Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative Funding Components

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

APPENDIX F:
Interview Guides

Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative Funding Components
Interview Guide for Departmental Personnel

The Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) of the Department of Justice Canada is a multi-faceted approach to youth justice designed to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system, defined as:

• Appropriate use of courts by youth justice officials
• Appropriate use of custody by judges
• Responses by youth justice officials that are proportionate to the severity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender
• Enhanced rehabilitative and re-integrative opportunities

The Department of Justice hired PRA Inc. to conduct the Evaluation of the YJI Funding Components. The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess the relevance, program design and implementation, success, and cost effectiveness and alternatives for each of the three funding components of the YJI for the fiscal years 2005–2006 to 2008–2009.

The three funding components are:

• Youth Justice Services Funding Program (YJSFP)
• Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision (IRCS)
• Youth Justice Fund (YJF)

Key informant interviews are a major data collection activity for this evaluation. The information we gather from this interview will be summarized in aggregate form; interview notes will not be shared outside of PRA and the Department of Justice’s Evaluation Division. Not all questions may be relevant to you; please let me know if you are unable to speak to a particular question and we will move to the next one.

Background

1. To begin, please describe your position and your role and responsibilities with respect to the YJI. Which funding component(s) are you involved in? How long have you been in your position?

Please respond to the following questions for each of the funding components (YJSFP, IRCS, YJF) that you are involved in.

Relevance

• 2. In your view, are the YJI funding components still relevant/needed? What would be the impact on the youth justice system if they were not in place? Please consider each component you are involved in.

• 3. Is there a legitimate and necessary role for government in the area of each funding component? Is the current role of the federal government appropriate, or is the program a candidate for realignment with the provinces/territories? Please explain.

• 4. Do the YJI funding components continue to serve the public interest? Why or why not?

Design and implementation

• 5. Is the design of the YJI funding components appropriate to support the objectives and intended outcomes of the YJI, as well as any identified needs and emerging issues? What is not appropriate about the design?

• 6. To what extent have the YJI funding components been implemented as planned? Please describe any changes to the funding components, the justification for the changes, and any impacts that occurred as a result. In your answer, please consider the organizational structure, funding programs, stakeholder relationships, and performance measurement strategy.

• 7. What types of partnerships have the YJI funding components successfully encouraged? Have partnerships been working effectively to support the achievement of the YJI objective to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system? Why or why not?

• 8. [YJSFP/IRCS] What efforts have been undertaken to work collaboratively with other federal departments and/or provincial/territorial jurisdictions on emerging youth justice issues? (e.g., Youth Justice Working Group, Coordinating Committee of Senior Officials Responsible for Youth Justice, Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Youth Justice Cost-Sharing). In your opinion, how effective are these groups at supporting the YJI objective to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system?

  [YJF] What efforts have been undertaken to work collaboratively with other federal departments and/or provincial/territorial jurisdictions on projects to address emerging youth justice issues? In your opinion, how effective are these interactions with other federal and provincial contacts at supporting the YJI objective to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system?

• 9. [YJSFP] How would you describe the YJSFP federal-provincial/territorial relationship? Is this an effective model for supporting service delivery in provinces/territories? Are there any positive or negative aspects of this relationship? Please explain.

• 10. To what extent has the Department of Justice implemented an effective performance measurement strategy to:

  • provide timely management or project management information

  • assist the Department of Justice in ongoing performance monitoring and program adjustment

  • capture adequate and useful information for assessing the impact of YJI funding?

• 11. Are reporting requirements for agreements/projects under each YJI component appropriate? Why or why not? Please describe any challenges that have been encountered in reporting on activities and outcomes and any strategies used to address them.

• 12. [YJSFP] In your view, what challenges/opportunities have the provinces/territories experienced in implementing the high, medium, and low categories of the priority-based agreements? Are there any changes to the design of YJSFP that would improve or facilitate implementation?

• 13. [YJSFP] To your knowledge, have the YJSFP-funded programs and services provided by the provinces and territories changed since the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative was launched in 1999? What are the reasons for these changes and were any the result of receiving federal funding? What are the impacts of these changes?

• 14. [YJSFP] Federal funding for YJSFP was reduced and capped in fiscal year 2006–2007. To your knowledge, how were the jurisdictions’ YJSFP-funded programs and services affected, particularly the high priority programs and services (e.g., operationally, ability to achieve expected outcomes)? What changes were necessary to accommodate the decrease in federal funding?

• 15. [IRCS] How is the IRCS basic capacity and case funding used by jurisdictions? To your knowledge, are provinces and territories able to provide the services and supports required for IRCS sentences? What are the challenges, if any? How have they used the Part A incremental funding provided in 2008-2009 (i.e., $100K for provinces, $50K for NT and YK, and $25K for NU)? What has been the impact of this incremental funding?

• 16. [YJF] What assistance do Department of Justice staff provide to YJF funding applicants and funded projects? To what extent does this assistance help projects to move forward?

• 17. [YJF] Do the YJF proposal development and approval processes work effectively? Why or why not? Do you have any suggestions for improving these processes?

Success

• 18. [YJSFP] What high priority programs and services do the jurisdictions currently deliver with YJSFP funding? To your knowledge, how accessible are these programs and services (e.g., geographical coverage, types of offender)?

  • Diversion and extrajudicial measures

  • Extrajudicial sanctions programs

  • Rehabilitative services

  • Reintegration services

  • Judicial interim release programs

  • Reports and assessments

  • Intensive support and supervision

  • Attendance programs

  • Other community-based sanctions

  • Conferencing

  • Other high priority services and programs

• 19. [YJSFP] I am going to list several intended outcomes of YJSFP. After I read each one, please explain whether, in your opinion, the outcome has been achieved. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Also, please note that it is not necessary to respond to every intended outcome.

  • Increased alignment of provincial/territorial programming with federal policy objectives (i.e., by targeting provincial/territorial resources to programs and services deemed ‘high priority’ under YJSFP)

  • Ability to maintain/continue existing and high priority programs and services after funding cap

  • Appropriate use of alternatives to court and incarceration

  • Court process and custody targeted to most serious offences

  • Accountability measures reflect severity of offence and degree of responsibility of the offender

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to youth justice

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

    To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without YJSFP funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 20. [IRCS] I am going to list several intended outcomes of the IRCS program. After I read each one, please explain whether, in your opinion, the outcome has been achieved. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Also, please note that it is not necessary to respond to every intended outcome.

  • Increased capacity to offer specialized services for serious violent young offenders suffering from a mental illness or disorder

  • Increased access to specialized services for serious violent young offenders suffering from a mental illness or disorder

  • Enhanced opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration of youth

  • Accountability measures reflect severity of offence and degree of responsibility of the offender

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to youth justice

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without IRCS funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 21. [YJF] I am going to list several intended outcomes of projects funded under the YJF. After I read each one, please explain whether, in your opinion, the outcome has been achieved through the projects funded. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Also, please note that it is not necessary to respond to every intended outcome.

  • Increased responsiveness to emerging youth justice issues and youth with unique needs (e.g., youth in care, youth with mental health issues, youth with FASD, Aboriginal youth, gang-involved youth and violent offenders, and drug-addicted youth)

  • Increased community involvement in the youth justice system, including collaboration between traditional and non-traditional youth justice partners

  • Increased knowledge development and collaboration amongst youth justice system stakeholders (e.g., sharing and application of best practices, skills development, and awareness of new or enhanced models)

  • Enhanced opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration of youth, including community-based youth programs and initiatives

  • Responsive policies, practices, and approaches to emerging youth justice issues

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to emerging youth justice issues

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without YJF funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 22. [YJF] To what extent is the YJF supported by stakeholders? What has affected the level of support?

• 23. [YJSFP and IRCS] To what extent do provinces and territories support the YJSFP and/or IRCS? What has affected the level of support?

• 24. What factors contribute to or constrain the achievement of the objectives and intended outcomes of YJI-funded programming? Please describe any particular challenges or best practices.

• 25. Is the Department of Justice facing any resource challenges in terms of available funding, organizational structure/staffing, and internal support that are affecting its ability to achieve the objectives of the YJI funding components? Please explain.

• 26. Are there any unintended or unanticipated impacts that have resulted from the YJI funding components? Have they affected the success of the YJI funding components? Please explain.

• 27. In your view, are there more effective ways of achieving the objectives of YJI funding?

Cost effectiveness and alternatives

• 28. Given the activities and intended outcomes of the YJSFP, IRCS, and YJF, are each of the funding components affordable? If not, which aspects are least affordable?

• 29. [YJSFP] How significant is federal funding in enabling the jurisdictions to provide programs and services under YJSFP? Given the current fiscal climate and the possibility of reduced funding in many areas, could you give any examples of how programs or services might need to be modified in the event of a substantial (e.g., 10-25%) reduction in funding for YJSFP? What priority level/type of program would be most vulnerable? What would be the impact on the achievement of YJSFP objectives and the broader goals of the YJI? If it were possible to increase the funding available under this program by 10-25%, to what priorities or unmet needs would you like this additional money to be allocated? Please provide specific examples.

• 30. [IRCS] How significant is federal funding in enabling the jurisdictions to provide programs and services under IRCS? Given the current fiscal climate and the possibility of reduced funding in many areas, could you give any examples of how programs or services might need to be modified in the event of a substantial reduction in funding for IRCS, or the elimination of the IRCS program or any of its components? What type of programs would be most vulnerable? What would be the impact on the achievement of IRCS objectives and the broader goals of the YJI?

• 31. How could the efficiency of the YJI funding components be improved?

• 32. Are there any aspects of the YJSFP, IRCS, or YJF that should or could be transferred in whole or in part to the private/voluntary sector?

• 33. [YJSFP] In your view, is federal government funding for YJSFP keeping pace with provincial/territorial expenditures? Please explain.

• 34. In your view, are Canadians getting value for their tax dollars from the YJI funding components?

• 35. Do you have any other comments or suggestions for improving the YJI funding components?

Thank you for your participation.

Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative Funding Components
Interview Guide for Provincial/Territorial Partners

The Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) of the Department of Justice Canada is a multi-faceted approach to youth justice designed to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system, defined as:

• Appropriate use of courts by youth justice officials
• Appropriate use of custody by judges
• Responses by youth justice officials that are proportionate to the severity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender
• Enhanced rehabilitative and re-integrative opportunities.

The Department of Justice hired PRA Inc. to conduct the Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) Funding Components. The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess the relevance, program design and implementation, success, and cost effectiveness and alternatives for each of the three funding components of the YJI for the fiscal years 2005-2006 to 2008-2009.

The three funding components are:

• Youth Justice Services Funding Program (YJSFP)
• Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision (IRCS)
• Youth Justice Fund (YJF)

Key informant interviews are a major data collection activity for this evaluation. The information we gather from this interview will be summarized in aggregate form; interview notes will not be shared outside of PRA Inc. and the Department of Justice’s Evaluation Division. Not all questions may be relevant to you; please let me know if you are unable to speak to a particular question and we will move to the next one.

Background

1. How are you involved with the Youth Justice Initiative? Which funding component(s) are you involved in? (YJSFP, IRCS, YJF)
Please respond to the following questions for each of the funding components (YJSFP, IRCS, YJF) that you are involved in. For YJF, please refer to the attached list of YJF-funded projects for your jurisdiction.

Relevance

• 2. In your view, are the YJI funding components still relevant/needed? What would be the impact on the youth justice system if they were not in place? Please consider each component that you are involved in (YJSFP, IRCS, YJF).

• 3. Is there a legitimate and necessary role for government in the areas of each funding component? Is the current role of the federal government appropriate, or is the program a candidate for realignment with the provinces/territories? Please explain.

• 4. Do the YJI funding components continue to serve the public interest? Why or why not?

Design and implementation

• 5. Is the design of the YJI funding components appropriate to support the objectives and intended outcomes of the YJI, as well as any identified needs and emerging issues? What is not appropriate about the design?

• 6. [YJSFP/IRCS] What efforts have been undertaken to work collaboratively with the federal government and/or other provincial/territorial jurisdictions on emerging youth justice issues (e.g., Coordinating Committee of Senior Officials Responsible for Youth Justice, Federal-Provincial-Territorial Working Group on Youth Justice Cost-sharing)? In your opinion, how effective are these groups at supporting the YJI objective to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system?
  [YJF] What efforts have been undertaken to work collaboratively with other federal departments and/or provincial/territorial jurisdictions on projects to address emerging youth justice issues? In your opinion, how effective are these interactions with other federal and provincial contacts at supporting the YJI objective to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system?

• 7. [YJSFP] How would you describe the YJSFP federal-provincial/territorial relationship? Is this an effective model for supporting service delivery in provinces/territories? Are there any positive or negative aspects of this relationship? Please explain.

• 8. Are reporting requirements for agreements/projects under each YJI component appropriate? Why or why not? Please describe any challenges that have been encountered in reporting on activities and outcomes and any strategies used to address them.

• 9. [YJSFP] In your view, what challenges/opportunities have your province/territory experienced in implementing the high, medium, and low categories of the priority-based agreements? Are there any changes to the design of YJSFP that would improve or facilitate implementation?

• 10. [YJSFP] Have your YJSFP-funded programs and services changed since the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative was launched in 1999? What are the reasons for these changes and were any the result of receiving federal funding? What are the impacts of these changes?

• 11. [YJSFP] Federal funding for YJSFP was reduced and capped in fiscal year 2006-2007. How were your jurisdiction’s YJSFP-funded programs and services affected, particularly the high priority programs and services (e.g., operationally, ability to achieve expected outcomes)? What changes were necessary to accommodate the decrease in federal funding?

• 12. [IRCS] Has your jurisdiction funded any IRCS cases? What types of programs and services has your jurisdiction funded through IRCS? (Probe: basic capacity and, if applicable, case funding) Is your jurisdiction able to provide the services and supports required for IRCS sentences? What are the challenges, if any? How has your jurisdiction used the Part A incremental funding provided in 2008-2009 (i.e., $100K for provinces, $50K for NT and YK, and $25K for NU)? What has been the impact of this incremental funding?

• 13. [YJF] What assistance do Department of Justice staff provide to YJF funding applicants and funded projects? To what extent does this assistance help projects to move forward?

• 14. [YJF] Do the YJF proposal development and approval processes work effectively? Why or why not? Do you have any suggestions for improving these processes?

Success

• 15. [YJSFP] What high priority programs and services does your jurisdiction currently deliver with YJSFP funding? In your opinion, how accessible are these programs and services (e.g., geographical coverage, types of offender)?

  • Diversion and extrajudicial measures

  • Extrajudicial sanctions programs

  • Rehabilitative services

  • Reintegration services

  • Judicial interim release programs

  • Reports and assessments

  • Intensive support and supervision

  • Attendance programs

  • Other community-based sanctions

  • Conferencing

  • Other high priority services and programs

• 16. [YJSFP] I am going to list several intended outcomes of YJSFP. After I read each one, please tell me whether, in your opinion, your jurisdiction has achieved the outcome. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Also, please note that it is not necessary to respond to every intended outcome.

  • Increased alignment of provincial/territorial programming with federal policy objectives (i.e., by targeting provincial/territorial resources to programs and services deemed ‘high priority’ under YJSFP)

  • Ability to maintain/continue existing and high priority programs and services after funding cap

  • Appropriate use of alternatives to court and incarceration

  • Court process and custody targeted to most serious offences

  • Accountability measures reflect severity of offence and degree of responsibility of the offender

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to youth justice

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without YJSFP funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 17. [IRCS] I am going to list several intended outcomes of the IRCS program. After I read each one, please tell me whether, in your opinion, your jurisdiction has achieved the outcome. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Also, please note that it is not necessary to respond to every intended outcome.

  • Increased capacity to offer specialized services for serious violent young offenders suffering from a mental illness or disorder

  • Increased access to specialized services for serious violent young offenders suffering from a mental illness or disorder

  • Enhanced opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration of youth

  • Accountability measures reflect severity of offence and degree of responsibility of the offender

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to youth justice

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without IRCS funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 18. [YJF] I am going to list several intended outcomes of projects funded under the YJF. After I read each one, please tell me whether, in your opinion, projects in your jurisdiction have achieved the outcome. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Also, please note that it is not necessary to respond to every intended outcome.

  • Increased responsiveness to emerging youth justice issues and youth with unique needs (e.g., youth in care, youth with mental health issues, youth with FASD, Aboriginal youth, gang-involved youth and violent offenders, and drug-addicted youth)

  • Increased community involvement in the youth justice system, including collaboration between traditional and non-traditional youth justice partners

  • Increased knowledge development and collaboration amongst youth justice system stakeholders (e.g., sharing and application of best practices, skills development, and awareness of new or enhanced models)

  • Enhanced opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration of young persons, including community-based youth programs and initiatives

  • Responsive policies, practices, and approaches to emerging youth justice issues

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to emerging youth justice issues

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without YJF funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 19. [YJF] To what extent is the YJF supported by stakeholders, including your organization and others? What has affected the level of support?

• 20. [YJSFP and IRCS] To what extent do provinces and territories support the YJSFP and/or IRCS? What has affected the level of support?

• 21. What factors contribute to or constrain the achievement of the objectives and intended outcomes of YJI-funded programming in your province/territory? Please describe any particular challenges or best practices.

• 22. Are there any unintended or unanticipated impacts that have resulted from the programs and services offered in your province/territory with Youth Justice Initiative funding? Have they affected the success of the programs and services? Please explain.

• 23. In your view, are there more effective ways of achieving the objectives of YJI funding?

Cost Effectiveness and Alternatives

• 24. Given the activities and intended outcomes of the YJSFP, IRCS, and YJF, are each of the funding components affordable? If not, which aspects are least affordable?

• 25. [YJSFP] How significant is federal funding in enabling your jurisdiction to provide programs and services under YJSFP? Given the current fiscal climate and the possibility of reduced funding in many areas, could you give any examples of how programs or services might need to be modified in the event of a substantial (e.g., 10-25%) reduction in funding for YJSFP? What priority level/type of program would be most vulnerable? What would be the impact on the achievement of YJSFP objectives and the broader goals of the YJI? If it were possible to increase the funding available under this program by 10-25%, to what priorities or unmet needs would you like this additional money to be allocated? Please provide specific examples.

• 26. [IRCS] How significant is federal funding in enabling your jurisdiction to provide programs and services under IRCS? Given the current fiscal climate and the possibility of reduced funding in many areas, could you give any examples of how programs or services might need to be modified in the event of a substantial reduction in funding for IRCS, or the elimination of the IRCS program or any of its components? What type of programs would be most vulnerable? What would be the impact on the achievement of IRCS objectives and the broader goals of the YJI?

• 27. How could the efficiency of the YJI funding components be improved?

• 28. Are there any aspects of the YJSFP, IRCS, or YJF that should or could be transferred in whole or in part to the private/voluntary sector?

• 29. [YJSFP] In your view, is federal government funding for YJSFP keeping pace with provincial/territorial expenditures? Please explain.

• 30. In your view, are Canadians getting value for their tax dollars from the YJI funding components?

• 31. Do you have any other comments or suggestions for improving the YJI funding components?

Thank you for your participation.

Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative Funding Components
Interview Guide for External Federal Partners

The Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) of the Department of Justice Canada is a multi-faceted approach to youth justice designed to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system, defined as:

• Appropriate use of courts by youth justice officials
• Appropriate use of custody by judges
• Responses by youth justice officials that are proportionate to the severity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender
• Enhanced rehabilitative and re-integrative opportunities

The Department of Justice hired PRA Inc. to conduct the Evaluation of the YJI Funding Components. The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess the relevance, program design and implementation, success, and cost effectiveness and alternatives for each of the three funding components of the YJI for the fiscal years 2005-2006 to 2008-2009.

The Youth Justice Fund (YJF) is one of the three funding components of the YJI. The YJF provides grants and contributions to non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations, individuals, and provincial and territorial ministries responsible for youth justice in order to:

• help achieve a fairer and more effective youth justice system
• respond to emerging youth justice issues
• enable greater citizen/community participation in the youth justice system.

Key informant interviews are a major data collection activity for this evaluation. The information we gather from this interview will be summarized in aggregate form; interview notes will not be shared outside of PRA and the Department of Justice’s Evaluation Division. Not all questions may be relevant to you; please let me know if you are unable to speak to a particular question and we will move to the next one.

Background

1. How are you involved with the Youth Justice Initiative? How familiar are you with the Youth Justice Fund?

Relevance

• 2. In your view, is the YJF still relevant/needed? What would be the impact on the youth justice system if it were not in place?

• 3. Is there a legitimate and necessary role for government in the areas of the YJF? Is the current role of the federal government appropriate, or is the program a candidate for realignment with the provinces/territories? Please explain.

• 4. Does the YJF continue to serve the public interest? Why or why not?

Design and implementation

• 5. To your knowledge, is the design of the YJF appropriate to support the objectives and intended outcomes of the YJI, as well as any identified needs and emerging issues? What is not appropriate about the design?

• 6. What efforts have been undertaken to work collaboratively with other federal departments and/or provincial/territorial jurisdictions on projects to address emerging youth justice issues? In your opinion, how effective are these interactions with other federal and provincial contacts at supporting the YJI objective to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system?

Success

• 7. I am going to list several intended outcomes of projects funded under the YJF. After I read each one, please explain whether, in your opinion, the outcome has been achieved through the projects funded. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Also, please note that it is not necessary to respond to every intended outcome.

  • Increased responsiveness to emerging youth justice issues and youth with unique needs (e.g., youth in care, youth with mental health issues, youth with FASD, Aboriginal youth, gang-involved youth and violent offenders, and drug-addicted youth)

  • Increased community involvement in the youth justice system, including collaboration between traditional and non-traditional youth justice partners

  • Increased knowledge development and collaboration amongst youth justice system stakeholders (e.g., sharing and application of best practices, skills development, and awareness of new or enhanced models)

  • Enhanced opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration of youth, including community-based youth programs and initiatives

  • Responsive policies, practices, and approaches to emerging youth justice issues

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to emerging youth justice issues

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without YJF funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 8. To what extent is the YJF supported by stakeholders, including your organization and others? What has affected the level of support?

• 9. What factors contribute to or constrain the achievement of the objectives and intended outcomes of the YJF and/or YJF-funded projects? Please describe any particular challenges or best practices.

• 10. To your knowledge, are there any unintended or unanticipated impacts that have resulted from YJF-funded projects or from YJF funding generally? Have they affected the success of the YJF? Please explain.

• 11. In your view, are there more effective ways of achieving the objectives of YJF funding? What other methods or approaches would be more effective?

• 12. Do you have any other comments or suggestions for improving the YJF?

Thank you for your participation.

Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative Funding Components
Key Informant Interview Guide for YJF Funding Recipients

The Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) of the Department of Justice Canada is a multi-faceted approach to youth justice designed to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system, defined as:

• Appropriate use of courts by youth justice officials
• Appropriate use of custody by judges
• Responses by youth justice officials that are proportionate to the severity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender
• Enhanced rehabilitative and re-integrative opportunities

The Department of Justice hired PRA Inc. to conduct the Evaluation of the YJI Funding Components. The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess the relevance, program design and implementation, success, and cost effectiveness and alternatives for each of the three funding components of the YJI for the fiscal years 2005-2006 to 2008-2009.

The Youth Justice Fund (YJF) is one of the three funding components of the YJI. The YJF provides grants and contributions to non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations, individuals, and provincial and territorial ministries responsible for youth justice in order to:

• help achieve a fairer and more effective youth justice system
• respond to emerging youth justice issues
• enable greater citizen/community participation in the youth justice system.

Key informant interviews are a major data collection activity for this evaluation. The information we gather from this interview will be summarized in aggregate form; interview notes will not be shared outside of PRA and the Department of Justice’s Evaluation Division. Not all questions may be relevant to you; please let me know if you are unable to speak to a particular question and we will move to the next one.

Background

• 1. To begin, please tell me a bit about your organization, your role and responsibilities, and how long you have been there.

• 2. Please briefly describe your funded project(s). What are your project(s)’s target groups?

Program delivery

The next few questions ask about the delivery of the Youth Justice Fund program.

• 3. Are the eligibility criteria for the YJF clear and easy to understand? Are they appropriate? Why or why not?

• 4. Does the application/proposal development process for YJF funding work effectively? Why or why not?

• 5. Is it clear how decisions are made about which projects are funded and which are not? Do you have any suggestions for improving these processes?

• 6. What assistance have you received from YJF staff? Was this assistance helpful? What other kinds of assistance are needed, if any?

• 7. Are project reporting requirements for the YJF appropriate? Why or why not? Please describe any challenges that have been encountered in reporting on activities and outcomes and any strategies used to address them.

Project outcomes

The next few questions ask about the outcomes of your project(s) funded through the Youth Justice Fund.

• 8. To what extent did your project(s) reach its/their target groups?

• 9. What partners are involved in your project(s)? Have these partnerships helped your project(s) achieve its/their objectives? Why or why not? What new partnerships were developed as a result of the project?

• 10. [YJF] I am going to list several intended outcomes of projects funded under the YJF. After I read each one, please explain whether, in your opinion, your project(s) has/have achieved the outcome. In your answer, please give specific examples of how that outcome has been achieved. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Please note that individual projects are not expected to respond to each intended outcome.

  • Increased responsiveness to emerging youth justice issues and youth with unique needs (e.g., youth in care, youth with mental health issues, youth with FASD, Aboriginal youth, gang-involved youth and violent offenders, and drug-addicted youth)

  • Increased community involvement in the youth justice system, including collaboration between traditional and non-traditional youth justice partners

  • Increased knowledge development and collaboration amongst youth justice system stakeholders (e.g., sharing and application of best practices, skills development, and awareness of new or enhanced models)

  • Enhanced opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration of youth, including community-based youth programs and initiatives

  • Responsive policies, practices, and approaches to emerging youth justice issues

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to emerging youth justice issues

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without YJF funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 11. In your view, what were the reasons the expected outcomes were achieved/not achieved? Have you encountered any challenges in achieving the expected outcomes for your project(s)? If so, what types of challenges? To what extent have you been able to overcome these challenges?

• 12. To what extent will the impacts of your project(s) continue on and/or increase over time?

• 13. To your knowledge, are there any unintended or unanticipated impacts that have resulted from your project(s) or from YJF funding generally? Please explain.

• 14. What best practices or lessons learned do you have to share from your YJF-funded project(s)?

• 15. How cost effective was/were your project(s)? How many participants took part, and what was the cost per participant? How might this compare to other possible scenarios (e.g., if a participant took part in a different project, or did not take part in any project)?

Relevance, design, and cost effectiveness of the YJF

This last set of questions asks about the relevance, design, and cost effectiveness of the Youth Justice Fund.

• 16. In your view, is the YJF still relevant/needed? What would be the impact on the youth justice system if it were not in place?

• 17. Is there a legitimate and necessary role for government in the areas of the YJF? Is the current role of the federal government appropriate, or is the program a candidate for realignment with the provinces/territories? Please explain.

• 18. Does the YJF continue to serve the public interest? Why or why not?

• 19. Is the design of the YJF appropriate to support the objectives and intended outcomes of the YJI, as well as any identified needs and emerging issues? What is not appropriate about the design?

• 20. In your view, are there sufficient opportunities for collaboration and sharing of best practices on YJF programs with federal/provincial/territorial partners and external stakeholders?

• 21. In your view, are there more effective ways of achieving the objectives of YJF funding? What other methods or approaches would be more effective?

• 22. How could the efficiency of the YJF be improved?

• 23. Are there any aspects of the YJF that should or could be transferred in whole or in part to the private/voluntary sector?

• 24. In your view, are Canadians getting value for their tax dollars from the YJF?

• 25. Do you have any other comments or suggestions for improving the YJF?

Thank you for your participation.

Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative Funding Components
Case Study Interview Guide for YJF Funding Recipients

The Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) of the Department of Justice Canada is a multi-faceted approach to youth justice designed to create a fairer, more effective youth justice system, defined as:

• Appropriate use of courts by youth justice officials

• Appropriate use of custody by judges

• Responses by youth justice officials that are proportionate to the severity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender

• Enhanced rehabilitative and re-integrative opportunities

The Department of Justice hired PRA Inc. to conduct the Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) Funding Components. The primary purpose of the evaluation is to assess the relevance, program design and implementation, success, and cost effectiveness and alternatives for each of the three funding components of the YJI for the fiscal years 2005–2006 to 2008–2009.

The three funding components are:

• Youth Justice Services Funding Program (YJSFP)

• Intensive Rehabilitative Custody and Supervision (IRCS)

• Youth Justice Fund (YJF)

Case study interviews are an important data collection activity for this evaluation. The information we gather from these interviews will be combined with file review data and summarized into a brief case study report about the program. Interview notes will not be shared outside of PRA and the Department of Justice’s Evaluation Division.

Background

• 1. To begin, please tell me a bit about your organization, your role and responsibilities, and how long you have been there.

• 2. Please briefly describe your funded project. What are your project’s target groups?

Design and implementation

• 3. How did you first learn of YJF funding?

• 4. When did your project receive funding under the YJF? Was your project developed and implemented with YJF funding, or did it exist prior to YJF funding? Would your project have been possible without YJF funding?

• 5. In addition to the funding you received from the YJF, did your project have any other sources that provided monetary or in-kind support? What were the other sources? To what extent did YJF funds assist in leveraging funding from other sources?

• 6. Are the eligibility criteria for the YJF clear and easy to understand? Are they appropriate? Why or why not?

• 7. Does the application/proposal development process for YJF funding work effectively? Why or why not?

• 8. Is it clear how decisions are made about which projects are funded and which are not? Do you have any suggestions for improving these processes?

• 9. What assistance have you received from YJF staff? Was this assistance helpful? What other kinds of assistance are needed, if any?

• 10. Are project reporting requirements for the YJF appropriate? Why or why not? Please describe any challenges that have been encountered in reporting on activities and outcomes and any strategies used to address them.

• 11. What partners are involved in your project? How many of these are justice-related organizations and how many are non-justice-related organizations? Have these partnerships helped your project achieve its objectives? Why or why not? What new partnerships were developed as a result of the project?

• 12. Has YJF funding encouraged your project to develop new partnerships and/or strengthen existing ones? In what ways?

Success

• 13. When you planned your project, what outcomes did you expect to achieve?

• 14. To what extent has your project achieved these outcomes? What evidence do you have that these outcomes have been achieved? To what extent did your project reach its target groups?

• 15. In your view, what were the reasons the expected outcomes were achieved/not achieved? Have you encountered any challenges in achieving the expected outcomes for your projects? If so, what types of challenges? To what extent have you been able to overcome these challenges?

• 16. [YJF] I am going to list several intended outcomes of projects funded under the YJF. After I read each one, please explain whether, in your opinion, your project has achieved the outcome. In your answer, please give specific examples of how that outcome has been achieved. If you are aware of any relevant information or data on these outcomes, please let me know. Please note that individual projects are not expected to respond to each intended outcome.

  • Increased responsiveness to emerging youth justice issues and youth with unique needs (e.g., youth in care, youth with mental health issues, youth with FASD, Aboriginal youth, gang-involved youth and violent offenders, and drug-addicted youth)

  • Increased community involvement in the youth justice system, including collaboration between traditional and non-traditional youth justice partners

  • Increased knowledge development and collaboration amongst youth justice system stakeholders (e.g., sharing and application of best practices, skills development, and awareness of new or enhanced models)

  • Enhanced opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration of youth, including community-based youth programs and initiatives

  • Responsive policies, practices, and approaches to emerging youth justice issues

  • More integrated, coordinated approach to emerging youth justice issues

  • Fairer, more effective youth justice system

  To what extent do you think these outcomes would have been achieved without YJF funding? What other major factors affect or influence these outcomes?

• 17. To what extent will the impacts of your project continue on and/or increase over time?

• 18. In your view, are there sufficient opportunities for collaboration and sharing of best practices on YJF programs with federal/provincial/territorial partners and external stakeholders? What best practices or lessons learned do you have to share from your YJF-funded project?

• 19. To your knowledge, are there any unintended or unanticipated impacts that have resulted from your project or from YJF funding generally? Please explain.

• 20. What are the next steps for your YJF-funded project? What happened/will happen when federal funding terminates?

• 21. In your view, are there more effective ways of achieving the objectives of the YJF funding component? What other methods or approaches would be more effective?

• 22. Do you have any other comments or suggestions for improving the YJF?

Thank you for your participation.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page