Contraventions Act Evaluation, Final Report

4. Methodology

The methodology used to conduct this evaluation has two main components: a document and file review, as well as key informant interviews.

4.1. Document review

To get a detailed understanding of the Contraventions Act, a range of documents were reviewed. The list of documents includes, but is not limited to:

4.2. Key informant interviews

Key informant interviews were conducted with a number of stakeholder groups from all regions of Canada where the Act is operational. In total, 67 interviews were conducted, involving 81 individuals. These interviews were conducted during the period between February and April 2010. Table 4 presents the distribution of key informants consulted, based on their positions.

Table 4: Distribution of key informants consulted by positions
Key informant group Number of individuals consulted
Enforcement officers (federal, provincial, municipal) 29
Enforcement managers (federal, provincial, municipal, airports) 20
Legal counsel and prosecutors 12
Public servants (federal and provincial) 17
Court managers  3
Total 81

Some of these interviews were conducted in person, while others were conducted over the phone. Formal site visits were included as part of the data collection process, and some in-person interviews were conducted in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Ontario. In other provinces, however, the geographical location of stakeholders was so dispersed that phone interviews were used instead of site visits.

4.3. Analysis

The implementation of the Contraventions Act is largely an undocumented story. As a result, the methodology used for the evaluation was structured to allow for a thorough review of documented and undocumented facts about the Act, and for the gathering of opinions and perceptions of a wide range of stakeholders, with a strong emphasis on enforcement officers and managers.

Since the evaluation relied heavily on qualitative data, qualitative data analysis software (NVivo) was used to systematically structure findings along key evaluation issues, questions and indicators, and to allow for a complete integration of all qualitative information. This approach supported an analysis by organizations and positions, which was particularly important considering the nature of statutory offences covered by the Act.