SDAs to take full advantage of their expertise.

3.8.4. Progress made in addressing issues raised in the formative evaluation

Although the formative evaluation has only recently been completed, some progress has already been made in responding to the collaboration issues that were raised.

A small majority of the partners and SDA representatives reported a recent increase in the level of collaboration.

Have you noticed an increase in the level of collaboration recently?

[ Description ]

In particular, progress has been made in increasing communication and understanding between different parties, better balancing of participation among members, and gaining more input from SDAs. Areas highlighted where further improvements are needed include facilitating greater input from SDAs (consideration is currently being given to creating a third chair selected from among the SDA directors), obtaining broader input into meeting agendas, adjusting travel budgets so that appropriate parties can travel, and acknowledging regional differences when considering changes to the Program.

The formative evaluation also made recommendations regarding performance measurement. Progress has been made with respect to the implementation of client and justice official surveys as well as the definition of some terms. An extensive survey of clients has now been completed (the results of which have been incorporated into this report) and the process is currently being reviewed to determine the opportunities for further improvement. Reporting of data defined under the performance measurement strategy has been mixed in the past with a few of the jurisdictions having yet to provide reports for 2006-07. It is anticipated that reporting will be improved for this fiscal year although it is too early to determine. According to the partners, working towards greater standardization and efficiency in reporting (e.g., implementing common approaches to the collection of data, ensuring that courtworkers understand the definitions and nature of the data they are collecting, and streamlining the data collection, reporting and administrative requirements for courtworkers) is an on-going process.

3.9. Other Impacts and Effects

In addition to the impacts previously identified, the ACW Program has also generated a number of other positive impacts. Three notable impacts include:

• Courtworkers have helped to improve the effectiveness of other programs serving Aboriginal communities. Through the involvement of courtworkers and development of referral networks, the ACW Program has increased collaboration between community programs and awareness of client needs and key issues facing the community, improved opportunities for community development, created dialogue on Aboriginal issues and justice within the community, and helped to build community capacity.
• Courtworkers have become role models in some communities and have helped to encourage Aboriginal pride while enhancing the credibility of the justice system within the Aboriginal community.
• The courtworker position can act as an entry position or stepping stone through which individuals have been able to obtain experience and exposure before moving on to more senior positions in the justice system (sometimes after returning to school). As such, the Program has helped to further strengthen the Aboriginal voice from within the justice system while encouraging Aboriginal courtworkers to pursue justice-related careers.

3.10. Factors determining the effectiveness of the Program

Key factors that determine the effectiveness of the Program include:

• The capabilities and experience of the courtworkers, which is itself determined in part by the rate of attrition and access to training;
• The evolving role of courtworkers and the continued pressure on courtworkers to broaden their role;
• The capacity of the Program to meet the demand for services; and
• The access to other resources and programs in the community.

Effectiveness is less dependent upon the type of delivery model that is employed. These factors are discussed in the following paragraphs.

3.10.1. Attrition

Overall, the effectiveness of the Program is in large part a function of the skills and capabilities of the individual courtworker. Given that many of the skills and capabilities of courtworkers are developed on-the-job, there is a strong correlation between the effectiveness of the Program and the rate of attrition or turnover in the courtworker position.

According to interviews with PTPs and SDAs, the attrition rate among courtworkers has averaged about 11% over the past year. These figures are relatively consistent with the results of courtworker interviews which found that under 10% had less than one year of experience, 10% have from one year to less than two years experience, 9% have from two years to less than three years experience, 17% have from three years to less than five years experience, 22% have from five years to less than 10 years experience, 30% have 10 years or more experience, and 1% were not sure or did not provide an estimate. On average, courtworkers reported 5.2 years of experience as a courtworker.

The rate of attrition appears to vary by region. Forty-eight percent of the provincial and territorial partners and SDAs and 42% of the courtworkers indicated that attrition rates have tended to be high in their regions.

When courtworkers were asked whether they were considering leaving their job within the next year, approximately 10% of them indicated that they definitely are considering leaving, and another 11% indicated they may possibly consider leaving their jobs. The most common reasons given by courtworkers for considering leaving the job include dissatisfaction with the level of compensation, an opportunity or desire to move on to other employment or return to school, health issues, burn-out due to high workloads and stress, family reasons, work place difficulties and a lack of steady work for those working on a part-time or an ad-hoc basis. It should be noted that although courtworkers have concerns about compensation and some other elements of the job, they frequently expressed passion and enjoyment for their jobs. Part of this passion comes from working with their people and helping their community.

