Evaluation of the Legal Aid Program
Appendix F: Difference between Provincial Financial Eligibility Guidelines and Low Income Cut-Offs
| BC | ABTable note i | MB | ONTable note ii | QCTable note iii | SKTable note iv | NSTable note v | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 38.9% | 19.8% | -10.2% | -30.7% | -1.5% | -2.2% | -17.8% |
| 2 | 59.1% | 21.9% | -7.2% | -3.7% | 12.7% | -11.9% | ||
| 3 | 63.9% | 39.3% | -3.6% | -10.7% | 1.2% | -14.1% | ||
| 4 | 60.3% | 20.7% | -6.8% | -16.9% | -14.5% | -19.9% | ||
| 5 | 66.2% | 13.9% | -5.6% | -18.7% | -21.2% | |||
| 6 | 73.2% | 9.9% | -8.2% | -21.5% | -22.9% | |||
| 7+ | 79.0% | -10.3% | -24.2% | |||||
| 2015Table note vi | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 35.0% | 47.4% | 35.9% | 19.5% | 13.4% | -11.3% | -24.4% |
| 2 | 55.3% | 50.0% | 28.1% | 43.9% | 26.8% | -15.0% | -18.9% | |
| 3 | 60.4% | 71.4% | 19.6% | 34.4% | 15.4% | -8.5% | -20.9% | |
| 4 | 56.6% | 48.5% | 8.1% | 32.1% | 0.1% | -19.5% | -26.3% | |
| 5 | 62.6% | 40.2% | 3.7% | 35.4% | -25.4% | -27.5% | ||
| 6 | 69.3% | 35.2% | -0.6% | -28.4% | -29.0% | |||
| 7+ | 74.7% | -4.0% | -27.1% | -30.3% | ||||
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family – LICO) / LICO] * 100
BC, AB, and SK were compared to after tax LICOs; MB, ON, and NS were compared to before tax LICOs; QC was compared to after tax LICOs in 2010 and to before tax LICOs in 2015.
Source for LICOs:
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) after tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl01-eng.htm
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) before tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm
- Table note i
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 6+.
- Table note ii
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 5+.
- Table note iii
-
For 2010 and 2015, Quebec separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Ranged from 1 adult and 0 children to 2 adults and 2 children or more.
- Table note iv
-
Saskatchewan guidelines are provided for families with a number of children, where family was defined as one or two-parent household. For this table, two parents are assumed so the eligibility criterion for a family of four is equivalent to a family with two children. Only family sizes of one adult and no children and family with four children were available for 2010.
- Table note v
-
Nova Scotia separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size.
- Table note vi
-
LICOs for 2015 were not available and were therefore calculated as LICO2015 = LICO1992 x CPI2015 / CPI1992 (Source: Statistics Canada. [2015]. Low income cut-offs. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010005/lico-sfr-eng.htm).
| BC | ABTable note vii | MB | ONTable note viii | QCTable note ix | SKTable note x | NSTable note xi | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 21.3% | 4.7% | -21.0% | -39.1% | -13.9% | -14.6% | -27.8% |
| 2 | 39.0% | 6.5% | -18.4% | -15.3% | -1.6% | -22.6% | ||
| 3 | 43.2% | 21.7% | -15.2% | -21.5% | -11.5% | -24.5% | ||
| 4 | 40.1% | 5.4% | -18.0% | -26.9% | -25.3% | -29.6% | ||
| 5 | 45.3% | -0.5% | -17.0% | -28.5% | -30.8% | |||
| 6 | 51.4% | -4.0% | -19.3% | -31.4% | -32.2% | |||
| 7+ | 56.4% | -21.1% | -33.4% | |||||
| 2015Table note xii | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 18.0% | 28.8% | 19.4% | 5.0% | -0.3% | -22.5% | -33.5% |
| 2 | 35.7% | 31.0% | 12.6% | 26.5% | 11.4% | -25.7% | -28.7% | |
| 3 | 40.1% | 49.8% | 5.2% | 18.2% | 1.4% | -20.1% | -30.5% | |
| 4 | 36.9% | 29.8% | -5.0% | 16.2% | -12.0% | -29.7% | -35.2% | |
| 5 | 42.1% | 22.5% | -8.8% | 19.0% | -34.8% | -36.3% | ||
| 6 | 47.9% | 18.2% | -12.6% | -37.4% | -37.6% | |||
| 7+ | 52.6% | -15.6% | -36.3% | -38.7% | ||||
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family – LICO) / LICO] * 100
* BC, AB, and SK were compared to after tax LICOs; MB, ON, and NS were compared to before tax LICOs; QC was compared to after tax LICOs in 2010 and to before tax LICOs in 2015.
Source for LICOs:
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) after tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl01-eng.htm
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) before tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm
- Table note vii
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 6+.
- Table note viii
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 5+.
- Table note ix
-
For 2010 and 2015, Quebec separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Ranged from 1 adult and 0 children to 2 adults and 2 children or more.
- Table note x
-
Saskatchewan guidelines are provided for families with number of children, where family was defined as one or two-parent household. For this table, two parents are assumed so the eligibility criterion for a family of four is equxalent to a family with two children. Only family sizes of one adult and no children and family with four children were available for 2010.
- Table note xi
-
Noxia Scotia separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size.
- Table note xii
-
LICOs for 2015 were not available and were therefore calculated as LICO2015 = LICO1992 x CPI2015 / CPI1992 (Source: Statistics Canada. [2015]. Low income cut-offs. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010005/lico-sfr-eng.htm).
| BC | ABTable note xiii | MB | ONTable note xiv | QCTable note xv | SKTable note xvi | NSTable note xvii | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 8.8% | -6.2% | -27.7% | -44.3% | -22.8% | -23.4% | -33.9% |
| 2 | 24.6% | -4.6% | -25.4% | -22.5% | -11.7% | -29.2% | ||
| 3 | 28.4% | 9.1% | -22.4% | -28.2% | -20.7% | -30.9% | ||
| 4 | 25.6% | -5.5% | -25.0% | -33.2% | -33.1% | -35.6% | ||
| 5 | 30.2% | -10.8% | -24.1% | -34.6% | -36.6% | |||
| 6 | 35.7% | -13.9% | -26.2% | -38.5% | -38.0% | |||
| 7+ | 40.2% | -27.8% | -39.1% | |||||
| 2015Table note xviii | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 5.8% | 15.5% | 9.3% | -3.9% | -8.8% | -30.6% | -39.2% |
| 2 | 21.6% | 17.5% | 3.0% | 15.8% | 2.0% | -33.4% | -34.8% | |
| 3 | 25.6% | 34.2% | -3.8% | 8.1% | -7.2% | -28.4% | -36.4% | |
| 4 | 22.7% | 16.3% | -13.1% | 6.3% | -19.5% | -37.0% | -40.7% | |
| 5 | 27.4% | 9.8% | -16.6% | 8.9% | -41.6% | -41.7% | ||
| 6 | 32.6% | 5.9% | -20.1% | -43.9% | -42.9% | |||
| 7+ | 36.8% | -22.8% | -42.9% | -43.9% | ||||
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family – LICO) / LICO] * 100
BC, AB, and SK were compared to after tax LICOs; MB, ON, and NS were compared to before tax LICOs; QC was compared to after tax LICOs in 2010 and to before tax LICOs in 2015.
Source for LICOs:
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) after tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl01-eng.htm
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) before tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm
- Table note xiii
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 6+.
- Table note xiv
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 5+.
- Table note xv
-
For 2010 and 2015, Quebec separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Ranged from 1 adult and 0 children to 2 adults and 2 children or more.
- Table note xvi
-
Saskatchewan guidelines are provided for families with number of children, where family was defined as one or two-parent household. For this table, two parents are assumed so the eligibility criterion for a family of four is equivalent to a family with two children. Only family sizes of one adult and no children and family with four children were available for 2010.
- Table note xvii
-
Nova Scotia separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size.
- Table note xviii
-
LICOs for 2015 were not available and were therefore calculated as LICO2015 = LICO1992 x CPI2015 / CPI1992 (Source: Statistics Canada. [2015]. Low income cut-offs. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010005/lico-sfr-eng.htm).
| BC | ABTable note xix | MB | ONTable note xx | QCTable note xxi | SKTable note xxii | NSTable note xxiii | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 7.4% | -7.3% | -28.2% | -44.6% | -23.8% | -24.4% | -34.3% |
| 2 | 23.1% | -5.7% | -25.8% | -23.0% | -12.8% | -29.6% | ||
| 3 | 26.8% | 7.7% | -22.9% | -28.6% | -21.7% | -31.3% | ||
| 4 | 24.0% | -6.7% | -25.5% | -33.6% | -33.9% | -36.0% | ||
| 5 | 28.6% | -11.9% | -24.5% | -35.0% | -37.0% | |||
| 6 | 34.0% | -15.0% | -26.6% | -39.3% | -38.4% | |||
| 7+ | 38.4% | -28.3% | -39.4% | |||||
| 2015Table note xxiv | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | 4.4% | 14.0% | 8.6% | -4.5% | -9.3% | -31.4% | -39.5% |
| 2 | 20.1% | 16.0% | 2.4% | 15.1% | 1.3% | -34.2% | -35.2% | |
| 3 | 24.0% | 32.6% | -4.4% | 7.5% | -7.8% | -29.3% | -36.8% | |
| 4 | 21.1% | 14.9% | -13.6% | 5.6% | -20.0% | -37.8% | -41.1% | |
| 5 | 25.8% | 8.4% | -17.1% | 8.2% | -42.3% | -42.0% | ||
| 6 | 30.9% | 4.6% | -20.5% | -44.6% | -43.3% | |||
| 7+ | 35.1% | -23.3% | -43.6% | -44.2% | ||||
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family – LICO) / LICO] * 100
BC, AB, and SK were compared to after tax LICOs; MB, ON, and NS were compared to before tax LICOs; QC was compared to after tax LICOs in 2010 and to before tax LICOs in 2015.
Source for LICOs:
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) after tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl01-eng.htm
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) before tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm
- Table note xix
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 6+.
- Table note xx
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 5+.
- Table note xxi
-
For 2010 and 2015, Quebec separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Ranged from 1 adult and 0 children to 2 adults and 2 children or more.
- Table note xxii
-
Saskatchewan guidelines are provided for families with number of children, where family was defined as one or two-parent household. For this table, two parents are assumed so the eligibility criterion for a family of four is equivalent to a family with two children. Only family sizes of one adult and no children and family with four children were available for 2010.
- Table note xxiii
-
Nova Scotia separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size.
- Table note xxiv
-
LICOs for 2015 were not available and were therefore calculated as LICO2015 = LICO1992 x CPI2015 / CPI1992 (Source: Statistics Canada. [2015]. Low income cut-offs. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010005/lico-sfr-eng.htm).
| BC | ABTable note xxv | MB | ONTable note xxvi | QCTable note xxvii | SKTable note xxviii | NSTable note xxix | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010 | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | -9.2% | -21.6% | -38.2% | -52.3% | -35.5% | -36.0% | -43.4% |
| 2 | 4.1% | -20.3% | -36.1% | -33.7% | -26.3% | -39.4% | ||
| 3 | 7.2% | -8.9% | -33.6% | -38.5% | -33.8% | -40.8% | ||
| 4 | 4.9% | -21.1% | -35.8% | -42.8% | -44.1% | -44.9% | ||
| 5 | 8.7% | -25.5% | -35.0% | -44.0% | -45.8% | |||
| 6 | 13.3% | -28.1% | -36.8% | -48.7% | -46.9% | |||
| 7+ | 17.1% | -38.2% | -47.8% | |||||
| 2015Table note xxx | ||||||||
| Family size | 1 | -11.7% | -3.6% | -6.5% | -17.8% | -21.9% | -42.0% | -47.9% |
| 2 | 1.6% | -1.9% | -11.8% | -0.9% | -12.7% | -44.4% | -44.2% | |
| 3 | 4.9% | 12.1% | -17.6% | -7.5% | -20.6% | -40.2% | -45.5% | |
| 4 | 2.5% | -2.9% | -25.6% | -9.0% | -31.1% | -47.4% | -49.3% | |
| 5 | 6.4% | -8.3% | -28.6% | -6.8% | -51.2% | -50.1% | ||
| 6 | 10.7% | -11.5% | -31.6% | -53.1% | -51.1% | |||
| 7+ | 14.3% | -33.9% | -52.3% | -52.0% | ||||
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family – LICO) / LICO] * 100
BC, AB, and SK were compared to after tax LICOs; MB, ON, and NS were compared to before tax LICOs; QC was compared to after tax LICOs in 2010 and to before tax LICOs in 2015.
Source for LICOs:
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) after tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl01-eng.htm
Statistics Canada. (2015). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) before tax. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2012002/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm
- Table note xxv
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 6+.
- Table note xxvi
-
For 2010 and 2015, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 5+.
- Table note xxvii
-
For 2010 and 2015, Quebec separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Ranged from 1 adult and 0 children to 2 adults and 2 children or more.
- Table note xxviii
-
Saskatchewan guidelines are provided for families with number of children, where family was defined as one or two-parent household. For this table, two parents are assumed so the eligibility criterion for a family of four is equivalent to a family with two children. Only family sizes of one adult and no children and family with four children were available for 2010.
- Table note xxix
-
Nova Scotia separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size.
- Table note xxx
-
LICOs for 2015 were not available and were therefore calculated as LICO2015 = LICO1992 x CPI2015 / CPI1992 (Source: Statistics Canada. [2015]. Low income cut-offs. Retrieved March 29, 2016 from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010005/lico-sfr-eng.htm).
- Date modified: