Legal Aid Program Evaluation, Final Report
Appendix D: Difference between Financial Guidelines and Low Income Cut-Offs
Table 1: Percentage difference between provincial financial guidelines and LICOs* (1992 base) (Population: rural areas)
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | 7.7% | 6.3% | 7.0% | -17.4% | -13.9% | -8.6% | -2.1% | 8.4% | -54.2% | 108.5% | - |
| 2 | 32.8% | 3.2% | 10.5% | 14.7% | -0.3% | -9.1% | 4.9% | 8.8% | -48.2% | 102.9% | - | |
| 3 | 24.5% | 12.9% | 14.9% | 6.4% | -3.9% | -21.2% | 2.4% | 10.1% | -55.4% | 105.5% | - | |
| 4 | 10.4% | 3.7% | 11.1% | -1.0% | -10.2% | -23.0% | -4.6% | 9.7% | -61.9% | 81.8% | - | |
| 5 | 6.9% | 4.8% | 12.4% | -3.1% | - | -20.2% | -6.2% | - | -64.3% | 86.5% | - | |
| 6 | 4.7% | 1.3% | 9.3% | - | - | -17.1% | -8.2% | - | -66.0% | 78.2% | - | |
| 7+ | 1.9% | 0.2% | 6.9% | - | - | -14.5% | -9.7% | - | -66.6% | 82.0% | - | |
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | 38.9% | 19.8% | -10.1% | -30.7% | -1.4% | -2.2% | -17.8% | 1.3% | -61.6% | 75.1% | 36.9% |
| 2 | 59.1% | 21.9% | -7.2% | -3.7% | 12.7% | - | -11.9% | 1.7% | -56.5% | 70.4% | 44.7% | |
| 3 | 63.9% | 39.3% | -3.5% | -10.7% | 1.3% | - | -14.0% | 2.9% | -62.6% | 72.6% | 42.0% | |
| 4 | 60.4% | 20.7% | -6.7% | -16.9% | -14.5% | -0.8% | -19.9% | 2.5% | -68.0% | 52.6% | 29.3% | |
| 5 | 66.3% | 14.0% | -5.6% | -18.6% | - | - | -21.2% | 2.0% | -70.0% | 56.7% | 22.7% | |
| 6 | 73.3% | 9.9% | -8.2% | - | - | - | -22.9% | - | -71.4% | 49.6% | 11.6% | |
| 7+ | 79.0% | - | -10.3% | - | - | - | -24.2% | - | -72.0% | 52.9% | 2.6% | |
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family - LICO) / LICO] * 100
Table 2: Percentage difference between provincial financial guidelines and LICOs* (1992 base) (Population of 30,000 or less)
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | -5.9% | -6.6% | -5.9% | -27.4% | -24.8% | -20.1% | -14.0% | -4.8% | -60.0% | 82.2% | - |
| 2 | 16.1% | -9.3% | -2.8% | 0.8% | -12.9% | -20.6% | -7.8% | -4.4% | -54.8% | 77.3% | - | |
| 3 | 8.8% | -0.8% | 1.0% | -6.5% | -16.0% | -31.2% | -10.0% | -3.2% | -61.0% | 79.6% | - | |
| 4 | -3.5% | -8.9% | -2.4% | -13.0% | -21.5% | -32.7% | -16.2% | -3.5% | -66.7% | 58.8% | - | |
| 5 | -6.6% | -7.9% | -1.2% | -14.8% | - | -30.3% | -17.5% | - | -68.8% | 63.0% | - | |
| 6 | -8.5% | -11.0% | -3.9% | - | - | -27.5% | -19.3% | - | -70.3% | 55.7% | - | |
| 7+ | -11.0% | -11.9% | -6.1% | - | - | -25.3% | -20.7% | - | -70.9% | 59.0% | - | |
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | 21.4% | 4.7% | -21.0% | -39.1% | -13.9% | -14.5% | -27.8% | -11.0% | -66.4% | 53.0% | 19.7% |
| 2 | 39.0% | 6.5% | -18.4% | -15.3% | -1.5% | - | -22.6% | -10.6% | -62.0% | 48.9% | 26.4% | |
| 3 | 43.3% | 21.7% | -15.2% | -21.5% | -11.5% | - | -24.4% | -9.6% | -67.3% | 50.8% | 24.1% | |
| 4 | 40.1% | 5.5% | -18.0% | -26.9% | -25.3% | -13.4% | -29.6% | -9.9% | -72.1% | 33.4% | 13.0% | |
| 5 | 45.3% | -0.4% | -17.0% | -28.5% | - | - | -30.7% | -10.4% | -73.8% | 36.9% | 7.2% | |
| 6 | 51.4% | -4.0% | -19.3% | - | - | - | -32.2% | - | -75.1% | 30.8% | -2.5% | |
| 7+ | 56.4% | - | -21.1% | - | - | - | -33.4% | - | -75.5% | 33.6% | -10.4% | |
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family - LICO) / LICO] * 100
Table 3: Percentage difference between provincial financial guidelines and LICOs* (1992 base) (Population of 30,000 to 99,999)
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | -15.6% | -14.5% | -13.9% | -33.6% | -32.6% | -28.4% | -21.3% | -12.8% | -64.1% | 63.3% | - |
| 2 | 4.0% | -17.0% | -11.1% | -7.7% | -21.9% | -28.8% | -15.6% | -12.5% | -59.4% | 58.9% | - | |
| 3 | -2.5% | -9.2% | -7.6% | -14.4% | -24.7% | -38.3% | -17.7% | -11.5% | -65.1% | 61.0% | - | |
| 4 | -13.5% | -16.6% | -10.7% | -20.4% | -29.6% | -39.7% | -23.3% | -11.7% | -70.2% | 42.4% | - | |
| 5 | -16.3% | -15.7% | -9.6% | - | - | -37.5% | -24.5% | - | -72.0% | 46.1% | - | |
| 6 | -18.0% | -18.5% | -12.1% | - | - | -35.0% | -26.1% | - | -73.4% | 39.6% | - | |
| 7+ | -20.2% | -19.4% | -14.0% | - | - | -33.0% | -27.4% | - | -73.9% | 42.6% | - | |
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | 8.8% | -6.1% | -27.7% | -44.2% | -22.8% | -23.4% | -33.9% | -18.5% | -69.9% | 37.1% | 7.3% |
| 2 | 24.6% | -4.5% | -25.4% | -22.5% | -11.7% | - | -29.1% | -18.2% | -65.9% | 33.5% | 13.3% | |
| 3 | 28.4% | 9.1% | -22.4% | -28.1% | -20.7% | - | -30.9% | -17.3% | -70.7% | 35.2% | 11.2% | |
| 4 | 25.6% | -5.5% | -25.0% | -33.1% | -33.0% | -22.3% | -35.6% | -17.5% | -75.0% | 19.5% | 1.3% | |
| 5 | 30.2% | -10.7% | -24.1% | -34.6% | - | - | -36.6% | -18.0% | -76.5% | 22.7% | -3.9% | |
| 6 | 35.7% | -13.9% | -26.2% | - | - | - | -38.0% | - | -77.6% | 17.2% | -12.6% | |
| 7+ | 40.2% | - | -27.8% | - | - | - | -39.0% | - | -78.1% | 19.7% | -19.7% | |
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family - LICO) / LICO] * 100
Table 4: Percentage difference between provincial financial guidelines and LICOs* (1992 base) (Population of 100,000 to 499,999)
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | -16.7% | -15.1% | -14.5% | -34.0% | -33.4% | -29.3% | -21.8% | -13.4% | -64.6% | 61.3% | - |
| 2 | 2.8% | -17.5% | -11.7% | -8.3% | -22.9% | -29.7% | -16.1% | -13.0% | -59.9% | 56.9% | - | |
| 3 | -3.7% | -9.8% | -8.2% | -15.0% | -25.7% | -39.1% | -18.2% | -12.0% | -65.5% | 59.0% | - | |
| 4 | -14.6% | -17.1% | -11.2% | -20.9% | -30.5% | -40.4% | -23.8% | -12.3% | -70.5% | 40.6% | - | |
| 5 | -17.3% | -16.2% | -10.1% | -22.5% | - | -38.3% | -25.0% | - | -72.4% | 44.3% | - | |
| 6 | -19.0% | -19.0% | -12.6% | - | - | -35.8% | -26.6% | - | -73.7% | 37.8% | - | |
| 7+ | -21.2% | -19.9% | -14.6% | - | - | -33.9% | -27.9% | - | -74.2% | 40.8% | - | |
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | 7.4% | -7.3% | -28.2% | -44.6% | -23.8% | -24.3% | -34.3% | -19.0% | -70.3% | 35.4% | 5.9% |
| 2 | 23.1% | -5.7% | -25.8% | -23.0% | -12.8% | - | -29.6% | -18.7% | -66.4% | 31.8% | 11.9% | |
| 3 | 26.8% | 7.8% | -22.9% | -28.6% | -21.7% | - | -31.3% | -17.8% | -71.0% | 33.5% | 9.8% | |
| 4 | 24.1% | -6.6% | -25.4% | -33.5% | -33.9% | -23.3% | -36.0% | -18.0% | -75.3% | 18.0% | 0.0% | |
| 5 | 28.6% | -11.9% | -24.5% | -35.0% | - | - | -37.0% | -18.5% | -76.8% | 21.2% | -5.1% | |
| 6 | 34.0% | -15.0% | -26.6% | - | - | - | -38.3% | - | -77.9% | 15.8% | -13.7% | |
| 7+ | 38.5% | - | -28.3% | - | - | - | -39.4% | - | -78.3% | 18.2% | -20.7% | |
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family - LICO) / LICO] * 100
Table 5: Percentage difference between provincial financial guidelines and LICOs* (1992 base) (Population of 500,000+)
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | -29.5% | -26.9% | -26.3% | -43.2% | -43.7% | -40.2% | -32.6% | -25.4% | -70.1% | 36.4% | - |
| 2 | -13.1% | -29.0% | -23.9% | -21.0% | -34.8% | -40.5% | -27.8% | -25.1% | -66.1% | 32.7% | - | |
