Archived - Evaluation of the Advocacy and Public Information Program - Follow-up Report Status Update as of March 31, 2010
This Web page has been archived on the Web. Archived information is provided for reference, research or record keeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.
PDF Version (23 Kb, 3 Pages)
Action Plan Implementation Status Update Report to the Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Committee - As of March 31, 2010
Resolution and Individual Affairs - Policy, Partnerships and Communications
Evaluation of the Advocacy and Public Information Program (200814)
AEC Approval Date: 26/Feb/2009
|1. In light of the revised implementation schedule for various Settlement Components, INAC should consider continuing support for communication activities, based in part on the APIP model, to assist in informing former students and Canadians about the Settlement Agreement;
|RIAS agrees with the recommendation and has sought and obtained the necessary authorities to continue APIP through 2009/2010 to 2012/13. Funding beyond 2009/10 is still to be identified.
As of 31/03/2010:
AES: To be re-assessed next year.
|2. Clarify roles and responsibilities, identify means for continuing information sharing of the various parties involved in disseminating information about the Settlement Agreement so as to ensure cost-effectiveness in the delivery of information and reduce the potential for duplication and overlaps over time; and
|RIAS agrees with the recommendation and has begun the process
of developing a strategic outreach approach which will clarify
roles and responsibilities, ensure cost-effectiveness in the delivery
of information (and reduce the potential for gaps and overlaps)
as well as ensure regular communications between APIP Contribution
Recipients and Program Interlocutors (within INAC and with specialists
from the various areas of the Settlement Agreement) and coordination
of the development and dissemination of accurate and up to date
information relevant, i.e., Common Experience Payment (CEP), Reconsideration,
Independent Assessment Process (IAP), Commemoration and the Truth
and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) to survivors, their families
In addition, the Community Impacts Working Group (CIWG), a network of interdepartmental representatives and Aboriginal organizations, will be reconstituted this spring and one of its goals will be to improve coordination of communications locally, nationally and regionally.
As of 31/03/2010:
This action has been met through the re-establishment of monthly teleconference call with recipient organizations and through regular meetings of the Community Impacts Working Group which is co-chaired by the ADM - RIAS.
|3. Depending on the approach adopted, develop
a results based management tools and performance measurement strategy,
that is mindful of reporting burden, yet includes:
- a program specific logic model demonstrating links to the Settlement Agreement objectives and INAC's program activity architecture;
- an analysis of information gaps which draws upon existing data (e.g., baseline study, program uptake rates and other relevant evidence) disaggregated by location, age and gender;
- performance measurement indicators and targets;
- formalized recipient selection and assessment criteria which are clearly aligned with program objectives (particularly with respect to reach)
- results-based reporting requirements; and
- a client survey to be applied for all activities undertaken ( i.e. clarity and utility of information provided, change in understanding, and ability to act based on information provided).
|RIAS will develop a performance measurement strategy, that will
include the recommended elements (at left), including a logic model,
development of indicators and targets. RIAS's approach will
include a reporting template which focuses on results and the collection
of performance data, including feedback from participants at specific
An analysis of information gaps and recipient reach will be developed and reviewed on a regular basis to assess communication needs and priorities, activities and targets and will inform funding decisions.
Applications for APIP support will be requested and assessed in accordance with identified communication requirements and capacity to achieve objectives and performance measurement requirements. No further formalized selection and assessment criteria are envisaged at this time.
A contingency plan will be developed to address gaps in coverage should capable and willing recipients not be identified in a timely manner.
As of 31/03/2010:
AES: It has been noted that the sector is continuing to work on its Performance Measurement Strategy. The logic model and indicators are being finalized and will be reviewed by EPMRC once completed.
Thank you for your feedback