Evaluation of the Justice Canada Federal Victims Strategy

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

4 Findings

4.1 Relevance

4.1.1 Continued Need for the Justice FVS

The priorities of the Justice FVS have continued to evolve over time to align with federal priorities and to address the increased knowledge and awareness about the needs and concerns of victims and survivors of crime. To maintain relevancy and effectiveness, the Strategy has consistently used a multi-pronged approach to collaboratively identify and respond to victim issues through criminal law reform, program development and delivery, and policy development and federal leadership activities. While these methods are presented separately below, the work is conducted in tandem to identify and address victim issues. All key informants from the current evaluation, as well as from the case studies, agreed that there is an ongoing need for the Justice FVS and it was recognized that the multi-pronged approach contributes to an informed response.

Criminal Law Reform

Since its inception 20 years ago, the Justice FVS has played a key role in criminal law development and reform in order to support the federal government’s criminal justice priorities and commitments to Canadians. PCVI has brought a victim focussed policy lens to federal legislation specifically intending to benefit victims of crime, as well as proposals that may have an impact on victims of crime. PCVI has lead, drafted and supported the implementation of many legislative initiatives in addition to providing advice on federal legislative proposals and options.

In the early 2000s, numerous legislative changes promoted increased victim participation in the criminal justice system. For example, former Bill C-79 (included amendments to the Criminal Code) facilitated victims’ participation in the criminal justice system by allowing them to present Victim Impact Statements at trial and any subsequent parole hearings.^{Endnote 5} Legislative changes at that time also reflected government priorities to protect child victims of crime. For example, in 2006, provisions of former Bill C-2 (An Act to Amend the Criminal Code [Protection of Children and Other Vulnerable Persons] and the Canada Evidence Act)) enhanced jurisdictions’ capacity to provide higher quality TAs to vulnerable victims (e.g., children). This measure helped increase the number of victims willing to participate in court and improved the overall experience of victims of crime in the criminal justice system.^{Endnote 6}

Significant legislative amendments after 2010 further enhanced increased consideration in the criminal justice system for victims of crime. In 2015, former Bill C-32, the Victims Bill of Rights Act (VBR) enacted the stand-alone Canadian Victims Bill of Rights (CVBR), which provided to victims of crime, for the first time in Canada’s history, statutory rights at the federal level to information, protection, participation and to seek restitution, as well as ensuring that a complaint process is in place for breaches of these rights by a federal department or agency.^{Endnote 7} In addition, with policy and legal contributions from PCVI, support for victims of online crime was further bolstered in 2015 with the assent of former Bill C-13 (Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act), which among other provisions prohibited the non-consensual distribution of intimate images.^{Endnote 8} Federal priorities to protect victims of sexual-violence and gender-based violence were reflected in more recent legislative amendments, for example in June 2019 when former Bill C-75^{Footnote iii} enhanced victim safety and toughened criminal laws in the context of intimate partner violence.^{Endnote 9}

In 2018 the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), in their decision in R v. Boudreault, ruled that the mandatory victim surcharge regime was unconstitutional, and the court struck down the victim surcharge regime in its entirety. Before the SCC’s decision in Boudreault, the victim surcharge was imposed automatically on sentencing and no judicial discretion to waive the mandatory surcharge was provided. Former Bill C-75 re-enacted the victim surcharge regime in 2019 with greater judicial discretion to impose the surcharge. The victim surcharge is an important source of revenue for PT delivered victim services that work directly with victims and survivors of crime.

As the only centre of expertise for victim issues at the federal level, key informants indicated PCVI played an important advocacy role in ensuring a victim focused policy lens was considered during criminal law reform. Further, PCVI was able to draw on its FPT networks (e.g., PT victim services representatives, other federal government departments, and federal research partners such as RSD and Statistics Canada) to support legislative changes that were evidence-informed and relevant to victim needs. PCVI provided legal and policy advice, and/or assistance with the implementation of 13 legislative amendments related to victims of crime over the period of this evaluation, which suggests continued role for the Justice FVS in criminal law development, reform and implementation.

Funding for Program Development and Delivery

Justice Canada funding for victims initiatives has increased over time, approximately $2M per year in 2000-01 to $29M in 2019-20.^{Endnote 10Endnote 11} Gs&Cs through the Victims Fund for program development and delivery were identified by all key informants as an integral component of the Justice FVS. The Victims Fund provided essential funding to PTs and NGOs to provide victim services, deliver specialized pilot projects in their jurisdictions, and to promote awareness and understanding of victims issues through policy related activities. Key informants reported that most of the funded activities would not have been possible without the support of the Victims Fund due to limited budgets and competing priorities, especially for smaller or Northern PTs and services providers.

Need for the Victims Fund for program development and delivery was further demonstrated by the sustained demand for the funding, with 1820 applications received from PTs and NGOs/CBOs during the evaluation period (Table 4). Of these, 73% of applications were approved. The most common reason for applications to be rejected included “insufficient resources in the fund,” suggesting a strong need for the Fund, followed by “did not meet the terms and conditions of the fund.”

An additional 3,037 applications were approved for direct financial assistance through the Victims Fund between 2015-16 and 2019-20 (i.e., assistance for victims to attend PBC hearings, and assistance for Canadians victimized abroad to attend hearings in other countries). Victims can apply directly to these funding streams for financial support and these applications are approved if they meet the requirements.

Policy Development and Federal Leadership

Since its inception, a focus of the Justice FVS has been developing policy and providing federal leadership on victim issues and programs. Many key informants indicated that without the leadership and support of PCVI, these important policy activities and resources would not be available.

Examples of PCVI’s work in these areas since the early 2000s includes: developing and disseminating research and public information regarding victim issues; sponsoring the National Victims and Survivors of Crime Week; developing and disseminating PLEI materials for victims, criminal justice system professionals (i.e., victim services, Crown, police, etc.) and the general public; and delivering national training for criminal justice system professionals through regularly hosted knowledge exchanges and webinars on a variety of victim issues.^{Endnote 12Endnote 13Endnote 14}

In terms of federal collaboration, PCVI co-chairs the Federal Working Group on Violence and Victimization and provides policy and legal advice and assistance to federal officials on their work that impacts victims and survivors. For example, PCVI is working with Women and Gender Equality Canada (WAGE) on the Gender-Based Violence National Action Plan and is leading justice policy work on family violence and intimate partner violence. In addition, PCVI has supported the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) in their work to advance their victim policy and support for families of MMIWG (which transitioned to a new victim services unit in RCMP headquarters).

More recently, PCVI is supporting the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Seniors in their recent direction to explore and consider, among other initiatives, what improvements can be made to the Criminal Code to ensure our seniors are protected and that the provisions in the Criminal Code ensures that the criminal law adequately responds to those who abuse or neglect seniors (a focus area reiterated in the 2021 Mandate Letter). Further, PCVI worked closely with Statistics Canada, through the Canadian Center for Justice Statistics (CCJS), to support expanded methods for northern data collection through the General Social Survey on Victimization (collected every five years) and to explore feasibility and options around the collection of national data on victimization.

The FPTWG has been a consistent feature of the Justice FVS’s response to victim needs. As Secretariat of the FPTWG, PCVI works to bring those responsible for victim policy, legislation and programming together to facilitate discussion, networking, sharing of best practices, and collaboration around different areas related to victims issues and services.^{Endnote 15} Current membership of the FPTWG includes PCVI, Directors of PT Victim Services, PBC, the RCMP, CSC, PSC, Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC), Statistics Canada, and ESDC. Membership has increased to reflect the growing awareness over the last several years about the experiences of particular communities of victims and a more holistic understanding of the impact of crime that has evolved over the past several years (this is evident through the more recent inclusion of PHAC and ESDC in the WG).

Key informants indicated the Justice FVS played an essential role in leading centralized coordination and collaboration among FPT partners to support a consistent, yet flexible approach to identifying and addressing the needs of victims across Canada (e.g., through the FPTWG and development and support of national networks for the FILU and CAC initiatives where stakeholders from across the country met on a regular basis to collaborate and share successes and challenges). This was particularly important due to the broad scope of justice issues and the multi-tiered nature of Canada’s justice system.

Relevance of the Justice FVS in the Context of Ongoing and Emerging Needs of Victims

Overall, self-reported victimization rates declined somewhat between 2004 and 2014, although victimization rates for sexual assault remained relatively stable over this period. However, rates of violent victimization are significantly higher for women, Indigenous persons (particularly women), persons with disabilities, and youth, supporting a need to prioritize these groups.^{Endnote 15}

There is also a growing body of research which supports the need for culturally safe and trauma-informed approaches to victim services and supports as well as the adoption of technological supports to enhance existing services, suggestive of an ongoing need to support these approaches to victim services.

The specific needs of particular communities of victims who face significant challenges and barriers in relation to access to justice^{Footnote iv} were also identified by key informants who noted that the trauma that many victims experience as a result of being harmed can be a significant factor in an individual’s ability to access victim services. At the same time, that experience of trauma can also be exacerbated by services offered.

Key informants also noted that certain communities of victims are hesitant to engage with the criminal justice system, or feel intimidated. Many victims, survivors and family members do not trust the justice system. Factors influencing these experiences include the type of offense (e.g., intimate partner violence, homicide), the legacy and ongoing impact of colonization, racism, poverty and marginalization, and other factors, which require special considerations. Commonly identified under-served communities included: individuals living in rural, remote, and Northern communities (including Indigenous communities); racialized communities (e.g., Black Canadians); newcomers and non-official language speakers; victims of gender-based violence such as victims of sexual assault, intimate partner violence or human trafficking; victims who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex, and two-spirit (LGBTQQI2S); persons with disabilities and seniors; families of missing and murdered Indigenous peoples; victims of cybercrime; families of homicide victims; and people experiencing homelessness and poverty.

Some emerging needs were also identified. For example, due to the COVID-19 pandemic isolation measures, rates of gender-based violence and violence against children have increased.^{Endnote 16Endnote 17Endnote 18Endnote 19} There has been a notable increase in cybercrime in recent years, which has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic.^{Endnote 20Endnote 21} In addition, large societal shifts in awareness of issues faced by certain communities of victims, such as the Me Too movement, National Inquiry into MMIWG, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and Black Lives Matter have brought greater attention and focus to the needs of these communities of victims. With the implementation of the CVBR, victims are also more aware of their rights and are articulating the need for more responsive services.^{Endnote 22} Taken together, these factors have changed expectations of society and victims and put greater demand on victim services at the PT and NGO levels. Pressure on victim services has been further exacerbated by legal system delays and a need to provide services for a longer period.^{Endnote 23}

This highlights the need for continued effort of the Justice FVS, in conjunction with FPT partners, to focus on responding to these ongoing and emerging needs through trauma-informed, culturally safe approaches through its mandate, reach and resources. Almost all key informants recognized that there were not enough resources in the Justice FVS to address all victim issues, or all communities of victims. While there was awareness of these gaps and barriers, priorities were informed by research and FPT consultations. The focus of the Justice FVS on, for example, child victims, families of MMIWG, victims of gender-based violence, victims with disabilities, increased access to TAs, as well as culturally safe and trauma-informed methods of service design and delivery such as the FILU model of service and sexual assault training, was in line with trends in victimization and research on victim issues.

4.1.2 Consistency with Government Priorities, Federal Roles and Responsibilities

Alignment of Government Priorities and Justice FVS Activities

The Government of Canada (GOC) has prioritized victims of crime since the early 2000s with the creation of the Victims of Crime Initiative, and later creating and making permanent, the Justice FVS. Specific priorities to support victims of crime were emphasized in foundational federal documents (i.e., 2015 and 2019 Throne Speeches and Ministerial Mandate Letters, and fiscal budgets) and included priorities surrounding families of MMIWG, child victims of crime, victims of gender-based violence, victims of hate speech, and other victims associated with gun crime and gang-related violence.^{Endnote 24Endnote 25Endnote 26Endnote 27Endnote 28Endnote 29Endnote 30Endnote 31} Government priorities regarding victims of crime were further delineated in Justice departmental reports, which highlighted strategic priorities established to ensure an accessible, efficient, and fair system of justice, with a focus on victims’ rights, reconciliation, gaps in services to Indigenous people and MMIWG, child victims of crime, exit strategies for prostitution, elder abuse and Canadians victimized abroad.^{Endnote 32Endnote 33}

In alignment with federal priorities, the Justice FVS aims to increase access to justice for victims of crime through its legislative, program and policy activities, all designed to work in concert to achieve the most positive impact. For example, the Justice FVS supported several specialized initiatives through policy initiatives and project funding to respond to GOC priorities. Many of which were in direct response to support legislative changes enacted through former Bill C-32 (VBR) which enacted the stand-alone CVBR in 2015, and former Bill C-51 which further clarified and strengthened Canada’s sexual assault laws (for more information, see Appendix D: Legislative Amendments Related to Victims of Crime), as well as other key events such as the National Inquiry Into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. Some examples of specialized initiatives include:

• Implementation of the CVBR: Since 2015, the objective of Justice FVS activities in this area have been focused on increasing the ability of victims and survivors of crime to exercise their rights under the CVBR, specifically the rights to information, participation, protection, and the right to seek restitution.
• Sexual Assault Initiatives: Since 2016, the objectives of these initiatives were to enhance the criminal justice system response to adult victims and survivors of sexual assault, improve their access to justice and services, and by doing so increase their confidence in the justice system.^{Endnote 34}
• Families of MMIWG: Since 2016, the initiatives in this area were used to develop and support programs and partnerships to ensure families had access to up-to-date information about their missing or murdered loved ones and access to trauma-informed and culturally-grounded grief and trauma counseling or support.^{Endnote 35}
• CACs: Federal support for CACs began in 2010-11 and expanded during the evaluation period. The objectives of Justice FVS activities in this area have been focused on supporting the development and enhancement of CACs, building their capacity to provide services that reduce trauma to youth and child victims, and increasing their access to services and supports. CACs bring together a multi-disciplinary team to provide coordinated and comprehensive services such as forensic interviewing activities, specialized mental health services, and victim advocacy and support services (e.g., court preparation and support).^{Endnote 36}

Federal partners and departmental personnel respondents agreed that the legislative, program and policy activities of the Justice FVS aligned with federal roles and responsibilities and that the Justice FVS operated within its mandate according to the constitutional division of powers and responsibilities. The Justice FVS provided federal leadership supporting inter-jurisdictional cooperation (e.g., FPTWG) and amending criminal law, while PTs enacted PT victim legislation and delivered victim services.

4.2 Performance

4.2.1 Enhanced Capacity for PTs and NGOs/CBOs to Deliver Services that Respond to Victims Needs

Funding Provided Through the Victims Fund

Federal Leadership and Policy Support

4.2.2 Increased Awareness of Victim Issues, Legislation, and Services

National Victims and Survivors of Crime Week

The National Victims and Survivors of Crime Week (NVSCW) started in 2006.^{Footnote vii} For the past 15 years, this prominent annual initiative aims to give a more effective voice to victims and survivors of crime and their families, raise awareness about the important role they have in the criminal justice system, call attention to the services and assistance available to victims and survivors of crime and their families in local communities, encourage idea-sharing and networking, and celebrate and recognize those who support victims and survivors of crime and their families.

Over the evaluation period, PCVI hosted five NVSCW which included in-person symposia under the following themes: The Power of Our Voices (2016), Empowering Resilience (2017), Transforming Culture Together (2018), and The Power of Collaboration (2019). In 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, PCVI hosted a virtual on-line event, Recognizing Courage, Renewing Commitment. Funding was also available for NGOs to conduct local awareness raising events as part of the NVSCW. Examples of events and activities that NGOs organized included workshops and information sessions, public awareness events, and training for victim services professionals. Audiences for these activities commonly included victims and survivors of crime, the public, justice system professionals, and NGOs.

Other PCVI Led Awareness Raising Events and FPT Collaboration Activities

PCVI led several other events and produced a significant number of informational resources to support those working in the justice system, NGOs, the public, and other stakeholders to have greater awareness and understanding of victim issues, legislation, and services in Canada. PCVI collaborated at the FPT level and supported collaboration and knowledge exchange across Canada. Importantly, these efforts supported PTs and NGOs to develop and deliver responsive victim services in their jurisdictions, and encouraged conversations among justice system professionals, government officials and other stakeholders regarding the rights of victims and criminal law reform. To this end, PCVI hosted 24 events including national knowledge exchanges (6), WebExs/webinars (12), other in-person learning events, and awareness raising activities sponsored or hosted by PCVI with participants from other countries.^{Footnote viii} Examples of topics covered at these events included:

• Restorative justice, including victim-centered approaches, the role of the victim in restorative justice processes, and international information and approaches
• Supporting families of MMIWG, including models (e.g. FILUs), practices, and new approaches
• Trauma-informed approaches, including understanding secondary trauma and supporting victim resilience
• TAs, including best practices providing TAs in rural and remote areas
• Enhancing victims’ and survivors’ voices within the criminal justice system
• CACs, specifically supporting child victims of crime through a child-centred multi-disciplinary response
• Supporting specific communities of victims including persons with disabilities, women, and seniors
• Developing and implementing a restitution program as well as a victim complaints resolution mechanism
• Creating and implementing policies and initiatives to help transform the culture of the criminal justice system
• Exploring collaborative and multidisciplinary approaches to victim services provision

Impacts of Awareness Raising Activities:

Attendees at these events included victim services personnel and other criminal justice professionals, NGOs, government officials, victims and survivors of crime and advocates, and subject matter experts. Surveys were completed in 15 out of the 24 awareness raising events. Some key findings include:

• Awareness or knowledge of issues was rated as high or very high by 74% of participants after attending the events compared to approximately 41% of participants before attending the events (based on surveys at 15 of the events)
• 87% were satisfied or very satisfied with the information presented (based on surveys at 8 of the events)
• 70% were satisfied or very satisfied with the learning opportunity (e.g., learning about best practices and solutions) (based on surveys at 4 of the events)
• 93% were satisfied or very satisfied with the overall event (based on surveys at 3 of the events).

Most key informants indicated these events raised the awareness of the complexity of victim issues and the barriers different groups face in accessing services. Most of them indicated these events highlighted the need to think holistically about the issues (e.g., multidisciplinary models of care, trauma-informed approaches, after care support), and acted as a catalyst for the justice system and society to consider how to better support victims of crime through responsive victim services and legislation. Importantly, all key informants who had attended these events said it provided opportunities for attendees to engage with one another and share promising practices and knowledge on a national level, and it was commonly suggested by them that PCVI host more of these events. Attendees were able to adapt promising practices and models that they learned about within their own jurisdictions and contexts for more responsive services and policies, which key informants highly valued.

PLEI Materials and Informational Resources

In support of increasing awareness and understanding around victim rights and available services, PCVI developed a suite of PLEI materials and other informational resources which outlined victim-related provisions in the Criminal Code and CVBR. These resources were developed for a wide audience. Some examples included:

• Fourteen (14) factsheets on victim rights and the CVBR, 7 CVBR infographics and other tools, and a CVBR Brochure to support understanding of the new legislation^{Endnote 47Endnote 48Endnote 49}
• Quick information on topics such as general information about TAs, publication bans, and TAs for young victims and witnesses.
• Eight (8) family violence related resources, translated into 12 languages for newcomers and 12 Indigenous languages^{Endnote 50}
• Production of a video on victim involvement in an Indigenous Justice Program, developed in collaboration with the Indigenous Justice Program and the Communications Branch
• Maintenance of the Victim Services Directory website to help NGOs, victims, and individuals locate services for victims of crime across Canada, determine which services may be required, link organizations and victims, and help all individuals access victim services^{Endnote 51}

Impacts of PLEI Materials and Informational Resources:

In general, key informants who were aware of these materials, particularly PT representatives, were satisfied with the resources and found them useful. For example, they indicated that materials created and utilized for victims and witnesses, such as children and their parents and vulnerable adults, provided useful information about TAs that were available and the process for applying for and using them. However, some of the key informants, particularly NGOs, were not aware of these PCVI produced materials and expressed interest in learning more. In particular, fact sheets created for TAs were reported to provide justice professionals with awareness of TAs, important information on Criminal Code changes, and foundational knowledge on how to meet the needs of victims and witnesses using TAs.

Funded Awareness Raising Activities by PTs and NGOs

In addition to PCVI led awareness raising activities, the Victims Fund provided support to PTs and NGOs/CBOs to deliver events and projects that raised awareness and provided training on victim issues, legislation, and available services. Some common activities conducted by PTs and NGOs included outreach and community events, information sessions, resource materials (e.g., brochures, fact sheets), training/workshops (e.g., topics about trauma-informed approaches and cultural safety), and educational resources (e.g., guides and online courses). Examples of common topics covered for these activities included:

• Families of MMIWG and Indigenous victims of crime
• Victims and survivors of sexual violence and intimate partner violence, particularly among Indigenous communities, newcomer communities, and students and youth
• Information and navigational support for the criminal justice system and other services available for victims

These activities were commonly attended by justice system professionals, NGOs, victims and survivors of crime, and the public. Findings from the Victims Fund file review characterised the attendance at these events as good or strong. FILU key informants reported that a large component of FILU services was conducting outreach, such as visiting communities to build relationships, hosting community events and gatherings for families, and networking with or presenting to Indigenous organizations, NGOs/CBOs, and justice system professionals such as the police.

A deeper examination was conducted of Victims Fund supported initiatives for victims of sexual assault that took place in 2018-19 to provide some specific examples of the types of awareness raising activities funded by the Justice FVS:

• In New Brunswick, 499 participants attended community outreach presentations and workshops/training regarding sexual assault and 21,229 people were reached through the province’s #RelationshipGoals Campaign.
• In Manitoba, 164 participants attended training and community awareness sessions regarding sexual assault and 1,000 sexual assault information brochures were distributed.
• In Quebec, 42 organizations from 6 regions participated in 20 sexual assault workshops/trainings.
• In Ontario, 7 online fact sheets were published by a services provider to break down barriers to criminal justice for women who experience sexual assault (information about views and uptake were not provided).

Impacts of Awareness Raising Activities by PTs and NGOs:

PTs and NGOs reported their awareness raising activities and outreach by FILUs increased the knowledge and competence of justice system professionals, other NGOs, as well as the public regarding victim issues. It was further reported by PTs and NGOs that information and navigation services provided directly to victims received positive feedback for increasing awareness of their rights, the legal system, and available supports and services (e.g., TAs, counselling, independent legal advice).

Need for Continued Efforts to Raise Awareness:

There remains a continued need for ongoing and enhanced awareness raising through the Justice FVS to increase awareness among victims and survivors about their rights, victim-centered practices in service delivery and awareness about victim services. Some examples identified were supports for families of MMIWG and for victim services professionals and those interacting with victims related to using TAs (e.g., increase understanding of why they are used and how they support the victim or witness to provide their testimony through more training).

4.2.3 Improved Legislative and Policy Responses for Victims

Legislative and Policy Responses

Results indicated the activities of the Justice FVS played a key role in criminal law development and reform. In particular, PCVI provided a victim focused policy lens to help ensure that victim rights and issues were considered as criminal law reforms were developed. PCVI also leveraged its policy development work and leadership activities to inform relevant legislative changes and support coordinated implementation across FPT partners. At the same time, the Victims Fund supported implementation of victim legislation and new criminal justice system partnerships and practices in support of victims of crime.

Legislative Amendments for Victims

A total of 11 legislative amendments related to victims and survivors of crime received royal assent between 2015-16 and 2019-20 and PCVI played an integral role in providing a victim focused policy lens to ensure the impact on victims rights was considered. Across these legislative amendments, PCVI’s role varied from providing updates to the FPTWG to ensure they were aware of the initiatives, providing policy or legal advice on the reforms, or in some cases leading, drafting, and/or supporting the implementation of the legislation. Some specific amendments included:

• C-51: Anti-terrorism Act (2015)
• C-32: Victims Bill of Rights Act enacted the stand-alone CVBR (2015)
• C-74: An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 27, 2018 and other measures (2018)
• C-51: An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Department of Justice Act and to make consequential amendments to another Act (2018)
• C-77: An Act to amend the National Defence Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts (the Act) (2019)
• C-75: An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Youth Criminal Justice Act and other Acts and to make consequential amendments to other Acts (2019)
• C-59: An Act respecting national security matters (2019)

Appendix D provides additional information on each of these legislative amendments.

Policy Development and Leadership Activities

PCVI provided assistance to support the federal government and PTs with the implementation of new legislation, primarily through policy development, leadership activities and research. RSD, in partnership with the Justice FVS, undertook research, to support legal and policy development relating to victims of crime. Some examples of the reforms that benefited from PCVI implementation efforts include:

• CVBR. For former Bill C-32^{Footnote ix}, PCVI supported coordination and collaboration to implement the CVBR including presentations on the CVBR to raise awareness among criminal justice professionals, organized, and delivered training and webinars, and created PLEI materials. Specifically, in partnership with RSD, 12 publications were released relating to the CVBR (e.g., infographics, annual reports, and articles on victims of crime demographics, the right to information, victim impact statements, CVBR complaints mechanisms, and strategies for assessing the impact of the CVBR) as well as a website to increase knowledge about the CVBR.
• Sexual Assault Criminal Code Provisions. For former Bill C-51^{Footnote x}, PCVI co-led the ad hoc Coordinating Committee of Senior Officials Working Group on Access to Justice for Adult Victims of Sexual Assault and coordinated the drafting of the Working Group’s report entitled Reporting, Investigating and Prosecuting Sexual Assaults Committed against Adults.^{Endnote 52} PCVI also hosted a knowledge exchange on the criminal justice system response to adult sexual assault. Finally, in partnership with RSD, 21 publications were released relating to adult victims of sexual offenses such as fact sheets, surveys, research papers and articles on the impacts of trauma, trauma and violence informed approaches, restorative justice, resources available, and the economic impact of sexual assault.
• Military CVBR. For former Bill C-77, PCVI supported FPT consultations as well as provided policy advice to the DND on development and implementation options.
• Victim Surcharge Criminal Code provisions. During R v Boudreault and following the SCC decision, PCVI supported ongoing discussions with FPT partners regarding impacts, options, and next steps in ensuring that the Victim Surcharge provisions met the direction provided by the SCC, and updated related PLEI materials.

In addition, PCVI regularly engaged the FPTWG and other stakeholders to identify implementation challenges related to federal victim legislation and sought opportunities to address the challenges through the Strategy. The FPTWG collaborated on other topics such as efforts to modernize Canada’s criminal justice system (e.g., with restorative justice practices), Indigenous overrepresentation in the criminal justice system, and issues of domestic and sexual violence (e.g., measures proposed by former Bills C-51 and C-75).^{Endnote 53} PCVI also worked with departmental and interdepartmental colleagues to provide advice on legislation that impacted victims of crime.

PTs and NGOs were provided funding under the Victims Fund to conduct their own policy work to support responsive services and respond to legislative changes. Providing this funding for the jurisdictions to carry out their own policy and research activities ultimately contributed to improved legislative and policy responses to victims and survivors, by allowing policy and research activities to be tailored to the unique needs of the jurisdictions. In particular, funding supported PTs and NGOs/CBOs to develop materials (e.g., policy papers, updated policy documents to respond to legislative changes) and carry out consultations (e.g., with partners working in the criminal justice system such as police as well as other stakeholders such as family services). Many PT and NGO/CBO recipients also conducted research and evaluation activities to learn more about needs of victims of crime and the effectiveness of services and supports provided.

4.2.4 Demonstrated Leadership in the Area of Victim Issues within the Federal Government and Across Canada

Coordinated and Collaborative Approach

During the years covered by the evaluation, the Justice FVS utilized a coordinated and collaborative approach to engage FPT partners and establish close working relationships, identify shared priorities, and promote exchange of information and promising practices to advance consistent responses to victim issues. While previous sections of the report have outlined various Justice FVS leadership activities, the following provides a summary of interrelated leadership in relation to the multi-pronged approach, both from the federal and national perspectives. Leadership was also closely examined in the previous Justice FVS evaluation which included recommendations related to enhancing engagement, coordination, and information sharing between FPT victim services.^{Endnote 54}

Continuing to foster collaboration between PCVI and IAID was identified as important as the Strategy relies heavily on the interconnectedness of policy, programming, and law reform activities to ensure that the activities of the Justice FVS and associated funding agreements remain relevant and coordinated. It was also identified that it is important to include RSD in these collaborations to ensure research is integrated into both policy as well as program activities.

Federal Focused Leadership

Through criminal law reform and policy development activities, the Justice FVS provided important legal and policy leadership at the federal level. In addition to providing leadership on several pieces of legislation and decisions related to victim rights (e.g., CVBR, R v Boudreault, etc.), PCVI was a leading authority on providing policy and legal advice to other federal departments. Some examples of this included collaboration and policy advice with ESDC regarding senior abuse, with PSC regarding human trafficking, as well as with DND regarding victim legislation and services. In addition, PCVI is the co-chair with (WAGE) on the Interdepartmental Working Group on Violence and Victimization and the lead on the Justice Pillar for the Gender Based Violence National Action Plan in addition to policy work related to family violence and intimate partner violence. Strong collaboration between PCVI and the RCMP to support families of MMIWG was also noted.

National Focused Leadership

The Justice FVS also provided important leadership at the national level through policy development and program development and delivery activities. Some examples of this included:

4.2.5 Improved Criminal Justice System Responses to Victims and Increased Access to Responsive Services that Support Victims

Through its multi-pronged approach, the Justice FVS advanced several specific victim-focused initiatives where evidence demonstrated increased access to responsive services for victims across Canada while improving the experience of victims in the criminal justice system and supporting their well-being beyond the criminal justice system. Key informants spoke to the positive impacts of the Justice FVS with respect to multiple aspects of the Strategy, including that these initiatives encouraged the development and delivery of innovative and multidisciplinary models which provided services in a trauma-informed and/or culturally sensitive manner. In order to provide a more detailed examination of the impacts, additional information is provided based on a few selected areas of focus for the evaluation - TAs in the context of CVBR implementation, supports and services for families of MMIWGs and for victims of sexual assault.

Testimonial Aids as a Component of CVBR Implementation

The CVBR recognizes four rights for victims and efforts have been made to implement that legislation through program and policy efforts. One aspect of implementation of the CVBR includes support for the implementation of access to TAs. Former Bill C-32 gave all victims of crime the right to request a TA when they testify as a witness in criminal court (among other rights) and judges can now consider whether the TA would facilitate a full and candid testimony, as opposed to whether its use is necessary. The result is that it is now easier for judges to order a testimonial aid for adult witnesses.^{Footnote xi} To this end, the Justice FVS enhanced the ability of PTs to respond to the needs of children and some vulnerable adult victims and witnesses, particularly in cases of sexual assault and intimate partner violence. This was achieved through:

• Increased funding levels for PTs to implement TAs (i.e., a substantial three-fold increase of up to $250,000 per PT).
• Policy (e.g., training, fact sheets, resource materials such as case law reviews) and research guidance (e.g., evidence informed best practices in TA use) from PCVI and RSD to support implementation.
• Consistent collaboration between departmental staff and the PTs regarding challenges and good practices (e.g., FPT conference calls, knowledge exchanges, webinars).

Results of the evaluation indicated the following impacts related to improved justice system response and increased access to justice, as well as any challenges and opportunities for improvement.

Challenges and Lessons Learned:

Key informants identified several challenges that occurred across the jurisdictions with regards to implementing and using TAs. Challenges included accessing TAs in rural and northern areas, resistance to TAs from some justice professionals, technological and logistical issues with using CCTV, barriers to applying for a TA, problems with the witness screens, as well as challenges with building layouts and logistics. Lessons learned and best practices for dealing with some of these challenges included purchasing more equipment to expand availability of TAs, providing training and collaborating with justice professionals regarding which TAs were available, how to use them, and why they should be used, as well as identifying a witness’ need for TAs early and making applications as soon as possible.

Opportunities for Improvement:

At the federal level, key informants identified opportunities for improvements to reporting and monitoring of TA usage across jurisdictions, increased communication and collaboration across the sections of Justice Canada involved with Justice FVS administration and the PTs, and continued research in areas relevant to gaps in TAs. From the perspectives of the PTs, there were suggestions of including support animals as eligible TAs and continuing funding to support access to CCTV/videoconferencing and soft waiting rooms.

Supports and Services for Families of MMIWG

Through the CVBR, victims and their surviving family members have a right to information, on request, about the criminal justice system and their role, including the status and outcome of the investigation into the offence. The Justice FVS also enhanced the capacity of PTs and Indigenous community organizations to ensure that families of MMIWG had access to all the available information they were seeking about their loved ones, as well as access to trauma-informed, culturally-grounded services and supports. This was achieved by supporting:

• The development of a new model of victim services/support for family members of MMIWG – FILUs;
• Indigenous CBOs to design and deliver culturally-grounded healing supports for families of MMIWG (e.g., family gatherings, Elder services, counselling, smudging, healing on the land, sweats, beading);
• Training for justice system professionals regarding how to work with families in a respectful, trauma-informed and culturally grounded manner; and
• National collaboration on FILU delivery and awareness raising (e.g., FILU National Network Secretariat, FPTWG collaboration, RCMP collaboration, federal virtual FILU team, research).

Impacts:

There was increased responsiveness of services by supporting the creation of a team to work directly with and for families to access information they were seeking about their missing or murdered loved ones in a culturally-grounded, trauma-informed manner, where previously there was a longstanding lack of information or misinformation. Families appreciated the increased access to justice system professionals who could provide the information they were seeking and noted that the efforts made by those officials demonstrated that their loved ones mattered. Further, opportunities for families to access services and supports that were trauma-informed, culturally-grounded, and driven by the needs of the family were also enhanced.

Several new partnerships were formed and/or strengthened between FILUs and justice system professionals, which ultimately contributed to an improved response to families by the justice system. Through partnering with FILUs, system officials (e.g. police, coroners, prosecutors) reflected on their operations as they learned more about the impact their actions and inactions have had on families. They also learned more about trauma-informed practices for working with families, and building and redefining relationships with families grounded in recognition, respect, and understanding.

Opportunities for Improvement:

Key informants were also asked for their suggestions on how to improve the program design and delivery as well as the services and supports provided by FILUs and CBOs. Some of the key suggestions included: permanent funding for FILUs and CBOs, increased awareness about the services and supports offered by FILUs and CBOs through training and knowledge exchange as well as CBO resources for outreach, continued support for collaboration (e.g., FILU Network), offering support for murdered and missing Indigenous men and boys through the FILUs, and continued increased access to aftercare supports for families, including culturally-grounded healing supports and counselling as well as more services in communities and/or additional resources for travel. In addition, although standardized templates were developed to assist in reporting on FILUs, it was noted that performance measurement and reporting could be enhanced through more consistent use and application of the templates.

Further, key informants were asked for their suggestions on how to improve the experience of families of MMIWG more generally in the justice system. They identified the importance of making the justice system safer by providing access to Indigenous victim services providers that are situated outside of government/police buildings, as well as offering trauma-informed practice training for all justice personnel, incorporating ceremony into the system (e.g., smudging before court), utilizing Elders as support people, and having more dialogue and collaboration among justice system professionals on how to support families of MMIWG (e.g., how to provide seamless, wraparound support).

Supports and Services for Victims of Sexual Assault

Key Findings regarding Justice FVS supports for victims of sexual assault included criminal law reform through former Bill C-51, which enacted several legislative reforms to clarify and strengthen Canada’s sexual assault regime. Additionally, the Justice FVS enhanced the capacity of PTs and NGOs to respond to the needs of victims of sexual assault, particularly as it related to their interactions with the justice system. This was achieved through:

• Providing Victims Fund funding for PTs to pilot specialized projects and services that were unique to their jurisdictions and for NGOs to enhance existing services for victims of sexual assault, as well as funding for both PTs and NGOs to provide training for justice professionals and other front-line workers to effectively work with victims of sexual assault (e.g., trauma-informed approaches to working with victims of sexual assault).
• Policy support to raise awareness of sexual assault laws (e.g., fact sheets, resource materials), enhance the capacity of professionals to work with victims of sexual assault (e.g., knowledge exchange), and collaboration and networking coordination to support identification of issues and sharing of promising practices (e.g., FPTWG, federal working groups).

Impacts:

The Justice FVS contributed to an improved justice system response to victims of sexual assault by providing information for justice professionals about the unique and complex issues faced by these victims, as well as increasing awareness of appropriate methods to provide services to these victims (e.g., trauma and violence-informed practices). This improvement was achieved through a significant amount of awareness raising activities conducted by both PCVI and funding recipients related to sexual assault, including developing and delivering fact sheets, resources materials, research, workshops, and knowledge exchanges (e.g., raising the awareness of the Philadelphia Model) as well as extensive federal consultations through the Coordinating Committee of Senior Officials Working Group on Access to Justice for Adult Victims of Sexual Assault.

The Justice FVS increased access to responsive services for victims of sexual assault through supporting the development and scaling of specialized services, such as the Independent Legal Advice (ILA) pilot projects occurring across Canada.^{Footnote xii} Key informants noted that the ILA projects filled a recognized gap in the system (e.g., funding barriers for legal advice) and increased the confidence of victims to be able to access and navigate the system (if they chose to do so). ILA funding was not part of the original CFP for sexual assault initiatives. It was later considered after some PTs demonstrated success with their pilot projects and shared these benefits with PCVI, IAID, and the FPTWG. Other PTs have since accessed the funding to implement their own ILA pilot projects for victims of sexual assault in their jurisdictions, which further demonstrates the importance of the Justice FVS leadership and facilitation activities across PTs to support increased access to new pilot services.

Challenges:

Many key informants noted that the ongoing sustainability of these projects and whether funding would be available after the pilots were completed was a challenge. It was further identified by most key informants that more support is needed for victims of sexual assault, particularly as it pertains to information for navigating the criminal justice system, as well as therapeutic services to support healing from their victimization. Male victims of sexual assault were also identified as needing additional support in these areas.

Financial Assistance for Canadians to Attend Parole Board of Canada Hearings and for Canadians Victimized Abroad

In addition to funding and support provided through the Justice FVS to support PTs and NGOs in the delivery of victim services, direct financial assistance for victims was also available. From 2015-16 to 2019-20, over $4M in contributions were provided directly to victims of crime through two funding streams to support victims’ access (i.e., attendance and participation) to criminal justice system proceedings: financial assistance for federally registered victims to attend PBC hearings, and assistance for Canadians victimized abroad to attend hearings in other countries. Funding for services which supported victims beyond the justice system where the victim has no other source of financial assistance was also available, such as financial support for professional counselling and funeral expenses for Canadians victimized abroad.

The funding was identified as being particularly helpful in reducing financial hardship for victims to participate in the criminal justice system process, as well as in helping to offset costs associated with their victimization. The following table outlines the eligible expenses for these funding streams, as well as the number of approved applications during the years covered by the evaluation.

Impacts - Parole Board Funding:

During the evaluation period, 503 victims^{Footnote xiii} who received financial assistance under the Parole Board funding stream completed surveys about the financial assistance received. Responses show that approximately 90% of recipients reported:

• The funding was useful or very useful in reducing financial hardship
• The funding was somewhat or very important for supporting their attendance and participation in the hearings
• They were satisfied or very satisfied with the funding they received

Respondents commonly expressed gratitude for the financial support they received through the Victims Fund, explaining that they found it important to attend PBC hearings but faced financial hardship to do so. For instance, a third of recipients (33%) reported that they would not have attended the hearings if financial assistance had not been available, largely due to the unaffordability of travel expenses, particularly where travel to other provinces was involved, as well as concerns around lost wages. Further, approximately half (46%) of respondents received financial assistance for a support person, particularly for costs associated with accompanying them to the hearing (i.e., travel), as well as a smaller number who received support for childcare costs.

Recipients also described various ways in which attending PBC hearings affected their experience with the justice system. They commonly discussed how attendance increased their understanding of the process and access to information, sometimes increasing their confidence in the criminal justice system as a result. Other effects of attendance noted by some included feeling heard, contributing to their healing journey, and having positive interactions with victim services personnel (e.g., they were kind, respectful).

Impacts - Victims Abroad Funding:

During the same timeframe, 12 victims^{Footnote xiv} who received financial assistance under the Victims Abroad funding stream completed surveys about the financial assistance received.^{Endnote 57} Funding was most frequently used for counseling expenses (for two-thirds of recipients), followed by medical expenses, and travel expenses (e.g., returning to Canada or returning to the country where the crime occurred for the purpose of testifying). All of the recipients indicated that they would not have been able to fully cover these costs without funding through the Victims Fund. Finally, 92% were satisfied or very satisfied with how they were treated in their experience with the Victims Fund.

4.2.6 Access to Activities and Services for Specific Communities of Victims

GBA+ Considerations and Program Design

The document review indicated the Justice FVS is to be guided by a GBA+ lens during legal, policy and program development and implementation activities to ensure groups that have unique needs within the criminal justice system are considered. In particular, the Justice FVS Performance Information Profile includes a comprehensive section on GBA+ considerations, including for specific communities of victims such as women and Indigenous people (including reference to the GOC Truth and Reconciliation report). It was further noted by several key informants that the flexible design of the Victims Fund funding agreements allowed for adaptation and response to the unique needs of communities of victims that were identified in the jurisdictions of PTs and NGOs.

Justice FVS and GBA+ Activities

Results indicated that through PCVI activities (e.g., FPT collaboration and research), evidence-based issues and promising practices for specific communities of victims were identified to help inform relevant law reform, policy development, and responsive Victims Fund funding streams. More specifically, Justice FVS led and participated on working groups examining specific victim issues (e.g., Indigenous justice), hosted knowledge exchanges and symposia on FILUs and vulnerable victims such as children, persons with disabilities, and seniors, and identified and raised awareness of trauma informed approaches for working with sexual assault victims, as well as created PLEI materials and informational resources that were translated into official and other non-official languages. In addition, funding was available for PTs and NGOs to design and deliver specialized services as well as conduct policy activities related to specific communities of victims. These communities included human trafficking victims, victims of sexual offences, child victims of crime, Indigenous victims and families, senior victims, and victims with disabilities. Travel funds were also available for rural and remote victims living in the territories.

4.3 Program Design, Delivery and Efficiency

4.3.1 Flexibility and Clarity of the Victims Fund Agreements

Structure of the Victims Fund Agreements

The Terms and Conditions of the Victims Fund agreements outlined criteria and expectations to support the delivery of activities that address FPT priorities, yet were open and flexible to support PTs to undertake programming and or policy initiatives that were unique and adapted to their jurisdictions (e.g., either program development and delivery or policy development).^{Endnote 58} For example, northern representatives expressed a greater need to spend funds on technology that would support remote work of victim services workers and connection to rural and remote areas (e.g., cell phones for communities). The flexible nature of the agreements also allowed the Strategy to pivot and respond to issues that were brought to the forefront (e.g., sexual assault in light of the Me Too movement).

Further, all the PT respondents agreed that they were able to reallocate unspent funds across activities or fiscal years within their five-year agreement, when needed. This flexibility to amend agreements was identified as an important element of the Victims Fund agreements, as priorities changed over the PT five-year agreement period. The table below outlines the amendments made to the most recent PT five-year Victims Fund agreements. Of the 13 PTs, 10 requested an amendment to an agreement, with an average of 3 amendments each (ranging from 1 to 5 amendments among the 10 PTs requesting amendments). The most common reason for an amendment was an increase in funding. Funding increases were requested most often for addressing sexual assault (e.g., sexual violence, intimate partner violence) and developing ILA and legal representation programs after some PTs showed success with these initiatives (some with a focus on Indigenous communities). The second most common request was increased funding for CVBR implementation and the purchase of additional TAs, particularly after the Terms and Conditions were changed to allow for renovation improvements to courthouses such as separate entrances, soft waiting rooms, and rooms for CCTV.

PT respondents also identified good working relationships with IAID including regular dialogue and early and open discussions about options for funding and possible amendments. Further, some PT respondents indicated that PCVI conducted consultations with PTs to identify shared priorities so that funding opportunities and agreements were more relevant to their needs. It was identified by several key informants that additional consultations could occur with PTs as well as NGOs to continue to inform relevant priority areas and associated funding opportunities (i.e., to ensure good uptake of the funding stream). Some priority areas were identified by PT and NGO/CBO key informants as having strong consultations (e.g., FILUs, CACs, CVBR), but they also indicated there was room for improvement for other priority areas (e.g., persons with disabilities, restorative justice).

Funding Criteria Guidelines for the Victims Fund

The Victims Fund criteria are clearly described, well-organized and easily accessible online. The Fund website provides an overall description of the funding purpose and has developed individual pages to describe funding criteria guidelines for different funding streams.^{Endnote 59} Web pages include detailed information on funding criteria guidelines, such as eligible applicants, funding objectives, priority areas and suggested project types, descriptions of activities that are not eligible for funding, and areas for consideration to improve chances of having a successful application.^{Endnote 60} The site also provides a handbook on contribution funds for NGOs, which “is designed as a reference tool to help funding recipients better understand and comply with the financial requirements described in contribution agreements.”^{Endnote 61}

Funding criteria guidelines were generally clear for PT and NGO respondents, and they noted that IAID was responsive when clarification or support was needed. However, many PT key informants noted that there can be a lot of ongoing conversations and negotiations between themselves and the program staff to finalize their five-year agreements, particularly around the amount of funding available. Departmental personnel indicated funding criteria guidelines provided clear direction for policy and program analysts to determine if projects fit within the scope of Victims Fund, with degrees of flexibility and discretion, but that new applicants or analysts may need additional support to understand the Victims Fund and all its components (e.g., an onboarding package).

4.3.2 Efficiency of the Victims Fund Agreements

Victims Fund Budgeted and Expended Resources

During the years covered by the evaluation, the Victims Fund was expended $116M (93%) of the total $125M allocated (see Table 13 below). The Victims Fund experienced a lapse of funds each year during the evaluation period, with the highest percentage lapse (24%) in 2016-17, but had a reduction to 2% in the last two years of the evaluation period (2018-19 and 2019-20). Several key informants indicated that efforts were made to communicate with recipients early in the year to increase spending in other areas to reduce the lapse of funds, which was aided by the relationships IAID had established with PTs and the flexibility of the Victims Fund agreements. In addition, reduction in lapsed funds may have also been due to the progression of the longer-term agreements and fewer calls for proposals being released with additional available funds (e.g., only two CFPs were launched between 2017-18 and 2019-20).

Several factors were identified as having contributed to a larger lapse in 2016-17. For example, 2016-17 was the first year of the PT five-year agreements and a large amount was allocated to certain funding streams like the implementation of the CVBR, which was not initially utilized (e.g., the CVBR had been recently released and PTs were still identifying how to respond). In addition, due to government changes and budgeting decisions, a high number of Victims Fund CFPs were announced between June and December 2016, which aligned with an increase in available funds to spend for the year (i.e., there was a parliamentary cycle in 2016 with new government directions on funding). There were some challenges with timely application processing times which affected the ability of PTs and NGOs to spend funds within the fiscal year (as discussed further under departmental service standards). In addition, recipients sometimes notified departmental personnel of their inability to spend all anticipated funds late in the fiscal year, at which point it is challenging to make adjustments to avoid lapses.

Processing Times for Justice FVS Funding Applications

The Justice FVS uses a Selection Committee including representatives from IAID, PCVI and occasionally RSD, to review applications and identify which projects will be funded. Departmental service standards for applications that were fully completed and had received a funding decision were met at least 80% of the time for acknowledgement, funding decision, and payment.

Service standard calculations were measured from the date when the application was fully completed, not the date the application was originally submitted (i.e., often after applications are submitted, the program asks the applicant for additional information or documentation and the application is not considered complete until all materials are submitted). Therefore, the service standards are representative of all applications with a decision date within the fiscal year, and calculated based on the time from application completion (not application submission) to the time of decision.

Many key informants, particularly PTs and some NGOs, identified long application processing times and CFPs released mid-year as challenges to planning projects and spending funds. Departmental personnel agreed that the application finalization and decision process for some applications could be lengthy. This was primarily due to ongoing conversations and negotiations between the program and the applicant to receive final information and documents to complete the application prior to it being considered for funding, particularly for the first year of the PT five-year agreement. Departmental informants also noted that processing times could be lengthy for some of the high demand Victims Fund funding streams (e.g., NVSCW). Similar findings related to lengthy application processing times were found in the 2016 evaluation.^{Endnote 62}

These findings suggest that application processing times continue to be lengthy for some applicants, which may be associated with both the time to complete the applications as well as the time to render a decision. This may result in efficiency challenges within the Victims Fund in terms of approving and subsequently distributing funds as well as efficiency challenges for the recipients in terms of planning and delivering their projects and services. In addition, due to the way the service standards are calculated, it is challenging to determine the extent of the issue. For instance, it is not known how many applicants are affected by lengthy review processes or the average amount of time it takes from time of initial submission of the application to the funding decision.

Victims Fund Project Reporting

There was inconsistent data collected from PTs and NGOs/CBOs regarding the activities funded under the Victims Fund, primarily due to differences in reporting practices. For example, there was a lack of consistent quantitative information from recipients across activities as well as a lack of concise and targeted qualitative information to support accessible performance data in some instances. There is a need for more consistent data collection across recipients through an enhanced performance measurement strategy (e.g., identification of key data to be collected, better reporting templates and instructions for recipients, etc.). One suggestion was to provide a guidebook to applicants that would provide clear expectations and instructions on how to report back to the Justice FVS on Victims Fund activities.

Further, Justice data management systems for tracking the activities of the Victims Fund were identified as a challenge for regular monitoring of the Strategy and could use improvement (e.g., difficult to easily access information on CFPs, applications, rejections, amendments, activities, outcomes, etc.).

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

Date modified:

2021-08-13