National Anti-Drug Strategy Evaluation

Appendix E: Evaluation Instruments (cont)

LEARNING CIRCLE – DRUG STRATEGY COMMUNITY INITIATIVES FUND

Vancouver, BC
March 16, 2011

Structure of the Learning Circle:

Questions:

1. Briefly describe your project and specify to each of the following issues your project is particularly contributing to:

2. What part of your project is/was innovative?

Write-up – What have you learned about the DSCIF? What will you be taking away from this discussion?

3. What evaluation activities have you done as part of your project (formal and informal) and what are the results?

4. What lessons have you learned from conducting this particular project? What would you do differently if you want to do it again in order to be more successful? How will this learning be used going forward?

5. Given what we’ve learned and the possible legacy going forwards, was the DSCIF an effective way to dealing with youth and drug issues?

Write-up – What have you learned about the DSCIF? What will you be taking away from this discussion?

LEARNING CIRCLE – RCMP’S ABORIGINAL SHIELD PROGRAM

Saskatoon, SK
May 20, 2011

Structure of the Learning Circle:

Questions:

1. Name at least one particular and current need in your community which could be addressed, in part, by the Aboriginal Shield Program (ASP).

2. To which of the following do you think ASP can contribute more and why:

Write-up – What have you learned about the ASP from this part of group discussion?

3. In what other youth-driven activities have you been involved in the past? How do these activities relate to or compare with ASP?

4. What part of ASP would be new or innovative in your community?

5. What challenges or gaps do you expect to experience when delivering ASP?

6. What lessons have you learned during this training session with respect to approaches and practices that are effective in delivering substance abuse prevention programs for youth?

7. How will you use this learning going forward?

Write-up – What will you be taking away from this part of discussion? What have you learned from this part of group discussion?

LEARNING CIRCLE – YOUTH JUSTICE ANTI-DRUG STRATEGY

Ottawa, ON
March 10, 2011

Structure of the Learning Circle:

Questions:

Round 1:
Round 2 - 4: Questions About Each Selected Topic
Round 5: Question About the Strategy

Given what we’ve learned and the possible legacy going forwards, was the National Anti-Drug Strategy and more specifically the Youth Justice Anti-Drug Strategy, an effective way to dealing with these issues?

Round 6: Wrap-up

What will you be taking away from these sessions?

LEARNING CIRCLE – NATIONAL YOUTH INTERVENTION AND DIVERSION PROGRAM (NYIDP)

Grande Prairie, AB
March 17, 2011

Structure of the Learning Circle:

Discussion 1:

1. Briefly describe your organization and your role/involvement in the NYIDP.

2. Based on your experience and learning from the NYIDP, specify to which of the following issues the NYIDP is particularly contributing to and explain how:

Write-up – What have you learned about the potential impacts and contributions of NYIDP? What will you be taking away from this discussion?

Discussion 2:

1. Given what you have learned, how effective is the NYIDP as a way of dealing with youth and drug issues? Any examples, successful and unsuccessful stories?

2. What lessons have you learned from your involvement in the NYIDP? How will this learning be used going forward?

3. What would you like to be different about the NYIDP in order for the program to be more successful?

Wrap-up – What have you learned about the effectiveness of the NYIDP? What will you be taking away from this discussion?

Prevention Action Plan Case Study Interview

The Government of Canada has a long history in the horizontal management of drug issues. Following the Canada’s Drug Strategy (CDS), which had focused on substance use and abuse since 1978, the National Anti-Drug Strategy (the Strategy) was initiated in 2007. The Strategy is a horizontal initiative of twelve federal departments and agencies, led by the Department of Justice Canada. The goal of the Strategy is to contribute to safer and healthier communities through coordinated efforts to prevent use, treat dependency and reduce production and distribution of illicit drugs. The Strategy has three major activity areas:

  1. Prevention Action Plan;
  2. Treatment Action Plan; and
  3. Enforcement Action Plan.

Ference Weicker & Company, a management consulting firm, has been hired by the Department of Justice to evaluate the Strategy. As part of this evaluation, we are conducting interviews with representatives from organizations and departments that have been involved with the Strategy in different ways. The information we collect from you will be held confidential and will be reported only in summary form with the responses of other representatives whom we interview.

CONTACT INFORMATION

A. EFFECTIVENESS

1. We understand that you were involved with the project(s) supported through the National Anti-Drug Strategy. What was your role with respect to this project?

2. What led to the development of the project?

3. Was the project developed in response to the availability of funding from the Strategy or was it already being considered or developed?

  1. Developed in response to funding from the Strategy
  2. Was already planned
  3. Other
  4. Don’t know/don’t recall

Comments?

4. Apart from the funding provided by the Strategy, what other sources of funding were used for this project?

5. What was the total budget for the project? (confirm)

6. What is the current status of the project?

  1. Completed (when)
  2. Ongoing
  3. Suspended (started but not completed)
  4. Hasn’t started
  5. Cancelled
  6. Other
  7. Don’t know/don’t recall

Comments?

7. What did you see as the primary objectives of the project? What key issue or issues was the project designed to address?

8. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all successful, 3 is somewhat successful and 5 is very successful, how successful do you think the project has been in achieving these objectives?

8a. Why do you say that?

9. In what respects has the project been particularly successful?

10. In what respects has the project been less successful?

11. The projects funded through the Strategy vary widely in terms of types of impacts they generate. To what extent has this project generated the following impacts to date, on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact at all in that area, 3 is somewhat of an impact, and 5 is a major impact:

12. What other positive or negative impacts were generated?

13. What are some of the key factors that contributed to the success of the project?

14. What do you see as some of the factors that have constrained the success?

15. What actions have been taken since the project was completed? How are the results being used? By whom?

16. Looking back over your involvement in this project, what do you see as some of the key lessons that have been learned and best practices that have developed?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!

Treatment Action Plan Case Study Interview

The Government of Canada has a long history in the horizontal management of drug issues. Following the Canada’s Drug Strategy (CDS), which had focused on substance use and abuse since 1978, the National Anti-Drug Strategy (the Strategy) was initiated in 2007. The Strategy is a horizontal initiative of twelve federal departments and agencies, led by the Department of Justice Canada. The goal of the Strategy is to contribute to safer and healthier communities through coordinated efforts to prevent use, treat dependency and reduce production and distribution of illicit drugs. The Strategy has three major activity areas:

  1. Prevention Action Plan;
  2. Treatment Action Plan; and
  3. Enforcement Action Plan.

Ference Weicker & Company, a management consulting firm, has been hired by the Department of Justice to evaluate the Strategy. As part of this evaluation, we are conducting interviews with representatives from organizations and departments that have been involved with the Strategy in different ways. The information we collect from you will be held confidential and will be reported only in summary form with the responses of other representatives whom we interview.

CONTACT INFORMATION

A. EFFECTIVENESS

1. We understand that you were involved with the project(s) supported through the National Anti-Drug Strategy. What was your role with respect to this project?

2. What led to the development of the project?

3. Was the project developed in response to the availability of funding from the Strategy or was it already being considered or developed?

  1. Developed in response to funding from the Strategy
  2. Was already planned
  3. Other ( )
  4. Don’t know/don’t recall

Comments?

4. Apart from the funding provided by the Strategy, what other sources of funding were used for this project?

5. What was the total budget for the project? (confirm)

6. What is the current status of the project?

  1. Completed (when)
  2. Ongoing
  3. Suspended (started but not completed)
  4. Hasn’t started
  5. Cancelled
  6. Other
  7. Don’t know/don’t recall

Comments?

7. What did you see as the primary objectives of the project? What key issue or issues was the project designed to address?

8. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all successful, 3 is somewhat successful and 5 is very successful, how successful do you think the project has been in achieving these objectives?

8a. Why do you say that?

9. In what respects has the project been particularly successful?

10. In what respects has the project been less successful?

11. The projects funded through the Strategy vary widely in terms of the types of impacts they generate. How much, if at all, has this project generated the following impacts to date, on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact at all in that area, 3 is somewhat of an impact, and 5 is a major impact:

12. What other negative or positive impacts were generated?

13. What are some of the key factors that contributed to the success of the project?

14. What do you see as some of the factors that have constrained the success?

15. What actions have been taken since the project was completed? How are the results or tools being used? By whom?

16. Looking back over your involvement in this project, what do you see as some of the key lessons that have been learned and best practices that have developed?

17. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding outcomes relevant to the project (e.g. recent performance reports, surveys, research reports)?

18. We are looking to conduct interviews with 3-4 stakeholders that have been involved with the project. Are there any other individuals you would recommend we contact to get feedback on the outcomes and impacts of the project?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!

Cost-Efficiency Analysis Template

As part of the evaluation of the National Anti-Drug Strategy, we are collecting data on those components which provided funding for projects. More specifically, we are collecting data on:

We will aggregate the results and compare the National Anti-Drug Strategy with other federal horizontal strategies in order to provide information on how program dollars are used.

The attached form is provided to obtain data on your component.

Contact Information

Check the program for which the form is completed

Start Date of the Program

Established:

Cost-Efficiency Template

Budget, Expenditures and Staffing
Applications Processed, Approved and Funded
Target Groups
Project Outputs
Project Completion