Family Violence Initiative

Lessons Learned from Projects Funded Through the Family Violence Initiative 1998/99 to 2002/03

• [ Previous page |
• Table of Contents |
• Next page ]

APPENDIX A: File Review of the Department of Justice Canada Family Violence Initiative Project Funding
1997/98-2002/03

Introduction

The Evaluation Division, Department of Justice contracted Côté Consulting & Associates in 2003 to review projects funded under the Family Violence Initiative during the period 1997/98 to 2002/03.

Methods

Sixty project files were found to meet the selection criteria that had been identified by the Selection Committee, that is, they were projects that had been funded within the five year timeframe specified, and completed as of October 31, 2002. The study used both quantitative and qualitative methods. Family Violence General Project and Public Legal Education and Information (PLEI) Project files were reviewed to obtain background information such as funding partners, key stakeholders and beneficiaries, types of contribution, project time-frames, and the amount of dollars provided and other project information gleaned from the files. A representative sample of forty (40) project files was created, and a synthesis of each project was prepared. There were challenges in accurately reconstructing the total number of projects undertaken by each project fund. The Grants and Contributions Audit 2002 identified the shortcomings of the Project Control System (PCS) and steps have been taken to correct the system.

The file review sought to determine:

1. How many projects were funded and/or completed over the past five fiscal years, by each year?
2. What is the range of funding provided, and what percentage of each project was paid by Department of Justice Grants and Contributions Section?
3. What types of projects were funded (e.g. conferences, pilot/innovative projects, workshops, evaluations, etc.)?
4. What were the main family violence subject areas of the projects (e.g. rural communities, ethno cultural communities, elder abuse, child abuse, spousal abuse)?
5. Who were the beneficiaries?
6. What funding partners were involved in the projects?
7. How many projects were completed according to the terms of the agreement? Specifically, if a report or an evaluation was to be produced, was it done?
8. Is the report or evaluation available on the file?
9. Does the report or evaluation contain enough pertinent and useful information to include in a "lessons learned" study (e.g. results, recommendations, follow up activity)?
10. Which of the following links to the Interdepartmental FVI[11] was the project meant to contribute to:
    • Effective criminal justice interventions in family violence situations.
    • Community support for proven family violence prevention, intervention, protection measures.
    • Strengthened criminal justice system response to family violence.
11. Which of the following areas identified by Justice Canada, was the project meant to contribute to:
    • Promotion of public awareness about family violence and reduction of tolerance for the issue.
    • Development and implementation of effective intervention strategies/tools in family violence situations.
    • Development and implementation of protection measures for victims/witnesses.
    • Promotion of public participation in responding to family violence.
12. How did the project contribute to:
    • Raising awareness.
    • Imparting new knowledge about legislation or procedures in the criminal justice system.

Financial Overview

Under the Family Violence Initiative, the Department of Justice is involved in four types of activities: policy, research, project funding and PLEI. In addition, the Evaluation Division of Justice receives funding to conduct on-going evaluation activities. The financial breakdown for each of these areas is as follows:

Financial Overview

Financial FVI Breakdown Justice Canada $ 1.45M	Fiscal Year 1996-97	Fiscal Year 1997-98 and ongoing
FVI Project Funding	$ 40,000	$ 413,250
PLEI Project Funding	$ 50,000	$ 457,101
Policy Research	$ 15,000	$ 169,650
Policy Development	$ 30,000	$ 388,000
Program Evaluation	$ 5,000	$ 22,000
TOTAL		$1,450,000

The focus of the file review was on project funding. The breakdown of project dollars during the period under review was distributed in the following manner.

• 26.67% (16 projects) were in amounts under $10,000.
• 51.67% (31 projects) were in amounts between $10,001 and $30,000.
• 11.67% (7 projects) were in amounts between $30,001 and $50,000.
• 8.33% (5 projects) were in amounts between $50,001 and 100,000.
• 1.67% (1 project) in excess of $l, 000,000.

Overview of Project Funding

	FVI General	PLEI	Total
Under $5,000	2	3	5
$5001 - $10,000	4	7	11
$10,001 - $20,000	9	10	19
$20,001 - $30,000	8	4	12
$30,001 - $50,000	1	6	7
$50,001 - $70,000	3	2	5
$70,001 - $90,000	0	0	0
$1,000,000 +	1	0	1
Total	28	32	60

The following table illustrates the types of projects that were funded

Overview of Project Activity

Project Activitiy	FVI General	PLEI	Total
Conferences	6	4	10
Pilot Projects	9	4	13
Research	4	1	5
Training workshops/videos	1	4	5
Web Design	1	2	3
Public Awareness Campaign		1	1
Arts & Film	3		3
Evaluations	3		3
Publications	1	3	4
Brochures		13	13
TOTAL	28	32	60

The following table illustrates the distribution of projects across the country.

Overview of Project Distribution across Canada

	FV General	PLEI	Total
National	10	9	19
N.W.T.	0	0	0
Yukon	1	0	1
British Columbia	5	8	13
Alberta	1	3	4
Saskatchewan	2	5	7
Manitoba	1	1	2
Ontario	4	1	5
Quebec	3	1	4
New Brunswick	0	1	1
Nova Scotia	0	1	1
Newfoundland	0	1	1
P.E.I.	1	1	2
TOTAL	28	32	60

Administration of Project Funds

Fifty-eight (58) of the sixty (60) project files reviewed had deliverables, such as publications, films, progress and final reports.

Partnerships

The FVI General Project Fund cost-shared the majority of their projects with partners from governments and the private sector. The departments that provided the most partnership were Solicitor General, Correctional Services, Status of Women, Indian and Northern Affairs, Health Canada, and the Department of Canadian Heritage. It was common for three or more of these agencies to cost share on a specific project. A number of projects were cost-shared with other relevant initiatives of the Department of Justice, such as Victims, National Crime Prevention Strategy and Youth Justice.

Summary of File Review

The actual project files were well documented and the individual project findings were easily accessible.

Under this Phase of the FVI Initiative (1997/98 2002/03), funding was provided for activities such as pilot projects, conferences, comprehensive evaluations, research studies, arts and film, training workshops, website design, and public legal education and information materials. A wide variety of products and knowledge has been generated by the FVI during this period.

All of the projects funded met at least three or four objectives as set out under the FVI Interdepartmental Accountability Framework. Project funding was mainly for developmental purposes. While many of the projects are intended to reduce family violence and have the potential to contribute to these results, their effectiveness is still not known as projects are short term activities, and the Department of Justice Family Violence Initiative funding is not available for more than three years.

Topics covered at the conferences centered on elder abuse, violence against women, protection of human rights, sexual exploitation of children and youth, and children who witness violence in the home. Varied representatives from many fields attended the conferences. The criminal justice system was represented by police, crown attorneys, lawyers, probation officers, judges and correctional staff. Representatives from provincial/territorial governments, academic institutions, social and welfare services, women's organizations, multicultural groups, and Aboriginal groups were also in attendance.

Projects tested and carried out many innovative activities. Projects focused on protecting the safety of children from sexual predators, working with troubled youth, creating a communication base between sexual assault centres, counselling services for children and their parents, counselling programs for men who batter, providing information for women to use when escaping domestic abuse, and a program which provided women with new identities when they left life threatening situations behind. Educational and prevention programs to protect women, children and youth were also undertaken and in most cases these projects were found to be transferable to other locations in Canada.

Research projects examined the factors that influence recantation in female victims; violence and Aboriginal women; sexual exploitation of children and youth; and available resources for seniors experiencing elder abuse.

Target Groups who received funding include Women's Groups, Provincial Service Agencies, Educational Facilities, Child and Youth Groups, Senior Groups, Ethno Cultural Organizations, and Aboriginal Organizations.

Identified beneficiaries of funded projects were sexually exploited youth, students (school violence) females/domestic violence, children (child abuse) (conflict resolution), Muslim women (gender equality, human rights) and elder abuse.

While an evaluation component was usually written into the proposal, the evaluations undertaken were limited, due to factors such as a lack of evaluation expertise and resources to carry out evaluations, lack of independent evaluations, and a reliance on "soft" methods.

Lessons Learned: Follow Up

Forty (40) projects (with a final report or evaluation on file) were identified for potential further follow-up to determine lessons learned. These projects constituted a representative sample of FVI General and PLEI projects by project/territory, target group and by type of abuse.

• [ Previous page |
• Table of Contents |
• Next page ]