Evaluation of the Justice Partnership and Innovation Program

Appendix A: JPIP logic model and evaluation matrix

Justice Partnership and Innovation Program Logic Model

Justice Partnership and Innovation Program Logic Model

Justice Partnership and Innovation Program Logic Model - Text version

The JPIP is implemented through one overarching strategic activity and four sub-activities, which include the provision Operational Funding, Educational Funding, International Funding, and knowledge and Expertise Exchange Funding.

The Program’s key output is funding agreements.

The immediate outcome of the JPIP is:

  • an increased capacity to build knowledge, awareness and understanding of justice issues.

There are two intermediate outcomes of the JPIP:

  • Canadians have an increased awareness and knowledge of the justice system including their rights and obligations
  • Promotion of Canadians legal interests internationally

There are two ultimate outcomes for the JPIP:

  • Increased access to the Canadian justice system
  • Strengthened Canadian legal framework

Overall, the JPIP is linked to the departmental strategic outcome:

  • A fair, relevant, and accessible Canadian justice system.
JPIP Evaluation Matrix
Evaluation Issue Evaluation Question Evaluation Indicators Potential Data Sources/Analysis Responsibility for Collection
Relevance
1. Continued Need for the JPIP 1.1 To what extent is there a continuing need for the JPIP? 1.1.1 Alignment of the needs targeted by the JPIP and the justice needs of Canadians and needs identified by funding applicants/recipients
  • Document/Literature review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
1.2 To what extent are the activities of the JPIP responsive to the needs of Canadians? 1.2.1 Scope and reach of JPIP activities and funding investments
  • Document review
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
1.2.2 Number/type/nature of funded activities under the JPIP
  • Document review
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
2. Alignment with Government Priorities 2.1 Is the JPIP aligned with the priorities of the Department and the Government? 2.1.1 Alignment of the needs targeted by the JPIP with federal government and Justice priorities
  • Document/Literature review
  • Key informant interviews
 Justice ED
3. Alignment with Federal Roles and Responsibilities 3.1 To what extent do the activities of the JPIP align with federal roles and responsibilities? 3.1.1 Alignment of the JPIP with the Government of Canada’s roles and responsibilities
  • Document/Literature review (Justice Constitutional/ statutory authorities RPP, PAA)
  • Key informant interviews
 Justice ED
Performance - Immediate Outcomes
4. Achievement of Expected Outcomes 4.1 To what extent has the JPIP increased the capacity of stakeholders to build knowledge, awareness and understanding of justice issues? 4.1.1 Number and nature of partnerships
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4.1.2 Extent to which stakeholders are able to continue to maintain their ongoing activities in support of departmental priorities
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
4.1.3 Extent to which capacity has increased as a result of JPIP funding
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4.1.4 Nature and extent of federal contribution to issues at the international level
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
4.1.5 Level of satisfaction with partnerships
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
4.1.6 Efforts to address barriers to obtaining needed information (i.e. language) Key informant interviews Justice ED
Performance - Intermediate Outcomes
4. Achievement of Expected Outcomes 4.2 To what extent has the JPIP increased awareness and knowledge of the Canadian justice system? 4.2.1 Number of Métis and Non-Status Indians that have received financial assistance to pursue their studies in law
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
 Justice ED
4.2.2 Extent to which public legal education and information organizations assisted through funding promoted awareness and knowledge of the Canadian justice system
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4.2.3 Extent to which Justice partners’ knowledge and understanding has increased through funded meetings, conferences, etc.
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4.2.4 Number, type and nature of public legal education and information resources and tools developed, distributed
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4.2.5 Type and number of activities that build knowledge, awareness and understanding of justice issues
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4. Achievement of Expected Outcomes 4.3 To what extent has the JPIP helped promote Canadian legal interests internationally 4.3.1 Nature and extent of involvement in international fora
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
4.3.2 Examples where Canada has influenced international work
  • Key informant interviews
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
Performance - Ultimate Outcomes
4. Achievement of Expected Outcomes 4.4 To what extent has the JPIP contributed to increased access to justice? 4.4.1 Extent to which information is available to inform about the Canadian justice system
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4.4.2 Extent to which there is a more equitable representation of Aboriginal people in the legal profession
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
 Justice ED
4. Achievement of Expected Outcomes 4.5 To what extent has the JPIP contributed to a strengthened Canadian legal framework? 4.5.1 Evidence of changes to harmonize legislation
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
4.5.2 Ways in which the JPIP funding recipients have contributed to the legal framework (e.g. ICCLR assistance in responding to domestic issues)
  • Document review
  • Key informant interviews
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
4. Achievement of Expected Outcomes 4.6 What factors are contributing to, or constraining the achievement of expected outcomes? 4.6.1 Constraints on the ability to achieve outcomes
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4.6.2 Factors supporting the achievement of outcomes
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
  • File review
 Justice ED
4. Achievement of Expected Outcomes 4.7 Have there been any unexpected outcomes? 4.7.1 Identification of unexpected outcomes
  • Key informant interviews
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
5. Demonstration of Efficiency and Economy 5.1 To what extent is the JPIP resource utilization efficient?
  • What resources are being used?
  • Does the resource level make sense?
  • How did the resource level affect the results achieved?
  • Are there alternative ways to use the same/fewer resources to get similar/better results?
 5.1.1 Extent to which the resources support the achievement of results
  • Key informant interviews
  • Applicant survey
  • Case studies
 Justice ED
5.2 What measures are in place to manage the JPIP efficiently and economically? 5.2.1 Measures in place to manage the JPIP efficiently Key informant interviews Justice ED
5.2.2 Measures in place to manage the JPIP economically Key informant interviews Justice ED
5.3 Have the 2011 JPIP summative evaluation recommendations been implemented? 5.3.1 Extent to which the recommendations have been implemented Key informant interviews Justice ED