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

This chapter examines the continued relevance of the SDPP to HRDC and broader government objectives, and the cost-effectiveness of the program.

7.1 Continued Relevance of the SDPP

The SDPP continues to be relevant to the Mission of HRDC.

The HRDC mission statement leads with the objective "... to enable Canadians to participate fully in the workplace and the community". This is consistent with the overall goal of the SDPP, which is to increase participation and inclusion of members of populations at risk. Also, the scope of the SDPP goes beyond the workplace to address broader participation ("full citizenship") in the community.

The SDPP has a strategic role in HRDC's emphasis on partnerships.

HRDC places strong emphasis on partnerships to implement its programs, and many of its programs rely on partners in the social non-profit sector. The department's emphasis on partnership is found in its mission statement and reinforced by frequent statements in the current Plans and Priorities:

"... We will forge partnerships with the provinces and territories, businesses, labour organizations, voluntary organizations and community groups to ensure that Canadians are well served... " (HRDC Mission Statement) "

"We will take an integrated approach to human development as we assist Canadians, often when they are at risk. This will involve designing and delivering programs and services, usually in partnership with others... " (HRDC Mission Statement)

"...the need to foster partnerships with the voluntary sector, Aboriginal peoples, business and local communities are key to the work HRDC does to help Canadians participate more fully in the workplace and community."¹⁸

The SDPP's role in funding organizations and projects (particularly capacity-building projects) in the social non-profit community is particularly relevant to HRDC's partnerships approach. Voluntary organizations whose constituency is "Canadians who may be at risk" are unlikely to command the financial resources to be effective partners for the department. The SDPP appears unique in addressing the long-term viability and capacity of partner voluntary organizations to fulfil expected partnership roles. This also reflects the broader issue of the federal government's relationship with the voluntary sector, which is under discussion through the Voluntary Sector Initiative.

The SDPP's overall goal of increasing social participation and inclusion of populations at risk is also relevant to the government's Skill's Agenda.

The commitment to skills and learning is at the foundation of Canada's Innovation Strategy, which was launched in February 2002. Giving children and youth the best possible start in life and encouraging the participation of those facing barriers to labour market participation are among the important goals and objectives the government has set forth in its call for collaborative action to keep Canada economically strong and socially sound.

The SDPP is consistent with fulfilling the federal government's commitments under the federal-provincial Social Union Framework Agreement.

Section 5 of the Social Union Framework Agreement speaks to the use of federal spending power in improving social programs for Canadians, with specific reference to transfers to organizations: "Another use of the federal spending power is making transfers to individuals and to organizations in order to promote equality of opportunity, mobility, and other Canada-wide objectives."

In providing grants and contributions to organizations in the social non-profit community, the SDPP is consistent with the agreed mechanisms by which the federal government can channel federal spending power to promote Canada-wide objectives. The SDPP can also be considered to reflect a federal role in the area of applied research and development of models and best practices. There are clear economies of scale in having research and development performed and shared nationally, rather than undertaken separately in thirteen provincial/territorial jurisdictions.

There is an ongoing need to safeguard against overlap and duplication with provincial initiatives and agencies that have a mandate similar to the SDPP.

Although the evaluation did not conduct a review of provincial programs with mandates similar to the SDPP, to some extent the question of whether the SDPP is duplicating what provinces are already doing can be examined by examining the two provincial initiatives identified by the evaluation as similar to the SDPP—Quebec's SACA and Ontario's Trillium Foundation:.

• Capacity Building: SDPP capacity building is directed either at national organizations (e.g. grants); at reorganizing on a national basis (e.g. contribution case study of reorganizing Canadian Council for the Blind from a provincial basis to a regional basis); or in enhancing shared capacity of the social non-profit sector nationally (e.g. contribution case study of Community Social Data Strategy by Canadian Council on Social Development).
  
  SACA and Trillium both have comparable functions at the provincial levels. SACA funds the global missions of community organizations (grant-like approach), plus makes contributions to projects by such organizations. Key informants for SACA felt that virtually all of the funding could be categorized as social development. Trillium's program goals include enhancing volunteerism and increasing the effectiveness of organizations. Approximately half of Trillium's expenditures go to human and social services areas.
  
  Although the SDPP is focused on projects of national significance and national level organizations, and the provincial programs tend to focus instead at even the sub-provincial level, both have an interest in capacity building.
  
  
• Applied Research and Development: This activity is a principal part of the SDPP's mandate, but not directly addressed by Trillium and SACA. However, Trillium and SACA do have objectives which permit them to fund organizations to explore new methods of service delivery. For example SACA funds "better understanding of community action". Although the SDPP's mandate is more focused on applied research supporting innovation, and the SDPP screens project applications in these categories for national significance, all three can fund efforts to explore new methods of service delivery.

Even this brief review of two provincial initiatives suggests that there is a need for safeguards against overlap and duplication. Current safeguards in this area include the following:

• The SDPP does not fund provincial/regional organizations, and only funds pan-Canadian organizations that are umbrellas of regional members. This helps to guard against overlap and duplication because provincial/local organizations are not likely to be involved in pan-Canadian activities on their own; and
• The Social Development Directorate, and ODI have established a number of links/processes for consulting on priorities and sharing research results with corresponding provincial/territorial directors and officials (as discussed in Section 5.3.1).

For further information on the Ontario Trillium Foundation and SACA see Appendix A.

The strategic roles of the SDPP are inconsistent with the low profile of the program.

The strategic roles of the SDPP seem inconsistent with the low profile it has received within HRDC in past years. For example, the budget level for project contributions has gone unmentioned in the department Plans & Priorities documents of some years.

7.2 Cost-Effectiveness of the SDPP

As noted in Chapter 3, the evaluation was not asked to address cost-effectiveness measures beyond the relative effectiveness of the funded activity areas (addressed in Chapter 5). While a number of improvements in design and delivery are suggested, the absence of homogenous outputs from diverse projects and working through intermediaries precluded a quantitative analysis of cost-effectiveness.

Key informants were asked for suggestions on how to do things better. Most of the responses to this question focussed on the design and delivery issues and are reflected in previous chapters.

Establishing a partnership web page could help to broaden and solidify SDPP partnerships.

A partnership web page is one additional area of potential improvement in effectiveness that emerged from both key informant interviews and from the comparison of the SDPP with the provincial programs. Access to SDPP information could be improved and SDPP partnerships could be more easily broadened and solidified with a partnership web site that contains the following:

• An up-to-date organizational chart of program staff;
• Information about grants and contributions that the SDPP has funded recently;
• A description of the role of the Reference Group and a list of current members;
• A catalogue of project reports and organizational support innovations; and
• Current contact information for organizations, which have received SDPP funding.¹⁹

Similar communication ideas may be garnered from the usage of web sites by provincial programs similar to the SDPP.

Footnotes

18	2002/03 Report on Plans & Priorities, pg. ii
19	Both SACA (Quebec) and Trillium (Ontario) offer Website information of this nature.