Attrition has a negative impact on the success of the ACW Program. The effectiveness of courtworkers is largely a function of their visibility, credibility, connections, skills and experience – all of which take time to develop. It takes time for a courtworker to become known in the community, to develop relationships with justice officials, representatives of other programs and the broader community, to understand their role, and to learn how best to undertake their responsibilities. Training for new workers is costly and difficult to provide because of the one-to-one nature of much of the training and the decentralized location of many of the courtworkers. When a courtworker leaves, services are disrupted. It often takes an extended length of time to fill positions, particularly in smaller communities and in regions where the economy is strong. It also takes time for the courtworker to develop rapport with the Aboriginal clientele and community and to develop sufficient knowledge of the local population in order to recognize the names of the Aboriginal people on the docket.

Factors commonly identified by stakeholders as contributing to the high attrition rate are consistent with those identified by courtworkers. For example:

• Lower wages relative to competing employment opportunities;
• A booming economy in some regions (much lower rates of unemployment than in the past);
• Increasing demands on an already heavy workload leading to the burnout of courtworkers;
• Limited opportunities for growth, advancement and professional development; and
• A feeling of isolation attributed to the location of some communities as well as a lack of direct interaction with other staff, support and recognition.

Most courtworkers recommended an increase in compensation and an improved benefits package as a way to reduce attrition rates. Other suggestions include more training and professional development, more networking opportunities, reduced caseloads, reduced administrative duties, and better working conditions. Greater recognition of their efforts and appreciation of their work by the Program and justice officials would also help to increase job satisfaction. In addition, stakeholders recommended providing more competitive wages (particularly in areas requiring post-secondary education) and clear salary scales as well as increasing Program funding to allow for more training and improved working conditions. More resources for the Program are needed to increase the number of staff in some areas.

3.10.2. Training

Courtworkers obtain the bulk of their training on the job and through job shadowing other courtworkers. Other common methods include formal training programs, mentoring, self-teaching and orientation sessions. These methods can be supplemented by training materials and curriculum developed nationally (e.g., materials developed by the TWG ) or locally (e.g., developed by the local SDA and other courtworkers).

The available budget for training varies widely, with annual plans submitted by participating provinces and territories identifying training budgets ranging from $1,000 to nearly $100,000 per jurisdiction. In areas where the budget permits, supplementary training may be provided covering topics as diverse as Gladue report writing, mediation, facilitation, administrative support, time management, various mental conditions and associated behavior indicators, suicide intervention, and basic first aid.

The current system is generally effective in preparing courtworkers for their positions. For example, 74% of justice officials and 72% of Aboriginal justice representatives agreed that courtworkers have the knowledge and skills needed for their work.

Do ACWs have the knowledge and skills necessary to perform their work?

[ Description ]

Approximately two-thirds of federal, provincial, territorial and SDA representatives expressing an opinion agreed that the current training provided is adequate to give courtworkers the knowledge and skills needed for their work.

Is the current training adequate to provide ACWs with the knowledge and skills needed?

[ Description ]

Stakeholders identified a need for training in the following areas: family law (child apprehension, social services), Gladue-related services, changes to the criminal code, court proceedings, paralegal skills, conditions of release, bail hearings, how to deal with FASD or mentally ill clients, and the courtworker mandate. Other areas of importance include access to skill development training covering topics such as public speaking, client assessment skills, mediation and community outreach. Training could be improved by enhancing the national curriculum for courtworkers and facilitating knowledge sharing through mechanisms such as online learning communities, regular online forums, publications and teleconferences. Improved training would benefit the Program by shortening the learning curve for new courtworkers, reducing the rate of turnover, enhancing the quality of the services provided, and better enabling courtworkers to keep abreast of legislative changes.

3.10.3. Evolution in the role of courtworkers

The role of courtworkers has changed and evolved over time. Over three quarters of the delivery partners noted that the role of the courtworker had changed as compared to just over one-half of the courtworkers and justice officials. As would be expected, the tendency to note a change increases with the length of time that the courtworker has been involved in the ACW Program. Representatives of AJIs were least likely to notice changes in the role of courtworkers.