| 3 | -18.5% | -22.3% | -20.9% | -26.8% | -37.2% | -48.5% | -29.5% | -24.2% | -70.8% | 34.4% | - | |
| 4 | -27.8% | -28.6% | -23.5% | -31.8% | -41.2% | -49.6% | -34.3% | -24.5% | -75.1% | 18.9% | - | |
| 5 | -30.1% | -27.8% | -22.6% | -33.3% | - | -47.8% | -35.4% | - | -76.6% | 22.0% | - | |
| 6 | -31.5% | -30.3% | -24.7% | - | - | -45.7% | -36.8% | - | -77.8% | 16.6% | - | |
| 7+ | -33.3% | -31.0% | -26.4% | - | - | -44.1% | -37.9% | - | -78.2% | 19.1% | - | |
| Province | BC | AB2 | MB | ON3 | QC4 | SK5 | NS6 | PE7 | NL8 | NT9 | YK10 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Family size | 1 | -9.1% | -21.6% | -38.1% | -52.3% | -35.5% | -36.0% | -43.4% | -30.3% | -74.9% | 14.5% | -10.4% |
| 2 | 4.1% | -20.3% | -36.1% | -33.7% | -26.3% | - | -39.3% | -30.0% | -71.6% | 11.5% | -5.4% | |
| 3 | 7.2% | -8.9% | -33.6% | -38.5% | -33.8% | - | -40.8% | -29.2% | -75.5% | 12.9% | -7.1% | |
| 4 | 4.9% | -21.0% | -35.8% | -42.8% | -44.1% | -35.1% | -44.9% | -29.4% | -79.1% | -0.2% | -15.4% | |
| 5 | 8.8% | -25.5% | -35.0% | -44.0% | - | - | -45.8% | -29.8% | -80.4% | 2.5% | -19.8% | |
| 6 | 13.4% | -28.1% | -36.8% | - | - | - | -46.9% | - | -81.3% | -2.1% | -27.0% | |
| 7+ | 17.1% | - | -38.2% | - | - | - | -47.8% | - | -81.7% | 0.0% | -32.9% | |
Note: Percentages calculated as [(Highest contribution level for size of family - LICO) / LICO] * 100
- * BC, SK, QC, NL, NWT and YK were compared to after tax LICOs; MB, ON, NS, PE were compared to before tax LICOs; AB was compared to before tax LICOs in 2001 and to after tax LICOs in 2010.
- 1LICOs for 2010 were not available and were therefore calculated as LICO2010 = LICO1992 x CPI2010 / CPI1992 (Source: Statistics Canada. [2010]. Low income cut-offs. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010005/lico-sfr-eng.htm).
- 2For 2010, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 6+.
- 3For 2001, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 5+. For 2010, financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 5+.
- 4Quebec separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Ranged from 1 adult and 0 children to 2 adults and 2 children or more.
- 5For 2001, guidelines were provided for families with number of children, where family was defined as one or two-parent household. Family with 2 children was chosen for calculation. Ranged from single to family with 8 children. Only family sizes of 1 and 4 were provided for 2010.
- 6Nova Scotia separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size.
- 7Financial eligibility guidelines ranged from 1 to a family size of 4 in 2001 and 1 to a family size of 5 in 2010.
- 8Newfoundland and Labrador separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Ranged from 1 adult and 0 children to 2 adults and 6 children or more.
- 9The Northwest Territories separates its financial eligibility guidelines by zone in the territory. The middle level was chosen (Zone 5).
- 10Yukon separates its eligibility guidelines by single and two-parent families. The higher financial guideline was chosen for each calculation, which was the two-parent family guideline for each applicable family size. Financial eligibility guidelines for 2001 were not available for Yukon.
- Source for LICOs: Statistics Canada. (2010). Low income cut-offs (1992 base) before tax. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75f0002m/2010005/tbl/tbl02-eng.htm
- Date modified: