Justice Federal Victims Strategy Evaluation

4. Key Findings

This section combines information from all lines of evidence and presents the findings according to the broad evaluation issues of relevance and performance.

4.1. Relevance

The evaluation considered the continuing need for the Justice FVS, the extent to which the core activities are aligned with federal government priorities, and the Justice FVS’s alignment with federal roles and responsibilities. This section outlines the results of this analysis.

4.1.1. Continued Need for the Justice FVS

All key informants indicated that the Justice FVS continues to be relevant and that the four core activities are the most appropriate levers to ensure that the Justice FVS outcomes are achieved.

There continues to be a need for PCVI to provide an FPT coordination role to facilitate information sharing, collaboration and research which has an impact on public awareness and the quality and consistency of victim services; to ensure there is cohesion in developing legislation that takes into consideration the needs of victims; and to ensure that the criminal justice system is responsive towards victims and their needs. As victims begin to exercise their newly enshrined rights under the CVBR, the need for a federal centre of expertise on victims’ issues will increase.

On an international level, the Government of Canada has taken a leadership role with respect to victims’ issues. There continues to be a need for Canada to lead by example and to participate fully at the international level, including through responding to international surveys and requests for information on victim matters. With the enactment of the CVBR, it is also expected that there will be an increased demand for information at the international level.

All key informants also indicated that there is a continued need for the Victims Fund to support jurisdictions so that they can engage in innovative activities through pilot projects that are not supported through their provincial and territorial core funding; promote victims issues through Victims Week funding; as well as enhance victim services especially in smaller jurisdictions and in the North where the need for support is highest. The Victims Fund has also evolved to meet the continued need for culturally appropriate services for Aboriginal victims and supporting services for children and youth through CACs. There also continues to be a need to provide financial assistance for victims of crime to enhance their ability to participate and have a voice in the criminal justice system and to reduce financial hardship.

4.1.1.1. Emerging and Ongoing Issues

The evaluation identified, predominately through key informant interviews, a number of emerging and ongoing issues that also speak to the continued need for the Justice FVS.

Impact of Technology

The increase in the use of technology has changed the landscape for victims of crime. Key informants indicated that victims want faster and easier access to information and more accessible services (e.g., applications and social media). Technology has also changed the way victims can participate in the criminal justice process (e.g., use of closed-circuit television as a form of testimonial aid).

With advances in technology and the prevalence of social media, there are also new forms of technology-based crimes that are impacting victims (e.g., identify theft, cyberbullying and sexual exploitation on the internet). Increased media attention on cyber intimidation and bullying, scams, and child sexual exploitation has led/contributed to a more focused emphasis on vulnerable populations and increased protections, information and supports for victims of these crimes.

Awareness of the Needs of Victims

When asked during the evaluation, just over half of key informants interviewed indicated that they believe that the needs of victims have changed over the past five years. However, upon closer examination, the needs themselves may not have changed as much as the landscape (e.g., impact of technology), awareness, expectations and the response to addressing the core victim’s needs (e.g., to be engaged, to have a voice, to be kept safe, to receive compensation, to receive information, and to be treated with respect) that have changed.

According to key informants, public awareness of victims’ issues and needs have increased in part due to victims being a central priority for the federal government and that all crime issues have been framed as victims’ issues. It is believed that increased awareness (generally and through consultations to develop the CVBR) has led to increased expectations around availability of services; expectation for more specialized services that respond to the different types of victimization and populations; recognition that vulnerable victims accessing programs have multiple pre-existing needs and layers of trauma; recognition that there are many barriers in rural and remote communities for victims to receive support; the need to increase culturally relevant victim services; and from the northern perspective, although there is better understanding of what are culturally responsive services to victims, victims are still finding it difficult to participate in the criminal justice process (e.g., attend criminal justice proceedings).

Support for Victim Services

According to the Statistics Canada Victim Services Survey, the number of victims served increased from 409,598 in 2010 to 458,615 in 2012, an 11% increase over the two years and a 21% increase from when the survey began in 2002Footnote 23. This highlights the demand for services for victims of crime.

There also continues to be a demand for federal funding to meet the need for enhancing existing services and expanding the range of specialized responses for victims. Between 2010 and 2015, the Department received a total of 1,743 applications from victim-serving organizations as well as provinces and territories for funding through the Victims Fund. In addition, 3,754 individual victims or support persons applied for financial assistance during this period of time.

The Department provided financial assistance to 2,294 victims (including support persons) and put in place 1,059 funding agreements during this five-year period. For three of the funding streams (Victims Week, TLOF and CACs), the demand for funding was higher than the amount available each year.

The number of victims being contacted by the PBC also rose by 44% between 1989 and 2013 (between 2010 and 2013, there were 66,407 contacts with victims), demonstrating an increase in involvement of victims with the PBCFootnote 24. During the same time period, 4,187 victims and support persons were observers during a PBC hearing for which the Victims Fund provided financial assistance to approximately 33% (n=1,375) of the victims and support persons that attended. Although the majority of victims did not require financial assistance to attend, a departmental survey of victims who had received financial assistance to attend a PBC hearing between 2010 and 2013 indicated that 28% would not have been able to attend without the funding.

Support for Northern and Aboriginal Victims of Crime

In 2009, almost 322,000 Aboriginal people aged 15 years or older, or more than one-third (37%) of the Aboriginal population living in the provinces, reported having been a victim of at least one of the eight offences covered by the General Social Survey in the preceding 12 months. This compares to about one-quarter (26%) of non-Aboriginal people who reported having been victimized over the same periodFootnote 25.

Also, between 2009 and 2013, the rate of crime was higher in the territories compared to the rest of Canada and in 2013, the crime rates in all three territories were four to eight times higher than the rest of Canada (four times higher in Yukon, six times higher in the Northwest Territories (NWT) and eight times higher in Nunavut). Although the rates of crime in Canada decreased between 2011 and 2012 by 3%, the rates of crime increased in all three of the territories (1% in NWT and Yukon and 3% in Nunavut).

The high rate of victimization among Aboriginal people and Northern residents is attributed to the high prevalence of risk factors associated with offending and/or victimization, such as being young, living in a lone-parent family, living common-law, high level of unemployment, and the consumption of alcoholFootnote 26.

The dynamics of crime, victimization and service delivery in the North are also different from the rest of Canada:

Given these issues, the PCVI established a Northern Program, tapping into policy and program resources to build the capacity of northern service providers to better meet the needs of the victims of crime they work with. The Northern Program advanced in full collaboration with territorial and federal colleagues. The Program has evolved over the years and has shifted activities to continue to invest in areas where the Justice FVS has a role and federal leadership and assistance is sought.

Culturally Appropriate Services for Aboriginal Victims and Families of Missing or Murdered Aboriginal Women

There are also disproportionately higher rates of violence against Aboriginal women than non-Aboriginal women. In 2009, almost 67,000 or 13% of Aboriginal women aged 15 or older living in Canadian provinces reported being a victim of violence in the previous 12 monthsFootnote 27. Overall, the rate of self-reported violent victimization among Aboriginal women was almost three times higher than the rate of violent victimization reported by non-Aboriginal women. This was the case for spousal violence, as well as violence perpetrated by other family members, friends, acquaintances and strangers. In addition, an operational report released in 2014 by the RCMP indicated that 225 cases of missing and murdered Aboriginal women and girls remain unsolved todayFootnote 28.

The federal government, in partnership with provinces, territories and community organizations, implemented a number of initiatives to help address the high rates of victimization of Aboriginal women, including the implementation of the MMAW Initiative in 2010, which was renewed and expanded under the Action Plan in 2014 for an additional five years.

4.1.2. Alignment with Government Priorities

Victims of crime have been seen as a priority for the Government of Canada since the implementation of the VCI in 2000, and increased its importance with the creation of the FVSFootnote 29 in 2006. The Government of Canada continually strengthened its position that victims of crime are a key priority by ensuring ongoing funding for the FVS in 2011 upon renewal of the Justice FVS; as well as making explicit references to victims of crime in a number of Throne SpeechesFootnote 30 (2010, 2011 and 2013), Federal Budgets/Economic Action Plans, and over 76 announcements related to projects funded via the Victims Fund, CVBR, and victims surcharge (2010-2015).

The 2013 Speech from the Throne also announced that measures would be introduced to increase support for victims of crime with the introduction of a victim’s bill of rights, as part of the Government’s Plan for Safe Streets and Communities, which focused on holding violent offenders accountable, enhancing rights of victims and increasing the efficacy of the justice systemFootnote 31.

In 2014, the Prime Minister announced the introduction of legislation to create a victims bill of rights, stating that: “Our Government wants victims of crime across this country to know that we have listened to their concerns and that we are squarely on their side. Victims will have enforceable rights in Canada’s criminal justice system, will be treated with the respect and fairness that they deserve, and will have a stronger voice”Footnote 32. The CVBR received Royal Assent on April 23, 2015, and came into force on July 23, 2015. Budget 2014 indicated that funding would be available to support its implementation.

This increase in priority for the Government of Canada was reflected in the many initiatives it supported and the fact that the past five years were very active with regards to development of legislation, programs, and initiatives in the area of victims of crime. Since 2010, the DepartmentFootnote 33 has:

These initiatives affirm that victims of crime have been a key priority for the Government of Canada.

4.1.3. Alignment with the Strategic Outcome of the Department

Victims of crime have also been a priority of the Department since the implementation of the VCI in 2000. This continued with the expansion of the Justice FVS in 2007 and throughout the five-year period included in this evaluation.

In 2010-11, one of the Department’s three operational priorities was to “actively participate in initiatives to tackle crime and to support safe and resilient communities”Footnote 35. Implementation of two new initiatives (MMAW and CACs) was identified as a key way to advance this priority.

In 2011-12, focus on victims as a priority was further highlighted by specifically identifying victims in the Report on Plans and Priorities as part of the departmental operational priority: “active participation in initiatives to support Government priority of better protecting Canadians and promoting initiatives to respond to the concerns of victims of crime”Footnote 36. Key initiatives were to roll-out the CACs and MMAW funding.

In 2012-13 the departmental priority shifted “to support victims of crime”Footnote 37 as a separate priority which continued through 2013-14 and 2014-15. Key initiatives undertaken by the Department to realize this priority included:

This evolution of the departmental operational priority reflects the recognition of victims as a growing Government of Canada priority demonstrated in the growth of the Justice FVS with the addition of four new initiatives (CACs, MMAW, TLOF, and MAPI) between 2010 and 2015 and the development of the CVBR.

4.1.4. Alignment with Federal Roles and Responsibilities

The Justice FVS is fully aligned with federal roles and responsibilities with regards to addressing victims of crime issues. In 1988, following the United Nations’ Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime (1985), the FPT Ministers Responsible for Criminal Justice developed the Canadian Statement of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime to guide Canadian society in promoting access to justice, fair treatment and provision of assistance for victims of crime.

FPT Ministers responsible for Justice acknowledged and agreed that the needs of victims are a priority, and during a meeting in 1997 expressed support for inter-jurisdictional cooperation to address them. They also indicated their support for ongoing consultations to develop a victim’s strategy to enable the federal government to undertake a role complementary to the primary role of the provinces and territories.

The shared role in addressing victims’ issues was further highlighted in the 1998 Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights report, Victims’ Rights – A Voice, not a Veto, indicating that:

“Any discussion of the criminal justice system in Canada must bear in mind that both the federal and provincial/territorial levels of government have legislative jurisdiction. Consequently, victims' involvement in the criminal justice process can be affected by more than one level of government or institutional action. Parliament has jurisdiction over the enactment of legislation in relation to criminal law and procedure (including evidence), and penitentiaries. Provincial/territorial levels of government have legislative jurisdiction over the administration of justice, including policing and the prosecution of Criminal Code offences, and prisons”.Footnote 38

In 2003, FPT Ministers Responsible for Criminal Justice renewed the Canadian Statement of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime. The renewed Statement, led by PCVI through the FPTWG, recognizes that all provinces and territories as well as the federal government share the responsibility and obligation to improve the experience of victims in the criminal justice system while working within each jurisdiction’s respective mandates. While the provision of victim services and assistance is primarily a provincial responsibility under the administration of justice, federal jurisdiction for victims of crime is in the development of criminal law (and limited direct services through federal prosecutions and corrections of federal offenders), which included the introduction of the CVBR in 2014 and its enactment in 2015.

4.2. Performance - Achievement of Expected Outcomes (Effectiveness)

This section outlines the extent to which the Justice FVS’ direct and indirect outcomes have been achieved and the impact they have had on realizing the ultimate outcome of a more effective voice for victims in the criminal justice system. This outcome is achieved by providing victims opportunities to participate in the criminal justice process and enhancing their experience with the system. In addition, it is expected that if victims are well supported and informed, they will have a more effective voice.

4.2.1. Strengthened Federal Leadership, Legislation, Policy and Programs Responsive to Victim Issues

Key informants (85%) indicated that through the four core activities of the Justice FVS, the Department has strengthened federal leadership, legislation, policy and programs responsive to victim issues. PCVI acted as a centre of expertise to ensure that a coordinated response to victim issues was used by the Department through all of the core Justice FVS activities. In particular, key informants identified the legislative amendments, including the development of the CVBR and the FPTWG forum for sharing information and collaborating on victim issues, as most contributing to achievement of this outcome. Other examples provided were PCVI’s role in organizing the annual Victims Week; the role the Department played in the establishment and enhancement of CACs across the country; the use of webinars and funding provided to address the needs of families of missing and murdered Aboriginal women and victims; facilitation of knowledge exchanges and conducting research; collaboration with other federal departments on victim issues policy development (e.g., ESDC to implement the Federal Income Support for Parents of Murdered or Missing Children grant in 2014); the support provided for increasing public awareness (e.g., funding of projects and events during Victims Week); and support to the delivery of victim services through the Victims Fund.

Strengthened Leadership through Coordination and Collaboration

As Secretariat of the FPTWG, PCVI works to bring people together to facilitate discussion, networking, sharing of best practices, and collaboration around different areas related to victims. Priority areas that the FPTWG focused on between 2010 and 2013Footnote 39 were varied and included work with the RCMP on a policy for referral to victim services at the investigative stage; implementing victim-related Criminal Code amendments; intersection between family law and criminal law; Aboriginal victimization; restorative justice; development of online training programs for service providers; restitution enforcement; development of CACs; use of victim surcharge; safety planning and risk assessment; competencies for victim service providers; streamlining of the criminal justice system for children; cyberbullying; and victims’ rights. Many of these priorities were realized through the Justice FVS activities.

In the area of CACs, PCVI also took a leadership role in developing a network comprised of representatives from approximately 25 CACs across Canada as well as officials from the Department (IAID, RSD, Evaluation, and PCVI). The network began in April 2014 and meets on a quarterly basis via teleconference (three meetings occurred in the first year). The network promotes information sharing regarding research, training, and promising practices in the development and operation of CACs. In late 2014, the network calls were reorganized to include a focused discussion on specific topics (e.g., forensic interviewing).

During the period of this evaluation, as part of the Northern Program, a Northern Essential Skills Curriculum was developed to ensure that those working with victims in the territories have a consistent and common training base. It is expected to be delivered across all three territories in 2016.

In partnership with territorial governments, direct assistance to Northern victims was also provided through either a Victims of Crime Emergency Fund (Northwest Territories and Yukon) or a Victims of Crime Travel Fund (Nunavut) supported by the Victims Fund. There are no criminal injuries compensation programs in the territories, and this small investment for the most serious needs has been made available to assist in addressing this gap. Results of surveys of victims (n=72) who had received financial assistance through a territorial emergency or travel fund between 2010 and 2015 indicated that 99% found the support helpful and 33% indicated they could not have covered the costs without the financial assistance from these program. Costs covered included travel related to attending court, child care expenses, travel to shelters, travel to attend services, emergency assistance with replacing groceries and clothing, and replacement/repair of damaged property.

Ongoing, dedicated policy and program support for the design of multiyear Victims Fund agreements with each territory are also part of the Northern Program. Through this process, innovative and territorial specific service delivery models are being discussed, designed and implemented.

PCVI has also supported an ongoing network with monthly meetings that identify shared training opportunities, provide opportunities for debriefing and support between territories, peer to peer assistance, and opportunities for further pan-territorial collaboration. The network is made up of territorial victim services, Public Prosecution Services and PCVI, and other federal colleagues have joined calls to provide northern specific updates on their work (e.g. RCMP referral regulations, federal corrections policy, northern research).

Finally, through the Northern Program, PCVI committed $100K to support an increased number of face-to-face interviews with northern victims of crime to improve the representativeness of the population, and hence the quality of data for the 2014 General Social Survey on Victimization to ensure that policy and program efforts are evidence based and reflective of northern voices.

Through the combination of policy, programming and a heavy emphasis on relationship building, the Northern Program has and continues to contribute to:

PCVI also acts as the liaison between the Office of the Federal Ombudsman on Victims of Crime and federal departments. PCVI collaborated with the National Office for Victims and other federal agencies to respond to the annual reports from the Ombudsman as well as special reports such as “Every Image, Every Child: Internet-Facilitated Child Sexual Abuse in Canada”.

Strengthened Legislation

Between 2010 and 2015, the Department undertook a number of Criminal Code amendments including five victims-related Bills sponsored by the Minister of Justice. These Bills focused on mandatory reporting of online child pornography, requiring offenders to pay mandatory increased victim surcharges, enhancing the protection and safety of victims, protecting Canadians online, and culminating in the enactment of Bill C-32, the Victims Bill of Rights in April 2015, which represents the largest legislative initiative related to victims of crime undertaken by the federal government.

The following are the Bills that received Royal Assent:

Bill C-32 was a lengthy and complex bill that enacted a stand-alone Act (the CVBR) to enshrine rights for victims of crime for the first time at the federal level, and gave greater specificity to those rights through amendments to the Criminal Code and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act. The work involved in supporting the Bill through Parliament was significant due to the complexity of the Bill and included: producing a clause by clause binder including revisions following amendments to the Bill made by committee; drafting multiple versions of comprehensive Questions and Answers to address different briefing requirements of departmental and elected officials; working with drafters on numerous revisions to the Bill; drafting numerous speeches for parliamentary debates and committee appearances; identifying and providing written analysis of issues raised at committee and debates; providing written analysis and options for amendments; and drafting briefing notes and talking points on the Bill for domestic and international meetings attended by the Department.

The development of the CVBR also involved the Department working with a number of other federal partners (including PPSC, PSC, Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, ESDC, DND, and Status of Women Canada) on policy options as well as coordinating a three-track consultation process (online public consultation, provincial and territorial engagement and in-person consultations with key stakeholders and victims by the Minister of Justice), one of the largest public consultation processes the Department had undertaken since 2006.

Most key informants interviewed for a case study of the CVBR felt that the process was successful in bringing together all of the federal departments, using collaborative virtual teamsFootnote 40 to ensure that all parts of the Department were involved, and managing the public consultation process. Although the provinces and territories were invited to participate in the public consultation process, it was not possible to fully engage the provinces and territories in the development of the CVBR, due to Cabinet confidences, until after the Bill was introduced in the House of Commons. Some case study key informants (15%) expressed concerns that the inability to consult with the provinces and territories during the development of the CVBR may have a future impact on implementation and in particular on service delivery.

Strengthened Policy and Programs

PCVI also advanced a number of non-legislative policy responses over the five years to respond to victim issues and advance priorities of the Department and the FPTWG. These included the need for more specialized victim services by advancing policy priorities for children and youth victims through the support of CACs; addressing the need for culturally appropriate services for Aboriginal victims of crime as well as their families through MMAW; expanding the Victims Fund to enable time-limited operational funding to help organizations focus on the delivery of services; developing non-legislative measures to address issues of prostitution; and supporting the PSC-led NAP-HT through making funding available to projects that improve services to victims of human trafficking.

Although the delivery of victim services is the responsibility of the provinces and territories, the Victims Fund provides an opportunity for the Department to take leadership in advancing victim services through supporting innovative pilot projects (e.g., Community Resource Coordinator for the Toronto Integrated Domestic Violence Court); expanding the reach of services through supporting national victim service organizations, supporting knowledge exchanges and the development of curriculum for service providers (e.g., Alberta e-learning and pan-territorial essential skills), raising public awareness through supporting Victims Week events (e.g., 798 projects were supported between 2010 and 2015), and providing financial assistance to victims and their support persons to ensure that they are able to participate in criminal justice hearings and receive assistance in exceptional circumstances as a result of their victimization.

Through victims-related research, the Department was also able to strengthen its policy response, advance priorities and enhance awareness of victim issues. Between 2010 and 2015, PCVI and RSD undertook a number of research projects and created PLEI productsFootnote 41, including:

These products have been posted on the departmental website to help with raising awareness and capacity of victim service agencies. The research agenda was a key mechanism for PCVI to examine emerging victim issues, monitor the implementation of policies, programs and legislation, and advance the priorities of the Justice FVS.

PCVI also engaged in a number of stakeholder consultation processes through the development of the CVBR. There were over 300 submissions during a five-month online consultation, 15 FPT working groups and 18 roundtables across the country. There were also four in-person meetings (no meeting was held in 2014-15) with the National Victims of Crime Advisory Committee to discuss challenges facing front-line victim services workers, research, and legislation impacting victims of crime.

4.2.1.1. Impediments to Fully Achieving the Outcome

Although key informants indicated that the Justice FVS has been successful in strengthening federal leadership, legislation, policy and programs responsive to victim issues, the full achievement of this outcome was impeded. The level of work on the four core activities (FPTWG, Victims Fund, Public Awareness of Victims of Crime Issues, and Policy Development and Criminal Law Reform) was impacted by a number of factors related to the growth in scope of the Justice FVS, resource constraints and the challenge of developing the CVBR in a limited time period without additional resources.

FPTWG

The FPTWG is the main vehicle for moving national and regional priorities forward for victims of crime. The bi-annual in-person meetings, conference calls and collaborative work are considered invaluable to achieving the objectives of the Justice FVS. As a result of departmental limitations on hosting events and travel, one of the FPTWG in-person meetings was not held in 2014-15. Key informants (11%) indicated that the 18-month gap between meetings had an impact on the sharing of information and best practices, collaboration on projects, and coordination of FVS activities at the federal level (e.g., reduce duplication of efforts and inconsistencies in activities).

In addition to a reduction in the number of FPTWG meetings, departmental participation at the meetings was also reduced to address an internal concern of over-representation of federal officials at these meetings. Only those making a presentation were invited to the meetings. By not being a part of these meetings, some departmental key informants (36%) indicated there was an impact on their ability to exchange information important for building connections, identifying best practices, developing policy and identifying new research topics.

Scope of the Justice FVS

Between 2010 and 2015, there was a significant increase in scope of the Justice FVS with the inclusion of specialized initiatives and increased funding components. The Victims Fund increased to $11.5M per year from $8.8M in 2009 with the addition of specialized initiatives (e.g., CACs, MMAW, and TLOF) and was further expanded with the addition in 2015 of the funding available for MAPI and assisting with the implementation of the CVBR.

This growth increased the level of work required for the IAID on the Victims Fund (e.g., review and approval of proposals), and for PCVI and RSD through the policy development required to create specialized responses to victim issues (e.g., development of new Memoranda to Cabinet, Treasury Board Submissions, and research).

The Department also had the added priority of leading the development of the CVBR within a very tight timelineFootnote 42. This was in addition to the regular activities expected in the delivery of the Justice FVS. In 2013, PCVI, RSD, Communications Branch and a number of other counsel within the Department (e.g., CLPS, FCY, Human Rights Law Section, and Constitutional, Administrative and International Law Section) came together to undertake an extensive public consultation process and develop legislative options for the CVBR which was introduced in April 2014. Even with the support of other counsel within the Department, it was challenging to balance the work required to develop the CVBR with the other priorities identified through the Justice FVS.

The increased level of work and limitations on staffing, hosting events and travel had a significant impact on the ability of the Department to fully realize all of the Justice FVS core activities. More specifically, these limitations led to a reduced capacity to advance work in the area of public awareness (e.g., update the departmental website, develop new PLEI products and tools), hold in-person meetings of the FPTWG, and limited the ability of PCVI staff to work on other potentially emerging areas both domestically and internationally.

4.2.2. Enhanced Capacity for the Delivery of Appropriate, Responsive Victim Services

Almost all key informants (92%) indicated that the Justice FVS has enhanced capacity for the delivery of appropriate, responsive victim services. This was achieved predominantly by supporting projects through the Victims Fund, information sharing through the FPTWG and various policy initiatives (e.g., webinars, Northern Program teleconference calls, CAC network).

Victims Fund

Between 2010 and 2015, 24% of all Victims Fund projectsFootnote 43 indicated that one of their expected outcomes was to enhance the capacity for the delivery of appropriate, responsive victim services. This was to be achieved through promoting implementation of principles, guidelines or laws to address the needs of victims of crime, or promoting, encouraging and enhancing government and NGO involvement in identification of victim needs and gaps in services.

A review of 91 Victims Fund project summary reports (2010 - 2015) indicated that 30 of the projects (33%) were successful in enhancing capacity, including new skills being developed, increasing community capacity, and developing new information and technology systems.

For example, one funded project involved the development of new training curriculum for service providers in northern communities. It is an example of cross jurisdictional collaboration in Canada on training initiatives and illustrates the importance and appetite to build community focused capacity building.

Northern Institute of Social Justice, Yukon College: “Essential Skills for Northern Victim Services Workers - Phase I & II”

This project used an innovative, pan-territorial approach to designing, developing, and delivering a training curriculum for victim service providers in northern communities. This work was led by the Northern Institute of Social Justice and directed by a working group made up of Justice Officials from the Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut governments.

The objective of the project was to provide consistent, common training for those who work with victims in the North that is grounded in the northern context, drawing on northern strengths and history. Each module covers a key topic (such as the criminal justice system, courts, victim trauma, service practices) that is discussed through a northern lens to ensure that the content reflects northern realities.

Although work was still ongoing with regards to the development of the curriculum at the time of the evaluation, the client organizations felt that the project helped working group members to learn about cultural and administrative capacity differences in how each of the territories provides victim services (and other programming); increased knowledge of the challenges each territory faces and the reasons for the differences in the way they respond; and helped to pioneer and pilot a model for future pan-northern collaboration that could be used to address other social justice-related training needs and service delivery.

The curriculum is set to roll out in 2016 with a general focus on the North and specific information by territory woven in using technology that is northern accessible.

Another project involved the delivery of training for community-based victim support workers to enhance their capacity to respond to the needs of victims of sexual and intimate partner violence, child abuse and stalking.

Ending Violence Association of British Columbia: “The Basics and Beyond: Ensuring Core and Emerging Competencies for Victim Service Workers in BC.”

In total, 293 representatives of the target groups attended the training, including frontline responders of sexual violence, domestic violence and child abuse from across BC, namely, victim services workers, victim outreach workers, stopping the violence counsellors, Aboriginal women, police and other responders to violence against women, as well as academics. The project included training sessions on both core competencies (e.g., Community-Based Victim Services, Stopping the Violence Counselling, Outreach, and Multicultural Outreach services) necessary to provide support for victims and workshops on new and emerging issues in the field, addressing the needs of victim support workers new to the field and those who have many years of experience.

The overall objectives of the training session was deemed to be met by the client organization. The training addressed existing capacity development gaps for victim support workers, helped them upgrade their skills and knowledge in the field and provided an opportunity to network and learn from others’ experiences.

The Victims Fund also supported the exploration, development and enhancement of services by funding 25 CAC projects across Canada. Funding was used to support a number of activities including, but not limited to, needs assessments and feasibility studies; the development of protocols between partner organizations; demonstration or pilot projects; staff victim advocate and coordinator/executive director positions; the purchase of video recording equipment for forensic interviews; training; and research and evaluation to advance knowledge of CACs in Canada.

A study started by the Department in 2012, involving six CACs in Canada, found that funding from the Justice FVS has been crucial for the establishment and further development of CACs. Five of the participating CACs indicated that they would not exist without the funding they received through the FVS. Interviews with CAC multi-disciplinary teams found that they would not have had the formal, structured approach to supporting young victims, witnesses and families without this funding. Protocols, Memoranda of Understanding and Letters of Understanding were developed which supported inter-agency collaboration. As a result, service gaps were reduced and victims, witnesses and families received the services and supports they needed and were less likely to experience re-victimization by the systems intended to help them.

Funding also supported staffing, in particular the position of the Victim Advocate at CACs, a key component of providing service and support – both practical and emotional – to victims and families. The Victim Advocate is the person who most frequently provides ongoing support and information to CAC clients. Program coordinators and executive directors were also hired through the funding which allowed the work of the CAC and its partners to move forward in a more timely and coordinated manner.

At some sites, the funding was used to purchase new or updated equipment, such as a new computer system/interview system for the CAC, televisions that are used in the children’s playrooms and youth and family rooms, video game systems, as well as with toys, games and movies. These amenities were identified as important in creating a child and family-friendly environment.

Funding also supported professional development and knowledge exchange, such as training, conference attendance and site visits where multi-disciplinary team members could learn from each other through exchanging experiences and effective practices with those from other CACs.

Support was also provided through the Justice FVS to build capacity for the delivery of culturally appropriate responses to families of missing and murdered Aboriginal women. A case study of five MMAW projects supported through the Victims Fund found that they all have enhanced capacity of the organizations to deliver culturally relevant services for victims. For one organization, the funding allowed them to bring services directly to families in the community, while another was able to hold a family gathering which helped build capacity for a support system for families. Funding also enabled the staffing of three Missing Person Liaison (MPL) positions in one province, ensuring that families have the information they need about the investigation and permitting officers in the three police services to focus on the investigation.

Recognizing the need to tailor the response to each community, three program models emerged through the different projects supported. These included:

In addition to providing project funding for capacity-building initiatives, the Department provided TLOF funding to 10 NGOs through the Victims Fund to enable organizations to spend more time on fulfilling their organization’s mandate effectively and enhancing their ability to address the long-term sustainability of their organization. Examples of the type of activities this funding supported included: purchase of up-to-date equipment and software; an increase of staff resources; an increase in staff knowledge and skills through a variety of training approaches; website upgrades; workshop delivery; and expanded reach in terms of providing court support services.

Policy Initiatives

In addition to the projects supported through the Victims Fund, PCVI also facilitated a number of capacity-building initiatives including sharing best practices through the FPTWG (e.g., Alberta e-learning project was considered in the development of core competencies in a Northern context, Saskatchewan Adult Restitution Program informed the development of a restitution program in Nova Scotia, Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse in Ontario, and Support for Victim Service Workers in Manitoba).

The Aboriginal Victims of Crime Sub-Committee of the FPTWG, co-chaired by PCVI, also undertook a national overview of victim service policies and practices related to families of missing or murdered victims, as well as how victim services could be or are delivered in a culturally responsive method. These were provided to all FPTWG members to assist with provincial and territorial program design and policy development related to victim services for Aboriginal victims of crime.

PCVI also established the Working Group on National Guidelines for CACs in 2014 to explore the development of national guidelines to facilitate the consistent development and implementation of CACs across Canada. A steering committee comprised of representatives from two of the 15 CACs on the Working Group, from a consulting firm and from PCVI, facilitated the work of the Working Group by planning all meeting agendas, reviewing documents and organizing teleconference and in-person meetings. Working Group members are also members of the national CAC network. Since 2014, two in-person meetings of the Working Group have occurred, one in November 2014 in Toronto and one in March 2015 in Calgary. Communication has also continued via email and teleconference. The PCVI facilitates the planning of the conference calls with steering committee members and the secretariat functions of the Working Group in collaboration with the Steering Committee.

PCVI helped build capacity by creating national opportunities for dialogue (e.g., CAC Network and MMAW network-building); hosting annual Victims Week symposiums; facilitating knowledge exchanges (e.g., CACs: Building Knowledge, Building Capacity, CAC research meeting, and CAC next steps meeting); webinars (e.g., CAC and MMAW); and working with territorial partners on the development of a pan-territorial essential skills program that is expected to be rolled out in 2015-16.

4.2.3. Increased Awareness and Knowledge of Victim Issues, Legislation and Services Available

Knowledge of victim issues has grown considerably over the last 10 years. A survey of police, Crown and victim service providers undertaken by the Department in 2012 indicated that there is a perception that victim’s’ awareness, knowledge and involvement in the criminal justice system improved between 2002 and 2012. This perception was strongest among victim service providers who work the most closely with victims.

All key informants indicated that the Justice FVS increased awareness and knowledge of victim issues, legislation and services available through FPT collaboration, policy initiatives, project funding, and awareness-raising initiatives by the Department, including the Victims Matter advertising campaign in 2010.

Victims Matter Campaign

To raise awareness among CanadiansFootnote 44 about services available to victims of crime, the DepartmentFootnote 45 launched a large-scale two-month advertising campaign in the fall of 2010 in partnership with other federal departments. The main objectives of the Campaign were to inform Canadians that services are available to victims of crime and to encourage these victims and their support networks to access information and assistance available. The advertising campaign ran between November 1 and December 26, 2010 and included television, print, out-of-home (posters in transit shelters), cinema and Internet advertisements. Operators at 1-800-O Canada were also available throughout the Campaign to provide callers with information or refer them to other sources of help. A website was also launched to support the Campaign and approximately 83,000 visits to the website were made as a direct result of the advertising campaign. Almost 72% of those visits were from individuals who typed the website's address straight into their browser or into the google.ca search engine. Visits were also generated through other sources: about 14% of the overall traffic came from online advertising, including banner ads and Facebook initiatives.

A telephone survey (n=1,005)Footnote 46 during the second month of the Campaign found that the overall recall of the advertisements was comparable to the recall of other Government of Canada advertisement campaigns, with 36% of respondents able to recall (unaided) seeing or hearing an ad, compared to the Government of Canada benchmark of 43%. In terms of demographics, women had a higher unaided recall than men (39% versus 33%); those living in urban areas had a higher unaided recall than those in rural areas (38% versus 30%); and amongst the different age groups, 18-25 year olds had the highest unaided recall (44% for print and 49% for the TV advertisements).

In line with findings from other Government of Canada advertising campaigns, respondents found the television ads (39%) far more memorable and impactful than advertising in other media (e.g., 10% found the newspaper ads more memorable, 8% the transit ads and 6% the internet ads).

Overall, 7% of respondents said they took action as a result of the advertising campaignFootnote 47. Given that the subject matter touches a narrower portion of the population than other Government of Canada advertisements of a more general nature, but has deeper impact and consequences for those whom it does touch, this finding was deemed positive by central agencies in the Government of Canada. Moreover, the relatively high unaided recall of those aged 18-25, as well as the fact that 15% of that age group took some action, should be considered a very successful outcome, given that youth experience one of the highest violent victimization rates of all age groups.

Victims Fund

In addition to raising awareness through the national Victims Matter Campaign, over 60% of projects funded through the Victims Fund between 2010 and 2015 identified an increase in knowledge and awareness of the impact of victimization as one of their expected outcomes. The review of Victims Fund project summary reports found that 57% of the projects were successful in increasing awareness or knowledge of victim issues as a result of their funding. These included: new information being disseminated (14%), change in awareness by participants (16%), best practices or response to emerging justice issues being identified (15%), or knowledge/understanding furthered (12%).

One project reviewed as part of the evaluation involved the dissemination of intervention kits on youth cyber-harassment. It is an example of how technology is being used to benefit victims of crime.

Association québécoise Plaidoyer-Victimes: “24 Hours Text Message: Intervention Kit on Youth Cyberbullying”

The project developed an intervention kit on youth cyber-harassment to raise awareness and mobilize French-speaking youth and service providers to take action. The project’s central product is a 28-minute professionally produced video “24 heures textos” (24 Hours Text Messaging). The video tells the story of Maude, a 16 year-old student, who falls in love with Vincent, a schoolmate. Through their relationship, viewers witness how text messages, sexting, and social media can encourage intimacy among youth, but also how a few clicks can transform these technologies into instruments of harassment and intimidation.

The funded organization sold 300 kits containing the video and guide (on CD) and the kits are being used by parents, police services that go into schools, and in youth centres, reaching an estimated 15,000 youth. In addition to making the toolkits available, the organization has participated in policing and judicial forums to further raise awareness of the issue cyberbullying.

The Victims Fund also supported a national knowledge exchange in 2012. Although the event was funded through the Victims Fund, PCVI collaborated with colleagues in the Department working on the Family Violence Initiative and RSD to support the event. This is an example of how the Victims Fund was used to advance a policy initiative identified through the FPTWG. RSD also prepared a review of different assessment tools, Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Tools: A Review, which was released prior to the event.

National Knowledge Exchange on Risk Assessment, Risk Management and Safety Planning

A two-day knowledge exchange was held in October 2012 in London, Ontario led by a small group of experts in the area who shared information on promising practices in the area of safety planning, risk assessment and risk management for victims of domestic violence, a priority of the FPTWG. Approximately 80 academics, researchers, police officers, Crown prosecutors, victim services workers, and policy makers participated in the knowledge exchange. A follow-up online survey of participants to the knowledge exchange found that 74% felt that the content of the event extended their knowledge of these issues.

A review of technology-related projects between 2010 and 2013 identified that the Victims Fund supported 28 projects that used technology to disseminate information to increase awareness and knowledge of victims’ issues (including technology-driven victimization) and increase the capacity of service providers to deliver responsive victim services, or increase access to victims interacting with the criminal justice system. These projects included development of websites, a video game to educate youth on what constitutes abuse, e-learning and webinars for service providers, and online resources and a DVD to which service providers could refer victims for information or assistance. Over half of the projects supported had national reach through the use of technology, and increased the focus on issues related to particularly vulnerable populations such as children and youth, Aboriginal people, women experiencing domestic violence, and persons with disabilities. In addition, the Victims Fund support for testimonial aids, specifically closed-circuit televisions and videoconferencing capacity, is another way that technology has benefited victims.

Policy and Communication Activities

The Department also directly undertook a number of policy initiatives to raise awareness and enhance knowledge since 2010.

Victims Week

In support of the Victims Week each year, PCVI hosts a one-day symposium in the National Capital Region to launch the week. In 2015, to recognize the ten-year anniversary of the Victims Week, three federal symposiums were held across the country (Vancouver, Gatineau, and Halifax). A total of 1,448 participants attended the symposiums between 2010 and 2015. Results from the participant evaluations indicated that by attending the symposium, 76% of participants surveyed learned (more) about services that are available for victims of crime; 61% better understand the role victims play in the criminal justice system; 66% feel they are better equipped to serve the needs of victims; and 74% are more aware of the needs of victims.

In addition to the Victims Week symposiums, events were funded in every jurisdiction across the country (between 2010 and 2015, over 798 events were funded) to increase public awareness and the capacity for the delivery of victim services.

Knowledge Exchanges and Webinars

The Department also hosted a number of knowledge exchanges and webinars that increased the knowledge of partners and stakeholders and helped enhance the capacity of CAC and MMAW victim service providers.

Online Products and Resources

In 2009, the PCVI developed a Victim Service Directory to assist victims and their families with locating services across the country. The number of services listed on the Directory increased from 364 in 2009 to 776 in 2015. PCVI also posted on the Justice Canada website a bi-annual newsletter as a vehicle to share information on policy-related activities and projects that have received funding. Between 2012Footnote 49 and 2015, various PCVI newsletters were viewed 3,107 times and 516 PDF copies were downloaded.

In addition, PCVI developed a number of PLEI products that were posted on the website between 2012 and 2015 to increase awareness and knowledge, which were viewed 53,991 times. These include: A Crime Victims’ Guide to the Criminal Justice System (viewed 36,517 times), Canadian Statement of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime, 2003 (viewed 2,735 times), Victim Impact Statement (viewed 13,164 times), and Working with Victims of Crime: A manual applying research to clinical practice (viewed 1,575 times and 659 PDF copies were downloaded). Also, a total of 2,053 hard copy publications were distributed (Working with Victims of Crime, Policy Centre for Victim Issues, A Crime Victim’s Guide to the Criminal Justice System, and Victims Matter).

RSD, in collaboration with PCVI, also developed a number of research products that were posted on the Justice Canada website, including the annual Victims of Crime Research Digest (25 articles), 18 research studies, 12 fact sheets and six articles as part of a building knowledge series. Between 2012 and 2015, the research products were viewed 50,043 times and 5,275 PDF copies were downloaded. The most viewed (10,966 times) research product was the 2010 Victims of Crime Research Digest, No. 3, which included the following articles: Documenting the Growth of Resources for Victims/Survivors of Violence, “Explain Please!” Working with Victims and Restitution, Aboriginal Victimization in Canada: A Summary of the Literature, Accessing Hard-to-Reach Populations: Respondent-Driven Sampling, Victim Services in Canada: Results from the Victim Services Survey 2007/2008, and Victim-Related Conferences in 2010.

The Communications Branch also prepared several victims of crime-related ministerial announcements and news releases. Between 2010 and 2015 there was a total of 76 victim-related announcements by the Minister of Justice across Canada. Of these 43 were related to projects funded under the Victims Fund (23 specifically on CACs), 25 were related to legislation (five were about victim surcharge and 20 were on the CVBR with 18 specifically regarding consultations), six were related to the Victims Week, and two were to introduce the new Federal Ombudsman. In 2014, the Department also started social media channels to raise awareness of research findings, new legislation, and other information (Twitter, Facebook and the Department’s YouTube Channel – Sharing our Stories Videos).

In general, over the past five years, the amount of information on victims of crime that the Department has put online for the public increased significantly. Between 2011Footnote 50 and 2015, there were 701,988 visits to the Justice Canada Victims web page, 979,326 pages and 113,954 publications viewed, with “A Crime Victim's Guide to the Criminal Justice System” (36,517 views) being the most viewed publication.

In 2011, the PCVI web page was one of the top nine most visited in the Department, and two of the victims of crime publications included (Impaired Driving and A Crime Victims Guide to the Criminal Justice System-Going to Court) were in the top 100 pages viewed for the Department. In 2012, when the Department redesigned the Justice Canada website, victims of crime were featuredFootnote 51 on the main page.

Also between 2010 and 2015, a total of 539 calls were received on the departmental general enquiries line regarding questions for PCVI and regarding the Victims Fund, with 151 calls (28%) being received in November 2010 corresponding with the Victims Matter Campaign.

Even though a significant amount of information was disseminated, key informants highlighted the need for additional information on specific types of victims (e.g., victims with disabilities, youth, elderly and children and how to provide services to those groups in the North); the need for information on other federal funding available in addition to the Victims Fund; and the need for paper products for some communities even though the government is moving towards online content.

4.2.3.1. Impediments Impacting Departmental Public Awareness Activities

Although the Department was successful in undertaking a number of public awareness activities and all key informants indicated that the Justice FVS has increased knowledge and awareness, a few departmental key informants (11%) identified factors that impacted their ability to engage in public awareness activities.

Resource Limitations

PCVI had limited resources (time and people) to undertake public awareness activities due to priorities in the other core activities. Often awareness-raising activities were relegated to being done on the side with a greater reliance on the Victims Week and the Victims Fund to fill the gap. This was an issue particularly during the development of the CVBR, which was the principal Justice FVS priority of the Department between 2013 and 2015.

Limitations on travel between 2012 and 2015 impacted the ability of PCVI and RSD to participate in meetings and events (e.g., knowledge exchanges, bilateral meetings with United States partners, and other international workshops and conferences), reducing the visibility of the Department and impacting the ability to share information with other jurisdictions, organizations, and internationally who would benefit from their expertise. To address these challenges, PCVI sought other opportunities to build capacity, such as creating the national CAC network to facilitate information sharing regarding best practices, tools and resources.

The undertaking of research by the RSD for public dissemination was also impacted by more stringent approval processes for contracting public opinion research and disseminating research results through the departmental website.

4.2.4. Expanding the Scope and Reach of Victim Services through the Victims Fund

Through the Victims Fund, the Department has contributed to expanding the scope of victim services available across the country by supporting service delivery in every jurisdiction, thereby enhancing the reach of services. Further, an additional 39 projects were funded between 2010 and 2015 as a result of specialized initiatives (MMAW and CAC). By increasing the number of specialized programs for victims, access to services has been increased for previously under-served populations (e.g., children, youth and Aboriginal communities), including providing services for families of victims through a number of MMAW projects.

Minority Language Groups

The Victims Fund also provides opportunities to enhance the capacity of under-served communities to access victim services.

The review of Victims Fund project summary reports indicated that 20% of funded projects (n=18) had an impact on a minority language group including: an official language community by providing services or engaging an official language minority community (n=6); making materials available to an official language minority community (n=9) (e.g., one project created an online guide with resources, tools, and information for French-speaking youth and young victims of crime which was disseminated in all French-speaking Ontario high schools, thus enabling students to access French-language information and victim services for young Francophones); and/or involved an official language minority community in partnership or collaboration on a project (n=5).

One of the projects funded provided the community with an opportunity to discuss with the RCMP the need to have French-speaking police officers available so that women can report sexual assaults and other crimes in their first language.

Liard Aboriginal Women’s Society: “Bridging the Gap: A Cross-Cultural Conversation Between Kaska Women, First Nations, RCMP and Community Agencies”

The project involved workshops in Whitehorse and Watson Lake, Yukon to share knowledge of cultural and community contexts to assist the RCMP and other first responders to better respond to violent crime against Aboriginal women and in northern communities, and to build trust between the groups. A total of 65 participants from a range of community and service organizations attended the two workshops (RCMP, front-line service providers, women’s groups, and First Nations Elders).

Les EssentiElles, L’Association Franco-Yukonnais Women’s Directorate, participated in the Whitehorse workshop, and had an opportunity to speak about the specific needs for RCMP to make available French-speaking police for women to report sexual assaults or other crimes in their first language, in keeping with Canada’s official languages policy.

Women and police reported that they learned a lot about positive social responses to women, and using accurate language to ensure more just responses to women reporting violence. The RCMP representatives that participated also indicated they has better understanding of violence against women and Aboriginal culture.

Three projects also highlighted the need to provide services in several Aboriginal languages. One other project partnered with the Ontario Camp for the Deaf to facilitate services for the under-served deaf population in their province.

Use of Technology

Advances in technology have also assisted victim service providers with expanding their scope and reach of services. A review of all technology-based projects supported through the Victims Fund (n=28) between 2010 and 2013 found that 17 projects (60%) expanded accessibility by creating websites and posting material online, as well as targeting specific under-served populations including:

When asked about other technological methods that could be used to improve accessibility to victim services, key informants had several suggestions, which reflect the variety of technologies now used to communicate and the need to give victims more options for interacting with victim services. The suggested technologies included: texting, chat rooms and online forums, use of social media to increase awareness, smart phone apps for victim services or to assist with safety planning, and use of Skype or other virtual encounters (e.g., tele-counselling, online counselling) for the delivery of services. Although key informants recognized that for some of the above technologies, privacy and security concerns are an issue, they also pointed out that these technologies would help them tailor the nature of interactions to meet client preferences and further enhance the ability to reach a wider range of victims.

4.2.5. Reducing Hardship for Victims of Crime

Key informants (85%) indicated that the Justice FVS helped reduce hardship for victims of crime, mainly through the Victims Fund.

Financial assistance was provided directly to victims to increase their ability to participate in criminal justice proceedings, especially in the North where costs for travel are high and when a victim needed to travel outside Canada. Between 2010 and 2015, a total of 2,294 victims or support persons (87% were for PBC hearings) were approved to receive a total of $3,675,067 in financial assistance through the Victims Fund to reduce their financial hardship and to assist them in their participation in the criminal justice system.

Although 53% of victims surveyed (n=497) indicated that they would still have participated or could have covered some/all the costs associated with participating in a PBC hearing or criminal justice proceeding abroad, 96% of victims indicated that the funding received was useful/helpful in reducing their financial hardship. In addition, 90% of victims who received funding for a support person indicated that it was important to have financial assistance for support persons in helping them attend the PBC hearings.

Key informants also highlighted projects funded through the Victims Fund that reduce hardship for victims. These included training to service providers about best practices for supporting people who have suffered trauma; culturally sensitive responses to families of missing and murdered Aboriginal women; supporting the implementation of testimonial aids (e.g. support for the capital costs in one province to facilitate implementation of the 2006 amendment to the Criminal Code, establishing closed-circuit televisions in every court room); resources for the three territorial governments to assist victims with emergency costs and/or travel to participate in criminal justice proceedings; the piloting and sharing of results from innovative projects, such as the restitution program in Saskatchewan which helps victims with enforcement – the model from that program has been taken up by two other provinces; and the development of CACs which seek to reduce system-based trauma for child and youth victims and witnesses.

The CAC multi-site study found that some CACs have the ability, by themselves or through their partners, to alleviate some financial hardships; for example, emergency cell phones, bus tickets or taxi slips, and food vouchers can be provided. The CACs were also found to play a very important role in reducing the stress and re-victimization, in part by limiting the number of times victims have to tell their stories. Victims and their family members had a safe and welcoming place to go for forensic interviews and to obtain information and supports. There is a central point of contact, with someone who can provide updated information and assist with navigating often-intimidating systems.

In the opinion of the victims’ non-offending caregivers who were interviewed as part of the CAC study, non-financial hardships have been reduced because they had a single point of contact where someone could provide emotional support, information updates, and referrals to supports and services. Not only did this reduce stress for families, it also saves time, as they have faster access to services, support and information and do not have to deal with multiple parties.

A case study of the Snowflake Place for Children and Youth Inc. highlighted the impact CACs have had on reducing hardship for young victims of crime.

Snowflake Place For Children and Youth Inc.: “The Development of Phase 1 of the Winnipeg Children's Advocacy Centre”

The project aimed to develop a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary and culturally appropriate CAC in Winnipeg, Snowflake Place. The CAC has helped to reduce hardships on child victims of abuse and their families in a number of ways. For example, prior to the establishment of the CAC, child victims of abuse and their families would be interviewed a number of times by representatives of different programs and services, which was difficult for them. Snowflake Place helps to organize one interview where representatives of all programs are present and alleviated the hardships for victims going through multiple interviews. Prior to the establishment of the CAC, child victims of abuse and their families would be taken to a police station, which was cold, unfriendly and sometimes intimidating to victims. Snowflake Place is child friendly and has the necessary facilities to improve the experience of children and their family members. The victims are treated as the centre of attention and supported and empowered by professionals. Snowflake Place has a family room, which is designed to minimize stress and provides a much better experience to family members compared to those waiting at the reception of a police station.

Key informants (19%) highlighted that the variability of the types and level of victims’ services available within/between jurisdictions continues to cause hardships for victims of crime. Although responsibility for the delivery of services rests with provinces and territories, key informants (15%) stressed that the Department, through the Victims Fund, can help play a role in enhancing services across the country to help increase access to services that may be contributing to the hardship for victims.

There is also an opportunity for the federal government to take a leadership role in the discussion of developing a basic level of standards for the delivery of services through the FPTWG. This could build on the work already started in developing training curricula for staff and volunteers (e.g., Alberta e-training and the pan-territorial essential skills).

4.2.6. Increased Access to Services for Victims Interacting with the Criminal Justice System

As with the outcome of building capacity, almost all key informants (96%) indicated that the Justice FVS has increased access to services for victims and although the delivery of services is a provincial and territorial responsibility, the federal government has a role to play in supporting provinces, territories and NGOs through the Victims Fund.

Between 2010 and 2015, 17% of Victims Fund projects identified promotion of access and participation in the justice system, and development of law, policies and programs as one of their expected outcomes. Examples of projects funded to enhance services included streamlining and expanding services available to child victims of crime, the training and utilization of a crisis response dog, integration of testimonial aids into court rooms to reduce the trauma that can be associated with testimony, capacity enhancements to services through the hiring of additional frontline and managerial level staff, providing court support services such as assisting with the preparation of victim impact statements and providing other direct supports to victims and families of victims, including emotional and crisis support.

As stated earlier, the review of Victims Fund project summary reports found that 20% of projects were successful in increasing access to services for victims in language minority communities, and over 54,999 individuals directly received services or participated in workshops or information sessions supported through Victims Fund projects.

The implementation of CACs also addressed many previous gaps in the system. Findings from a US studyFootnote 52 on CACs found that communities with CACs had more coordinated investigations and greater law enforcement involvement in the investigations. Children who were seen in CACs had better access to medical exams and received more referrals for mental health services. In addition, caregiver satisfaction with the investigation was higher in CAC communities than in comparison communities.

In all of the six Canadian multi-site study CACs, multi-disciplinary team members identified increased access to medical examinations (n=3), greater use of testimonial aids (n=1), and more child-friendly environments, both for forensic interviews (n=5) and court appearances (n=3). 

The 14 projects funded through the MMAW Initiative have also been essential in increasing access to services for families of missing or murdered Aboriginal women. In some jurisdictions, family members of missing persons are not eligible for victim services unless there is a police report. A review of five MMAW funded projects found that funding of FPL/MPL positions are enabling more access to information and services at the investigative stage and more seamless referrals to other support agencies for families. In addition, outreach workers, within a victim services framework, are able to bring culturally responsive grief and trauma counselling services directly to under-served populations within their community.

Key informants for the MMAW case study identified the following outcomes that were achieved as a result of the funding they received for their program:

Although the Justice FVS has increased access to services for victims of crime, key informants (19%) identified the need for different avenues to ensure cross-cultural representation of victims in the criminal justice system. Aboriginal people and minority immigrant populations need to be considered in the development of legislation, programs, services and public awareness material to enhance their knowledge of the criminal justice system and awareness of and access to culturally appropriate services.

Also, as indicated earlier, the use of technology has expanded the reach and scope of victim services, which in turn can increase the ability for victims to have access to services. A few key informants (7%) indicated that they would like to utilize technology to better meet the needs of victims (e.g., to enable victims in rural areas to be able to access information directly in their community without having to drive into urban settings, to purchase laptops for staff to be able show victims their impact statements when they meet with them, and to provide interactive learning models).

4.2.7. More Effective Voice for Victims in the Criminal Justice System

Most key informants (88%) indicated that the Justice FVS has contributed to a more effective voice for victims in the criminal justice system as a result of the work undertaken to advance the direct and indirect outcomes of the Justice FVS. More specifically, this was accomplished through financial assistance provided to victims and support persons; enhancement of the capacity for, reach, and scope of victims’ services and programs through the Victims Fund; and increase of the awareness of services and programs. The Justice FVS has provided victims with opportunities to participate in the criminal justice system. Also, through legislative amendments (e.g., testimonial aids and restitution through the Victims Bill of Rights Act), funding for training of service providers, and the implementation of special initiatives (e.g., CACs and MMAW), the Justice FVS has enhanced victims’ experiences with the criminal justice system.

Key informants highlighted the following as contributing the most to enhancing the voice of victims:

Some key informants (19%) identified areas where the Department could affect change to further enhance the voice for victims of crime. These included placing more focus on information sharing of best practices; undertaking more research to understand emerging issues; updating PLEI materials; and actively engaging in meaningful consultations through the FPTWG, National Victims of Crime Advisory Committee and with victims on victim issues.

4.3. Performance - Demonstration of Efficiency and Economy

As per the Treasury Board’s 2009 Policy on Evaluation, the evaluation included an analysis of the efficiency and economy of the Justice FVS. This involved key informant interviews to assess whether there are alternative ways to deliver the Justice FVS to increase its effectiveness; analysis of resources to determine how they were used; analysis of the operational efficiency of the Victims Fund; and an examination of the appropriateness of the allocation of resources among the four core activities. In addition, the evaluation considered the effectiveness of the financial assistance provided to victims to attend a PBC hearing in increasing victims’ participation and reducing their financial hardship.

4.3.1. Design and Delivery of the Justice FVS

Key informants were asked to consider how the Justice FVS is structured (governance, integration and coordination, policies) and delivered in the Department to assess whether there are alternatives that would enhance the effectiveness of the Justice FVS in achieving its outcomes.

Governance Structure, Integration and Coordination of the Different Functions/activities within the Department

The four functional areas involved in the Justice FVS are well integrated and coordinated, which is a result of long-standing relationships. The areas have learned to operate effectively in an environment where new priorities are regularly introduced (e.g. MMAW, NAP-HT, CACs, MAPI, CVBR). This included collaborating in the development of new Memoranda to Cabinet and Treasury Board documents with the Finance and Planning Branch, as well as working with others in and outside the Department on the development of the CVBR.

The development of the CVBR provided an opportunity to use virtual teams that allowed for further collaboration with different expert areas of the Department (e.g., CLPS, FCY, Human Rights Law Section, and the Constitutional, Administrative and International Law Section).Without this coordinated effort through the virtual teams, managed by PCVI, it would not have been possible to develop the CVBR in the timeframe permitted.

Although some key informants expressed concern over the changes to the governance structure (e.g., centralization of functional areas and PCVI no longer being responsible for the Victims Fund) having an impact on the level of coordination between the core activities of the Justice FVS, at the time of the evaluation, there continued to be integration and coordination of all activities due to established relationships and processes. It was indicated that this level of coordination and integration could be maintained by bringing together the different functional areas for regular meetings and continued identification of opportunities for collaboration.

Delivery of Departmental Services and Policies

The last evaluation recommended that the IAID have the flexibility to move funding between the various Victims Fund components. This flexibility has improved the ability to manage the demand for funding, especially for the Victims Week and CACs. Also, in response to the last evaluation, the Department has entered into five-year funding agreements with the provinces and territories which has reduced the administrative burden for both the Department as well as the recipient, and has allowed for longer-term planning.

However, there continue to be issues with regards to the approval process for projects that may be contributing to the ability to commit the full resources of the Victims Fund. Between 2010 and 2014,Footnote 53 only 86% of the Victims Fund was made available through Gs&Cs agreements. Of those funds committed, only 83% were expended as anticipated by funding recipients since in some cases they received the funding too late in the year to spend their full amount. Provinces and territories also continued to lapse funding each year (not solely in the first year of their funding agreement) with an overall lapse of 30% of the funding committed through contribution agreements between 2010 and 2014. These lapses were identified late in the year by funding recipients, which reduced the ability of the IAID to reallocate the funding to other projects.

Key informants highlighted the following issues that are affecting the administration of the Victim Fund.

Funding Review Process

The review process for funding agreements is very lengthy, which is further impacted by a high demand and number of proposals received for some of the Victims Fund specialized streams (e.g., CACs, Victims Week and TLOF) that need to be reviewed by IAID. Between 2010 and 2015, IAID received a total of 1,689 project proposals and 3,464 applications for financial assistance. In some cases, there was a need to bring on additional support from within the Programs Branch, especially when large calls for proposals took place such as for the Victims Week each year. In addition, given that the Victims Fund is one of the key policy levers under the Justice FVS, PCVI also reviews the proposals received, as does RSD when appropriate. This can further impact the length of the review process and the achievement of departmental service standardsFootnote 54 when other priorities delay the ability of these areas to review the proposals.

Funding Approval Process

Further delays were also experienced once IAID recommended projects for final approval. While funding decisions were made 92% of the time within the departmental service standard of 120 days/four months, some project funding decisions took six to nine months to be made. These delays can result in funding being lapsed within the first year of an agreement, and can impact the capacity of organizations to deliver the projects if they have a late start.

Financial Assistance Component

The Financial Assistance Component is the most administratively intensive component (e.g., time and paper) of the Victims Fund, as it is the sole component where staff in IAID have direct contact with victims of crime and their support persons. The process can be lengthy and complex as applicants are not always familiar with government processes (e. g., advance payments, review and processing receipts, and final claims). Processing times for victimized abroad applications were also impacted since there are no clear policies on what is eligible for funding, so each application is reviewed extensively by both PCVI and IAID. There is also the added requirement for the travel programs (e.g., PBC and victimized abroad) to contact other federal departments/agencies (e.g., PBC and DFATD) regarding each applicant to verify information in advance and upon submission of their final claim (e.g., confirming with the PBC that the hearing will be held, was held, and the victim attended). Between 2010 and 2015, a total of 3,464 applications for financial assistance were received and the Department approved financial support for 2,294 individuals with only two full time equivalents (FTEs) in the IAID administering the PBC and victimized abroad streams during that period of time. With limited capacity, the high demand for financial assistance and the complex and resource-intensive administration process, follow-up on final claims was not always completed. For example, between 2010 and 2014Footnote 55, there was $24,699 worth of final claims (approximately 2% of the amount committed) that had not yet been submitted by recipients of financial assistance to attend PBC hearings.

Demand for Funding

Recognizing the high demand for programs such as TLOF, Victims Week and CACs in the Victims Fund, there is a need to manage expectations for the availability of funding through the communication of eligibility criteria and messaging around calls for proposals on the departmental website. Organizations can then ensure their proposals are developed recognizing that the level of funding available may be impacted by the demand for funding (e.g., level of Victims Week was decreased from the $10,000 to $7,000 per organization to meet the demand for 2014 and 2015); and applicants fully understand what is eligible prior to submitting a proposal (e.g., only national victim serving agencies are eligible for TLOF funding).

This would increase the efficiency of the IAID by reducing the level of effort required for the review of proposals with each call for proposals.

In addition, a clear policy on what is eligible for funding for Canadians victimized abroad would assist funding applicants and departmental staff to apply a consistent approach in reviewing the funding requests, as well as provide applicants with greater clarity on eligibility criteria.

Variability of Services

With regards to the type of projects being supported through the Victims Fund, between 2010 and 2015, 60% of projects were undertaken to increase awareness and knowledge, 17% were to increase access, and 23% were to increase capacity. This distribution is reflected in the perceptions of key informants of the impact the funding has had on the indirect outcomes of the Justice FVS (e.g. 100% indicated achievement of increased awareness and understanding, 92% indicated a contribution to enhanced capacity, and 96% identified increased access as a result of the Victims Fund).

The Victims Fund has effectively helped to address concerns, identified through the 2011 Justice FVS evaluation, over the level of public awareness of victim issues and awareness among eligible crime victims regarding the available services and funding as a barrier to the take-up of these funds (e.g., 2,294 victims received financial assistance between 2010 and 2015).

Recognizing that there is variability in service delivery across Canada, the Department could play a role in enhancing the availability of services through the Victims Fund, by placing higher emphasis on supporting capacity building and innovative projects that expand the scope and reach of new services to under-served areas and clientele (e.g., new Canadians, Aboriginal communities and children).

4.3.2. Analysis of Economy

An analysis of economy focuses on inputs and whether they are optimized (or minimized). Economy is achieved when the cost of the resources that are used approximates the minimum amount needed to achieve the expected outcomes. In the context of the Justice FVS, this analysis looked at the relation between planned and actual expenditures for the Department.

Challenges were identified in the tracking of financial resources related to the Justice FVS. This may in part be due to the fact that four responsibility areas are involved in the core activities of the FVS and are using different project numbers for reporting expenditures by each of the separate initiatives under the Justice FVS. Table 9 outlines the expenditures for the four functional responsibility areas (PCVI, IAID, RSD and Communications Branch) between 2010 and 2015.

Table 9: TBS Authorities and Functional Area Expenditures for the Justice FVS 2010-2015
  Salary O&M Gs&Cs Total
Justice FVS Authorities (six InitiativesFootnote 56) $9,319,489 $8,857,285 $55,132,780 $73,309,554
Total Justice FVS Resources ExpendedFootnote 57 $7,240,265 $5,328,314 $37,698,669Footnote 58 $50,267,248
Difference (Amount Not Expended) $2,079,224 $3,528,971 $17,434,111Footnote 59 $23,042,306
% Expended 78% 60% 68%Footnote 60 68%

A total of 68% of the TBS authorities identified for Justice FVS activities were expended between 2010 and 2015. The ability for the functional areas to fully expend resources identified through TBS authorities was impacted by a number of government-wide and departmental spending limitations (e.g., travel, hospitality and contracting caps, Deficit Reduction Action Plan, and staffing). Although the Department was effective in achieving the Justice FVS outcomes, key informants (19%) indicated that the ability to undertake all planned activities was impacted by the level of resources within PCVI (only 78% of salary and 60% of O&M were expended). The impact of the reduced resource levels was even more pronounced between 2012 and 2015, when only 61% of the full-time positions within PCVI were staffed and only 40% of O&M dollars were approved to be expended. It was during this time that the CVBR was being developed, a principal priority for the Department, which affected PCVI’s ability to continue work on other core activities (e.g., undertaking federal public awareness activities).

Also, the level of resources in the IAID supported through the Justice FVS TBS authorities was insufficient to administer the Victims Fund. Two additional FTEs were supplemented by the Programs Branch to address the high demand for the Victims Fund with the increase in specialized initiatives (CAC and TLOF) and the increased awareness of funding available for the Victims Week.

Appropriateness of the distribution of Justice FVS resources among the four core activities

The following analysis was undertaken to determine whether the allocation of resources among the four core activities was appropriate. However, without having another program or a standard to compare the allocation, the analysis is restricted to discussing whether resources are distributed reasonably to achieve a more effective voice for victims in the criminal justice system.

The analysis required the functional areas of the Department (PCVI, IAID, RSD and Communications Branch) involved in the Justice FVS to estimate the percentage of time they spent on each of the four core activities (Victims Fund, Public Awareness of Victims of Crime Issues, Criminal Law Reform and Policy Development, and FPTWG) between 2010 and 2015. The estimates were used to determine the percentage of time spent overall for the Department on each activity, which were then used to allocate expenditures to each activity. The following table presents the breakdown by activity of all resources expended on the FVS in the Department.

Table 10: Expenditures (salary, O&M and Gs&Cs) by each Justice FVS main activity (2010-2015)
Main Activity Main Objective Percentage of salary and O&M Expenditures Percentage of all Expenditures (salary, O&M and Gs&Cs)
Victims Fund To directly assist victims of crime or to support the delivery of victim services 35% 84%
Criminal Law Reform and Policy Development To ensure that a “victim’s lens” is reflected in relevant federal policies 44% 11%
Public Awareness of Victims of Crime Issues To ensure an increased level of awareness of victims’ issues, legislation and services 14% 3%
FPTWG To ensure that there was an integrated/ coordinated FPT approach to victims’ issues. 7% 2%

Although all four core activities are relevant and expected to lead to a more effective voice for victims in the criminal justice system, focusing the majority of resources (84%) to support the delivery of services and direct financial assistance to victims is appropriate. The support of victim services and financial assistance is the most direct way to ensure there is increased access to services and participation in the criminal justice system contributing to a more effective voice.

With regards to the other three core activities, although it is not possible to determine whether the actual percentage of time spent on each activity is appropriate given there is no standard or comparison, the distribution appears to be reasonable. When only the salary and O&M resources are consideredFootnote 61, the majority of resources were expended on policy development and criminal law reform (44%). Recognizing the federal responsibility for policy development and criminal law reform, the allocation of more resources to this activity over the FPTWG and public awareness activities (which are also supported through the Victims Fund) is seen as appropriate.

However, as noted earlier in the report, the lack of fully staffing PCVI has had an impact on the ability to realize all of the policy-related activities. If PCVI had been able to fully expend the resources identified through TBS authorities, more time could have been spent on public awareness, FPT coordination and other policy development activities, increasing the impact of the Justice FVS.

4.3.3. Analysis of Operational Efficiency

An analysis of operational efficiency examines the relationship between resources that are consumed and the outputs that result, including how well inputs are being used and converted into outputs. The analysis was restricted to the Victims Fund, as it is the only operational activity under the Justice FVS in which the relationship between inputs and outputs can most readily be expressed in meaningful dollar terms.

Operational Efficiency of the Justice FVS Victims Fund

The operational efficiency analysis of the Victims Fund involved an analysis of the administrative costs as a percentage of the total IAID operating costs to determine an efficiency ratio. The second part of the analysis involved an examination of the Victims Fund performance in relation to achievement of departmental service standards.

The total salary and O&M expended by IAID to administer the Victims Fund between 2010 and 2014Footnote 62 was estimated to be $2,371,162.

Gs&Cs commitments made by the Victims Fund in this period (including the Project Components and the Financial Assistance Component) was $36,530,939.

For every administrative dollar expended (salary and O&M), $15.41 of the Victims Fund dollars were made available to support victims of crime.

The total amount expended to administer the Victims Fund (IAID salary and O&M), committed to fund projects and provide financial assistance in this period (Gs&Cs) was $38,902,101. The administrative costs expressed as a percentage of total operating costs is:

$2,371,162 (IAID salary and O&M)/$38,902,101 (total operating costs) x 100 = 6%

The administrative efficiency ratio (salary and O&M as a portion of Gs&Cs) awarded is:

$2,371,162/$36,530,939 = 0.06

This means that for every dollar invested in Gs&Cs, the Department spent $0.06 in administrative costs to support the delivery of the Victims Fund. Although a systematic comparison with other federal Gs&Cs programs is beyond the scope of this evaluation, the $0.06 in administrative costs per dollar of Victims Fund Gs&Cs and the resulting efficiency ratio are modest considering that the components of the Victims FundFootnote 63 involve a significant amount of interaction with funding applicants and recipients to deliver and manage the Gs&Cs.

However, given that the Victims Fund is a primary policy lever used to move forward the Justice FVS, PCVI also supports the administration of the Victims Fund through the review of proposals and the development of terms and conditions for each of the initiatives and Victims Fund components. RSD also provides support to the IAID by reviewing Victims Fund proposals when appropriate. When the additional PCVI and RSD resources, based on estimates of time by key informantsFootnote 64 are considered, the Victims Fund administrative efficiency ratio increases to 0.11, which is still modest considering the level of effort involved in the administration of the Fund.

Departmental Service Standards

The following table outlines the percentage of time that the IAID met the departmental service standards in the administration of Victims Fund projectsFootnote 65.

Table 11: Victims Fund Projects Departmental Service Standards 2010-2015
Fiscal Year Acknowledgement Funding Decision PaymentFootnote 66 % Met Overall
Number of Files % of times met service standard Number of Files % of times met service standard Number of Files % of times met service standard
July 2010 - March 2011Footnote67 31 90% 31 97% NA NA 93.5%
2011-12 103 86% 105 89% NA NA 87.5%
2012-13 293 98% 293 89% 111 80% 89%
2013-14 241 99% 241 95% 125 97% 97%
2014-15 442 96% 442 88% 129 77% 87%
2010-2015 1,110 94% 1,112 92% 365 85% 91%

Between 2010 and 2015, the IAID met the service standards 91% of the time, even though approximately 1,100 proposals were receivedFootnote 68 for the Victims Fund. In comparison to other departmental funding programs, the Victims Fund performance results were similar for 2010 to 2012, exceeded the average in 2013-14Footnote 69, but were less than the average for the funding decision and processing of payments in 2014-15Footnote 70.

The ability of the IAID to meet the departmental service standards was impacted by the demand for the Victims Fund that resulted in the highest number of proposals being received each year for the Department (e.g., in 2013-14, there were 280 Victims Fund proposals received which represents 49% of the 570 project proposals received that year for all Gs&Cs funds administered by the IAID); the complexity and length of the review process for applications (e.g., involvement of the policy functional areas of the Department, and the requirement for multiple follow-ups with victims and other federal departments in the administration of the Financial Assistance Component); and regular delays in the final approval of projects recommended by the IAID.

4.3.4. Analysis of Allocative Efficiency

Allocative efficiency goes beyond examining the direct relationship between resources consumed and outputs achieved (e.g., operational efficiency analysis). The focus of allocative efficiency is to examine the relationship between resources and the outcomes achieved, that is, whether the resources consumed were reasonable for the outcomes achieved in light of the activity's context and priorities.

The Financial Assistance Component was used for this analysis, since it is the only component of the Victims Fund for which the Department directly receives feedback from victims through surveys regarding the impact of the support they receive. The analysis focused specifically on financial assistance for victims to attend PBC hearings, for which the Department receives the highest number of surveysFootnote 71.

Appropriateness of allocating resources for financial assistance for victims to attend PBC hearings

Between 2010 and 2015, a total of 2,050 victims of crime and support persons received a total of $1,535,716 in financial assistance to attend PBC hearings (87% of the Victims Fund Financial Assistance Component) to reduce their financial hardship and to assist victims in their participation in the criminal justice system. An estimated 22% of the victims surveyed (n=497) indicated that they would not have attended the PBC hearing without financial assistance provided through the Victims Fund. This is a 30% increaseFootnote 72 in the participation of victims at PBC hearings as a direct result of the Victims Fund. This increased participation enables victims to have a more effective voice in the criminal justice system, the ultimate outcome of the Justice FVS. Since the financial assistance for victims to attend PBC hearings is having an impact, the provision of funding for this component of the Victims Fund is seen as an appropriate use of resources.