The roles of Aboriginal courtworkers have evolved in a number of ways according to the stakeholders interviewed:

• As awareness and visibility of the Program has increased, the courtworkers are increasingly utilized by both Aboriginal accused and justice officials.
• The range of responsibilities of courtworkers has increased as well, particularly with respect to delivery of services to the community and to the court (e.g., involvement in preparing or providing input into Gladue or pre-sentencing reports, making public presentations, being aware of the resources and programs within the community).
• In addition, courtworkers are increasingly involved in supporting and advocating for restorative and alternative justice (e.g., arranging and hosting healing circles, making referrals, arranging diversion programs).
• Expectations placed by the Program on courtworkers have also increased. For example, they are now expected to fulfill weekly reporting and administrative duties and to keep abreast of legislative changes. In some regions, courtworkers have also become more involved in family law, in providing input to the courts, and in serving youth.
• Stakeholders noted a pressing need for family courtworkers as Aboriginal families experience significant challenges. For example, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development data confirms that between the years 1995 and 2001, the number of registered Indian children entering into foster care rose 72% nationally. The same data indicates that Aboriginal inmates are twice as likely (in comparison to non-Aboriginal inmates) to have a history of involvement in the child welfare system[11] . Family courtworkers work to address problems in the home in a culturally relevant way, and in doing so, may effectively reduce the number of Aboriginal children who get incarcerated later on in life. Currently, courtworkers in some areas such as Alberta and Ontario are provided with provincial funding that has allowed them to develop Family Courtwork programs.

Most stakeholders view the changes positively, noting that these have improved the services provided, increased coordination across programming, and given the Program more credibility. However, as a result of these changes, many courtworkers report increased workloads (and accompanying stress levels) which can impact on the number of clients that they can assist and on the level of service that can be provided. It should be noted that workloads can vary by region (with courtworkers in some regions being overwhelmed by the demand while courtworkers in some regions may be less pressured) and over time (many communities offer a mixture of busy days and slow days).

The courtworkers continue to be under pressure to take on additional activities and responsibilities. In particular, courtworkers and delivery partners highlighted pressures to act as more of an advocate and/or legal representative for clients (e.g., appear on their behalf, produce Gladue reports), provide assistance related to family law and civil issues, keep up with legislative changes, get more involved with the community and fulfill new administrative duties.

To respond to these pressures, delivery partners and courtworkers recommend that the Program budget be increased where needed, more training and opportunities for professional development be provided, and steps be taken to streamline the administrative and reporting processes to reduce the accompanying burden on the courtworkers.

3.10.4. Capacity of the ACW Program to meet the demand

The overall effectiveness of the Program is determined, in part, by whether it has the capacity to meet the demand for services. In addition to heavy workloads reported by many courtworkers, a variety of indicators suggest that the demand for services exceeds the supply, including:

• In the recent survey, 70% of the clients indicated that they had a previous conviction but only 55% reported that they previously received services from a courtworker (not all of whom would have a previous conviction). Of those with a previous conviction, 69% indicated that they had previously received services from a courtworker. Of those who reported no previous conviction, 19% indicated that they had previously received services.
• Similarly, in the recent survey, 66% of clients would like to receive further help or services from the courtworker while only 31% indicated that they would not need any further assistance. Courtworkers commonly note that they typically do not have time available to provide much in the way of follow-up services to their clients. Areas where clients would like to receive further assistance included court appearances, finding a lawyer or help in attaining a better lawyer, dealing with outstanding or other charges assistance related to children and family, treatment programs, mediation, counseling and restitution.
• Delivery partners and courtworkers both note that the demand for services is increasing. The need for services has increased over time as the Aboriginal population has grown, the role of courtworkers has broadened, and the courtworkers have become firmly established as a key component of the justice system.
• Less than 40% of justice officials strongly agreed that courtworkers were available when needed, which largely relates to the number of courtworkers relative to the workload and their ability to provide services throughout the region given time, travel and resource issues.
• Access to services in rural areas tends to be more limited than in urban areas as a result of geographic considerations, the number of courtworkers available, and the costs of travel. While there is a need for the services of courtworkers in all regions, some stakeholders argue that the need is particularly acute in rural areas where clients may be less familiar with the justice system, face greater barriers to justice, and have less access to other resources including legal services, community programs and alternative measures.

3.10.5. Access to other resources in the community

The availability of other resources in the community such as diversion programs and alternative measures, treatment programs, medical services, mental health programs, and housing and shelter programs can impact on the effectiveness of the Program. Simply put, the greater the range of tools available to the courtworker, the more targeted their services can be. As highlighted earlier, rural communities tend to have much more restricted access to programs and resources.

3.10.6. Delivery models

Due to differences that exist in the way clients are counted across jurisdictions, it is not possible to accurately calculate the cost of the program per client. However, dividing the federal contribution by the best available estimate of the number of clients yields a crude estimate of about $79 per client and $25,600 per courtworker. The costs of the Program are low, expressed on a per-client or per-courtworker basis.

Direct comparisons are not feasible across jurisdictions because of differences that may exist in how clients are counted, the level of service provided to each client, the range of services supported with the federal funding, and the presence of part-time, ad-hoc, and unfilled courtworker positions which affect the number of courtworkers reported.

As noted in Chapter 2, six different delivery models operate across the country varying in terms of the number of agencies operating in the region and the type of employer. Across the jurisdictions, courtworkers vary from being government employees to working for one or multiple non-profit Aboriginal SDAs operating in the region. There appear to be no obvious reasons why one model is inherently more cost effective than another. For example, two provinces which appear to have comparably low costs per courtworker and per client use very different delivery models. Manitoba uses a government-only model under which courtworkers are government employees, whereas Saskatchewan uses a more complex model under which courtworkers are employees of 16 SDAs whose work is coordinated by a lead organization created by the provincial government.

All models involve a relatively small network of geographically decentralized courtworkers who require some attention from management and administrative assistance. All courtworkers require some form of orientation and training at the beginning of their employment but then largely work independently to provide services and further develop their own skills and networks on-the-job. A one-deliverer model may achieve some economies in management and administration but result in less face-to-face time with managers because of geographic differences. A multi-SDA model may result in somewhat less coordination between courtworkers in the province, require a longer lead to achieve consensus on some issues, and have greater potential for duplication in administration and support activities. However, a multi-SDA model may also enable the courtworker to interact more often with his or her manager and other SDA employees (including non-courtworkers), may be more community-driven, and may have the advantage of building close relationships with other programming in the region, particularly if that programming is also delivered by the SDA.

Factors other than the type of delivery model are likely to have a much greater impact on cost effectiveness. In addition to factors such as attrition, access to training, and access to other resources and programs which were highlighted earlier, such factors include:

• The geographic territory that is served (and related travel costs and times);
• The scope of the Program (e.g., whether courtworkers are involved in family court and youth court);
• The depth of services provided (e.g., where alternative measures exist, the time spent on aiding in the preparation of drug and alcohol related treatment plans, counseling, and other options can involve a greater time commitment from courtworkers);
• Competitive remuneration rates for the region;
• Access to supporting infrastructure (e.g., access to office space and equipment in the courthouse where courtworkers can work and meet with clients);
• The level of and the support for the awareness of the Program among justice officials; and
• The extent to which the justice system itself is overburdened in the region.

Furthermore, the results of the interviews illustrate that there are no differences across delivery models with respect to the perceived success of the Program in achieving ratings of its objectives, or its impacts on Aboriginal accused, justice officials, and other community initiatives. One notable difference relates to the impact of the Program in enabling justice officials to consider alternative measures, which is a function of the availability of alternative measures in a given jurisdiction rather than differences in effectiveness of delivery models.

3.11. Opportunities for Improvement Identified by Stakeholders

The delivery partners, courtworkers and other stakeholders provided a wide range of suggestions regarding the ways in which the ACW Program could be improved. The following table presents opportunities for improvement identified by stakeholders.

---

• [9] Fleming, Chris. The Aboriginal Justice Strategy. JustResearch,Issue 15. (2008).

• [10] "Assessing the Impact of the Aboriginal Courtwork Program" , Draft Report comparing Manitoba communities with and without a courtworker (2008).

• [11] Fraser, Racquel, Feasibility Study of a National Courtwork Program, 2007

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page