Directorates
·	Director General's Office
·	Data Development
·	Strategic Evaluations
·	Partnership and Continuous Evaluations
Publications
·	Evaluation Reports
·	Evaluation Briefs
·	Labour Market Development Agreement Series
·	Lessons Learned Series
·	Evaluation Tool Kit Series
·	Evaluation Forum Newsletter
·	From Theory To Practice

Continuing Validity of Program Rationale

The rationale for the CPP disability (CPPD) program continues to be appropriate. It provides virtually universal coverage to employees and the self -employed, minimum protection for those who might not be able to afford private coverage. Stakeholders support the program and the federal administrative role.

Reasons for Recent Caseload Increase

The rise in CPP disability caseloads, especially over the 1991-94 period, were primarily due to economic fluctuations, expanded eligibility due to legislative changes, and referrals from provincial social assistance and private disability insurance plans. But the past trend towards the rapid increase in caseloads has recently been reversed, and caseloads are now dropping. The issue of the extent to which disability pensions may have been awarded to mildly or moderately disabled persons for economic reasons, and as a 'bridge' to retirement, could not be resolved with the data at hand.

While the QPP disability (QPPD) program has a proportionately lower disability caseload, a higher percentage of persons with disabilities are receiving social assistance in Quebec than in the other provinces.

Adequacy of Earnings Replacement

The CPP disability program is an important source of earnings for disabled persons (meeting 52% of the average annual income in 1994 of respondents to a CPPD beneficiary survey). Earnings replacement levels exceed the 1964 White Paper target of 25% at the average wage.

Eligibility Criteria and Adjudication

Historically more people and in particular women (expressed as a fraction of the population) have been eligible for CPPD than QPPD. Legislated eligibility was expanded for CPPD when a lesser number of contributory years was required, starting in 1987, and retroactive applications for benefits permitted in 1992. Until 1993, QPPD applied stricter eligibility and adjudication criteria and exhibited a more pre-retirement focus than did CPPD. Since 1993, QPPD eligibility requirements can also be met through a 'recency of work' test identical to that for CPPD disability benefits.²⁰

CPPD administration has been relatively constant in its adjudication of applications for benefits. There is no evidence that more generous CPPD adjudication resulted in inappropriate increases in grants. But CPPD adjudication is less rigid and allows more scope for discretionary judgement than some other countries and the QPPD.

Rehabilitation

While a 1995 Statistics Canada CPP disability beneficiaries survey indicated that the client population generally comprises people who are unable to undertake regularly "substantially gainful employment", the same survey revealed that a significant proportion (10% of respondents) may have the potential for vocational rehabilitation and return to the work force. CPPD dedicates few resources to rehabilitation efforts despite the decreasing average age of the CPP disability beneficiary population. Consequently, there is potential for significantly expanded rehabilitation efforts. The recently completed evaluation of the CPP National Vocational Rehabilitation Project sets out the scope for improvements in CPP rehabilitation activities, and recommends a permanent rehabilitation function as part of the CPPD.

Reassessment

Reassessment activity was sporadic before 1993. Since 1993, reassessments have been intensified under a special project focussing on beneficiaries who have a high probabilIty of being gainfully employed. The evaluation concludes that there is considerable potential for significantly expanded reassessment efforts to insure the removal from the caseload of those who can once again undertake gainful employment.

International Comparison

International competitiveness goals are served insofar as the program's benefits and incidence rates are generally comparable with, although somewhat less generous than those of Canada's major trading partners. Further, despite the recent increase, the CPPD caseload as a percentage of individuals 18 to 65 years of age remains one of the lowest when compared to similar programs of some of Canada's major trading partners.

Alternatives

CPPD beneficiaries often draw disability benefits from a number of sources, and some stakeholders perceive unwarranted and costly program interaction complexities, and a lack of inter-provincial equity in the earnings replacement system. This suggests the potential for more coordination between the CPPD and complementary programs, such as negotiating agreements with the provincial governments to create "single payer" arrangements, modelled on the system which exists in Quebec.

To further improve overall quality assurance in adjudication, CPPD might:

• consider modifying its adjudication procedure and the introduction of new guidelines/tools, including: the development of baseline occupational demands, a structured scoring system to assess claimants' functional limitations to match their residual capacities to specific occupational demands, and making greater use of independent medical examiners;
• consider undertaking a comprehensive, ongoing case/file review to provide information to aid in quality assurance for the administration of adjudication across regions, and to resolve questions regarding the extent of any economic grants (including their use as a bridge to retirement); and
• consider expanding its rehabilitation capacity and its reassessment program to ensure positive outcomes for beneficiaries, reduced program costs and more efficient delivery. An evaluation of the CPP National Vocational Rehabilitation Project (NVRP) supports the rationale for a permanent rehabilitation function as part of the CPPD. Significant cost-savings are possible, even with the rehabilitation of a small portion of CPPD beneficiaries.

The complexity of the CPPD program suggests that preparing the evaluation framework for a future evaluation of the program should begin promptly in order to ensure timely results for the next five year review of CPP.

Footnotes

20	QPPD also confers benefits on applicants who have contributed for half their contributory period, even if they do not meet the recency of work test.