Evaluation of the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Initiative
Appendix C: Interview Guides
Interview Guide: Program Staff
The purpose of the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Initiative is to provide Canadians from official language minority communities access to legal information regarding their rights and responsibilities in the official language of their choice and, where necessary, with access to a justice system that meets their needs in that language. The Initiative is based on two main pillars.
- The Information pillar aims to offer legal information services that will help minority Francophone and Anglophone Canadians learn about their rights, obligations and responsibilities in the official language of their choice.
- The Training pillar involves the training and development of bilingual justice professionals in order to improve their language skills, thereby increasing their ability to offer services in French outside Quebec and in English in Quebec as part of their work within the justice system, including in the area of criminal law.
The objective of this evaluation is to assess the relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of the Initiative, in accordance with the TBS’s Policy on Evaluation. The evaluation covers a four-year period (2013-14 to 2016-17).
The evaluation will involve key informant interviews with recipient organization representatives, community stakeholders and Justice Canada program staff. The interview will take about 60 minutes.
1. To provide context, what is your involvement with the Initiative?
Relevance
2. Is there a legitimate and necessary role for the federal government in the area of access to justice in both official languages?
3. To what extent is the Initiative aligned with Departmental priorities? Federal government priorities?
4. To what extent is there a continued need for the activities funded by the Initiative?
Effectiveness: Delivery
5. The Initiative provides support to the Advisory Committee on Access to Justice in Both Official Languages, whose mandate is to liaise between representatives of non-governmental organizations from the legal and academic worlds and the Department of Justice. In your opinion:
- How does the committee contribute to the goals of the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Fund?
- Is the mandate still relevant?
- Are stakeholders satisfied with this structure?
- Does the Advisory Committee lead to increased cooperation between partners?
- Are the operations of the Advisory Committee efficient?
6. The Initiative provides support to the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Access to Justice in Both Official languages, which is made up of Department of Justice representatives as well as representatives from provincial and territorial governments. In your opinion:
- How does the Working Group contribute to the goals of the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Fund?
- Is the mandate still relevant?
- Are Working Group members satisfied with this structure?
- Does the Working Group lead to increased cooperation between partners?
- Are the operations of the Working Group efficient?
7. The Initiative involves a selection process to select projects in each of the pillars.
- What has Justice done to communicate the program to potential funding recipients? What has been done to make the selection criteria clear?
8. Let’s talk about the data collection and reporting system for the Initiative within Justice. (EQ8)
- Is the right data collected? Is it accurate and complete? What mechanisms are in place to ensure accurate and complete reporting (i.e. are the project reports reviewed)?
- Is data used for reporting purposes? Does it meet Justice reporting requirements?
- Are the reports useful for management purposes?
Effectiveness: Information Pillar
9. What strategies/models have been used by recipients to provide legal information services to allow Francophone and Anglophone minorities to learn about their rights, obligations and responsibilities in the official language of their choice?
- In your opinion, were the right strategies used to provide legal information?
- Is the content of the information accurate? Is the content up to date (e.g., in line with latest jurisprudence)?
- Who are the targeted users? Is the content targeted towards the most pressing needs?
- Were the targeted users reached? Is the information being used?
- Does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- Does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of both Anglophone and Francophone minorities?
Effectiveness: Training Pillar
10. What strategies/models have been used by recipients to provide training and development of bilingual justice professionals?
- In your opinion, were the right training strategies used?
- Were strategies effective in reaching professionals directly in their workplace using information technologies?
- Who are the targeted users? Were the targeted users reached?
- Was the training in line with the training needs? Did the training increase the ability of justice professionals to offer services in French outside Quebec and in English in Quebec, including in the area of criminal law?
- Did the funded projects increase awareness about linguistic obligations? About the exercise of language rights by litigants?
- Does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- Does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of both Anglophone and Francophone minorities?
11. To what extent were the activities of the pillars complementary to each other?
12. Did the activities funded under both pillars lead to unintended outcomes, either positive or negative? (e.g., social, cultural and economic impacts)
Efficiency
13. Were the project funding mechanisms adequate?
- Did the agreements meet the needs of the recipients?
- Did the agreements and reporting mechanism meet Justice needs, including risk and performance management needs?
14. Are funding activities under both pillars integrated and coordinated? Please describe information sharing mechanisms used at Justice.
15. How can the delivery of the Initiative be improved?
- Can it be delivered more efficiently? Are there unnecessary or duplicate activities?
- Should some activities be changed or emphasized?
- Can the Initiative be improved to increase the effectiveness of the funded activities?
16. What were the good practices or lessons learned about this Initiative?
Thank you
Interview Guide: Recipient Organization Representatives and Other Stakeholders
The purpose of the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Initiative is to provide Canadians from official language minority communities access to legal information regarding their rights and responsibilities in the official language of their choice and, where necessary, with access to a justice system that meets their needs in that language. The Initiative is based on two main pillars.
- The Information pillar aims to offer legal information services that will help minority Francophone and Anglophone Canadians learn about their rights, obligations and responsibilities in the official language of their choice.
- The Training pillar involves the training and development of bilingual justice professionals in order to improve their language skills, thereby increasing their ability to offer services in French outside Quebec and in English in Quebec as part of their work within the justice system, including in the area of criminal law.
The objective of this evaluation is to assess the relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of the Initiative, in accordance with the TBS’s Policy on Evaluation. The evaluation covers a four-year period (2013-14 to 2016-17).
The evaluation will involve key informant interviews with recipient organization representatives, community stakeholders and Justice Canada program staff. The interview will take about 60 minutes.
1. To provide context, what is your involvement with the Initiative?
Relevance (ask these questions only of experts)
2. Is there a legitimate and necessary role for the federal government in the area of access to justice in both official languages?
3. To what extent is there a continued need for the activities funded by the Initiative?
Effectiveness: Delivery
4. Are you a member of the Advisory Committee on Access to Justice in Both Official Languages? If yes:
- How does the Advisory Committee contribute to the goals of the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Fund?
- Is the Advisory Committee’s mandate still relevant?
- Are stakeholders satisfied with this structure?
- Does the Advisory Committee lead to increased cooperation between partners?
- Are the operations of the Advisory Committee efficient?
5. Are you a member (or aware) of the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Access to Justice in Both Official languages? If yes:
- How does the Working Group contribute to the goals of the Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Fund?
- Is the Working Group’s mandate still relevant?
- Are Working Group members satisfied with this structure?
- Does the Working Group lead to increased cooperation between partners?
- Are the operations of the Working Group efficient?
6. The Initiative involves a selection process to select projects in each of the pillars. (Ask only of representatives from funded organizations)
- Is the selection process clear from your perspective? Is the documentation about the Initiative useful/accessible in this regard?
- Is the selection process transparent? Are communications clear about the process, including the selection criteria?
Success of funded projects
In this part of the interview, respondents are asked to provide views and information about specific projects. According to program file information, your organization received funding for ..….. Correct? (or for other stakeholders “Are you aware of any of the following projects?”)
Legal Information Hubs
7. What strategies/models have been used by Legal Information Hubs to provide legal information services to allow Francophone minorities to learn about their rights, obligations and responsibilities in the official language of their choice?
- In your opinion, were the right strategies used to provide legal information?
- Is content up to date (e.g., in line with latest jurisprudence)?
- Who are the targeted users? Is the content targeted towards the most pressing needs?
- Were the targeted users reached? Is the information being used?
- How does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- How does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of Francophone minorities?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions? (e.g., statistics)
Éducaloi
8. What strategies/models have been used by recipients to provide legal information services to allow Anglophone members/communities to learn about their rights, obligations and responsibilities in the official language of their choice?
- In your opinion, were the right strategies used to provide legal information?
- Is content up to date (e.g., in line with latest jurisprudence)?
- Who are the targeted users? Is the content targeted towards the most pressing needs?
- Were the targeted users reached? Is the information being used?
- How does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- How does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of Anglophone minorities?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
Jurilinguistics centres
9. What strategies and tools have been used by the jurilinguistics centres to provide development of bilingual justice professionals?
- In your opinion, were the right strategies and tools used?
- Were these effective in reaching professionals directly in their workplace using information technologies?
- Who are the targeted users? Were the targeted users reached? Is the information being used?
- How does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- How does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of official language minority communities?
- Could the various tools be consolidated (Moncton, Ottawa, McGill and St-Boniface) in some way? Any activities? Operations?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
French training for judges
10. What strategies/models have been used by recipients to provide this training?
- What is your opinion of the courses? Are the materials and approach to teaching effective?
- Is the linguistic capacity grid appropriate?
- Were provincial representatives or experts consulted to develop the grid?
- (If yes) How did this input improve the product?
- (If no) Why not?
- Do you think that the grid can be used more broadly (e.g., other organizations)?
- How were the training needs assessed? Was the training in line with the training needs?
- How does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- How does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of Francophone minorities?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
Projects aimed at newcomers
11. What strategies/models have been used by recipients to support immigrants?
- In your opinion, were the right strategies used? Are they adapted to immigrants?
- Is content up to date (e.g., in line with latest jurisprudence)?
- Were the targeted users reached? Is the information being used?
- Does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- Does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of both English and French minorities?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
Development of public legal education and information materials: CliquezJustice.ca
12. In your opinion, is the right strategy used by CliquezJustice.ca to provide legal information?
- Is the interface in line with the latest best practices in Web communications?
- Is content up to date (e.g., in line with latest jurisprudence)?
- Who are the targeted users? Is the content targeted towards the most pressing needs?
- Were the targeted users reached? Is the information being used?
- How does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- How does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of Francophone minorities?
- What is the business plan going forward for CliquezJustice? With the site now running, in what way are resources needed?
- Did the project manage to secure other sources of funding?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
Jurisource.ca
13. In your opinion, is the right strategy used by Jurisource.ca to provide tools for justice professionals?
- Is the interface in line with the latest best practices in Web communications?
- Is content up to date (e.g., in line with latest jurisprudence)?
- Who are the targeted users? Is the content targeted towards the most pressing needs?
- Were the targeted users reached? Is the information being used?
- How did this portal increase the ability of justice professionals to offer services in French outside Quebec and in English in Quebec, including in the area of criminal law?
- Did the portal facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- Does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of both Anglophone and Francophone minorities?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
Training of Quebec members of the judiciary in English
14. What strategies/models have been used by recipients to provide training and development of bilingual justice professionals?
- In your opinion, were the right training strategies used?
- Were strategies effective in reaching professionals directly in their workplace using information technologies?
- Who are the targeted users? Were the targeted users reached?
- Was the training in line with the training needs? Did the training increase the ability of justice professionals to offer services in English in Quebec, including in the area of criminal law?
- Did the funded projects increase awareness about linguistic obligations? About the exercise of language rights by litigants? Is there data on how many sittings of court took place in English?
- Does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- Is there any duplication between the projects at Bishop’s University and St. Andrews? How are they complementary?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
Training of justice stakeholders
15. What strategies/models have been used by recipients to provide training and development of bilingual justice professionals?
- In your opinion, were the right training strategies used?
- Were strategies effective in reaching professionals directly in their workplace using information technologies?
- Who are the targeted users? Were the targeted users reached?
- Was the training in line with the training needs? Did the training increase the ability of justice professionals to offer services in French outside Quebec, including in the area of criminal law?
- Did the funded projects increase awareness about linguistic obligations? About the exercise of language rights by litigants?
- How does the information facilitate access to the justice system in the users’ official language of choice?
- How does it contribute to the protection of official language rights of Francophone minorities?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
Réseau national de formation en justice
16. Did this project create synergies between organizations involved in training and professional development? What type of activities/supports created linkages between them?
- How many organizations are involved?
- Did the project lead to exchanges of resources between these organizations? Please provide examples.
- Have any linkages been made with the English-speaking communities in Quebec? If not, why not?
- Do you have documentation that we could use to address the above questions?
General Questions (all respondents)
17. To summarize, to what extent has the Initiative resulted in the following outcomes areas in the last four years?
| 1. Little or no extent | 2. Some extent | 3. Moderate extent | 4. Great extent | 5. Very great extent | Don’t know | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a. Increased language training opportunities connected with criminal law. | ||||||
| b. Greater importance placed on the issue of access to justice in both official languages by organizations working in the area of justice. | ||||||
| c. Decrease in reluctance of litigants from official language minority communities to exercise their language rights in dealing with the justice system. | ||||||
| d. Increased ability of members of the judiciary to work in both official languages. | ||||||
| e. Increased ability of Crown attorneys to work in both official languages. | ||||||
| f. Increased ability of private lawyers to work in both official languages. | ||||||
| g. Increased ability of legal aid systems to operate in both official languages. | ||||||
| h. Increased ability of court officials to work in both official languages. |
18. Did the Initiative or your organization’s funded activities lead to unintended outcomes, either positive or negative (e.g., social, cultural and economic impacts)?
19. To what extent were the activities of the pillars complementary to each other?
Base funding and impact on the vitality of official language minority communities
20. In 2013, the Department ceased to provide core funding for the seven Associations for French-Speaking Jurists and their federation.
- A transition year was used to allow the associations to plan and adapt to this change. Was this funding useful?
- In your operations from 2014 onwards, did you implement the business/activity plan developed in 2013-14? How? Was it useful?
- How do you compare the level of financing you received under the present Initiative compared to previous Roadmaps? (Idea: comparing perceptions and realities)
- Do you include activities previously covered by core funding in your project funding?
- How would you compare the one-year funding mechanism and the multi-year mechanism?
- How do you go about developing projects to align with government initiatives/priorities?
- Do you think that clear government priorities (like having two clear pillars) enhance or hinder the vitality of the OLMCs?
- How did the elimination of this core funding affect the financial stability of these associations? Did it affect the vitality of the OLMCs?
Non-Funded Projects (Ask only of organizations that had other projects that did not receive funding)
21. Did your organization apply for funding for another project but was unsuccessful (for this Initiative)?
- What was the project about?
- For what reason was it not successful?
- Did your project go ahead despite the negative result of the application? Did you manage to find another source of funding?
Efficiency
22. Were the project funding mechanisms (Justice funding) adequate? (Ask only of representatives of funded organizations)
- Did the agreements meet the needs of your organization?
- Were you able to leverage additional funding from other organizations?
23. From your perspective, how can the delivery of the Initiative be improved?
24. What were the good practices or lessons learned from this Initiative?
Thank you
- Date modified: