Evaluation of the Aboriginal Justice Strategy

Appendix A: Evaluation Issues and Questions

Evaluation Issues Evaluation Questions
Relevance
Continued need for Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS) 1. To what extent is there a continuing need for the AJS?
2. Are there any emerging needs?
Alignment with government priorities and departmental strategic outcomes 3. To what extent are the AJS objectives aligned with Government of Canada priorities?
4. To what extent are the AJS objectives aligned with the strategic priorities of the Department of Justice?
Alignment with federal roles and responsibilities 5. To what extent do the AJS activities/objectives align with federal roles and responsibilities?
A justice system that responds to the needs of Aboriginal people by providing culturally relevant information and services 6. To what extent have the AJS community-based programs contributed to a justice system that responds to the needs of Aboriginal people by providing culturally relevant programming, information and services?
7. Has the AJS contributed to increasing access to community-based programs for Aboriginal people?
8. To what extent has the AJS increased knowledge, skills and capacity to offer community-based programs (new and enhanced)?
9. To what extent has there been increased capacity for networking and collaboration at the community level?
Federal policy that addresses the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people in the Canadian justice system 10. To what extent has there been increased federal, provincial and territorial collaboration and integration to address Aboriginal overrepresentation in the Canadian criminal justice system?
11. What policy activities were undertaken to address the overrepresentation of Aboriginal people in the Canadian justice system?
Aboriginal communities are more involved in local justice administration 12. To what extent do the AJS programs increase Aboriginal community involvement in the administration of justice services?
13. Are there other ways that the AJS programs could be more involved in the administration of justice services?
14. What are some promising practices?
Relevant Aboriginal cultural values are reflected in the Canadian justice administration 15. To what extent are the community-based justice programs recognized as a culturally relevant alternative to the mainstream justice system?
16. To what extent have the community-based programs established links with the mainstream justice system?
17. To what extent have links with the mainstream justice system improved the delivery of community-based justice programming and services?
Reducing crime and incarceration rates in communities with AJS programs 18. To what extent is the AJS contributing to reduced rates of crime and incarceration among Aboriginal people in communities operating AJS programs?
19. What factors contributed or prevented individuals from completing AJS programs?
Safer and healthier communities 20. To what extent and in what ways do AJS programs contribute to increasing community safety and community wellness?
Design and delivery 21. Are there any best practices or lessons learned in the delivery of the AJS?
22. Since the last evaluation, has the data collection system been adequate to support AJS monitoring and reporting requirements?
23. How has the cost-shared design contributed to the efficiency of the AJS?
Economy 24. How did the resources used affect the results achieved?
Operational efficiency 25. Are the Community-Based Justice Fund and the Capacity-Building Fund being administered efficiently?
Allocative efficiency 26. What cost savings were achieved for the mainstream justice system as a result of the AJS?

 

Date modified: