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

Recommendation 1

An overall internal communications strategy should be developed to address intra and inter-departmental concerns. Such a strategy would need to encompass issues related to clarifying the respective roles and responsibilities of both staff and LMDA partner departments, as well as changes in service delivery that have resulted from the implementation of the LMDA. One possibility may be to develop a single, automated, user-friendly information system on new programs to assist front-line staff.

Response

A Communications Committee consisting of representatives for all departments was established at the direction of the Implementation Committee. A draft strategy was completed. The three departments recognize the importance of having an overall internal communications strategy, and will take the necessary steps to finalize and implement (e.g. by using existing technologies). Furthermore, we are holding a workshop for field Directors in October 1999, which will focus on improving communications and client service. This will also aid in further clarification of respective roles and responsibilities.

Recommendation 2

Decisions around implementation issues of mutual concern to all partner departments will need to be made. These decisions would address issues related to the promotion of LMDA programs and services, as well as other service delivery issues, such as reception and appropriate signage in HRSCs.

Response

Decisions regarding issues of mutual concern are resolved at the local level. Those issues, which cannot be resolved by the Local Implementation Committees, are forwarded to the Senior Implementation Committee. Decisions have been made with respect to reception and signage.

Recommendation 3

The responsibility for serving the Aboriginal clientele, especially those living on reserves, needs to be clarified between federal and provincial partners.

Response

Service delivery issues for Aboriginal clientele, including those living on reserve, have been dealt with in a cooperative manner by provincial and federal representatives, and by the aboriginal community. All partners have made efforts towards clarifying roles and providing service in a coordinated manner. For example, the Aboriginal Human Resource

Development Strategy and the Aboriginal Employment Strategy have been implemented to address the needs of aboriginal clientele.

Recommendation 4

With respect to promotion, an external communications strategy needs to be developed to raise awareness among active EI claimants, whose participation in the benefits and measures was well below target.

Response

A marketing plan has been developed which is specifically aimed at active EI claimants, to raise awareness of employment services and to promote the importance of early intervention. This will be implemented in Autumn 1999.

Recommendation 5

Further qualitative research needs to be conducted into the reasons for the high uptake among reachbacks, particularly in the Entrepreneur program. The research will identify whether the high uptake can be attributed to actions on the part of client service officers to a larger than expected demand for assistance among reachbacks, or to some other factor.

Response

Clients typically receive assistance during the latter part of an EI claim. As stated in response 4 above, we are making efforts to assist clients earlier in their claim. The nature and time required in the Entrepreneur approval process may contribute to the observation of a higher percentage of reachback clients. An analysis of the group seeking service and the reasons for doing so, may be beneficial in delivering service.

Recommendation 6

Greater integration of information systems maintained by the three government departments would allow for proper monitoring and results tracking, thus greatly facilitating the management of program and service delivery, as well as the subsequent determination of impacts at the provincial and local levels. Related to this, there is a need for clarification of accountability requirements and who is responsible for what results, for a clear definition of valid results measures, as well as for a resolution of client privacy issues to improve information sharing among the LMDA partners.

Response

The conceptual design of case management for EI and reachback clients is complete. The province expects to have a single case management system (NBCASE) by the Spring of 2000. The system integration will allow for a streamlined and comprehensive management of client case/action plans, regardless of income source. Work is also being done in the development of the EDTS (Employment Development Tracking System).

This will provide an opportunity to better link client needs with program activity. This was also identified in our recent policy review, and we are in agreement to explore further. The three partners have committed to and have undertaken activities to improve our understanding of the accountability requirements. During fiscal year 1998/1999 improvements were recorded. A letter of understanding regarding the sharing of EI client information has been finalized and this will result in a formal change to the agreement. This has resulted in more effective targeting of EI clients.

Recommendation 7

Changes are required to ensure that programs are properly targeted to clients, as evidenced by the smaller than expected proportion of EI claimants who participated in LMDA programs. Related to this, some evidence suggests that EI clients were not being referred to PBMs. All this suggests that the lack of results in target attainment may be related to issues of service delivery, inter-departmental communication and inappropriate targeting.

Response

As stated in response 4 above, a marketing plan is being developed to inform EI clients of the benefits of seeking assistance earlier in their claim. A letter of understanding regarding the sharing of EI client information has been finalized and this will result in a formal change to the agreement. This has resulted in more effective targeting of EI clients. A number of initiatives in field offices are in place to ensure EI clients are informed of available services.

Recommendation 8

Greater coordination of program delivery among all three government departments would enhance service delivery and improve the reach of LMDA programs. These efforts would cover such areas as hours of operation and client referrals between departments.

Response

An inter-departmental task group was established in January 1999 to examine issues regarding LMDA program delivery. A document entitled "Policy Issues Action Plan" was drafted and supported by all three departments. This resulted in the establishment of a number of working groups which were charged with examining program issues such as, programs for disabled, youth, and students; a review of training and wage subsidy programs; and a review of our respective planning processes. Work has been completed in some areas, in particular in the area of a collaborative planning process.

Recommendation 9

The appointment of a dedicated project manager to oversee the LMDA implementation (including overseeing action on these recommendations) would minimize further difficulties that may arise throughout the remainder of the implementation process. Among the potential benefits of this appointment, such a manager could facilitate communications between the three departments, troubleshoot further difficulties that may arise, and work to establish clear guidelines for many of the implementation issues that were not resolved prior to the signing of the LMDA (i.e., the establishment of respective responsibilities for administrative costs).

Response

Key people from each department have been identified to oversee and manage the LMDA implementation and provide the links between field staff and senior officials.

Recommendation 10

To address concerns over inconsistency across service delivery sites, the different sites should be encouraged to exchange views and experiences through e-mail, a special constructed Internet site or some other means.

Response

We agree that inconsistencies across Service Delivery Sites are of concern. However, we believe the collaborative efforts of many joint working groups, such as Local Implementation Committees, SLG Consultation group and the upcoming Directors workshop, will address the concerns. This was also identified in our recent policy review, and we are in agreement to further explore.

Recommendation 11

Further research will be required, particularly in the summative evaluation, in order to make a more definitive assessment of the relative impacts of different programs on employment and other outcomes. It would be premature to make recommendations about specific programs based on the short-term results of this formative evaluation. The main reason is that the PBM programs target different employability needs and would thus be expected to require different lengths of time before the full impacts are felt. For instance, the observed positive outcomes for the Partners and Entrepreneur programs in this formative evaluation are not surprising given that both these programs target career decision-making using a job placement strategy typically leading to immediate employment outcomes. Conversely, the limited impact of other interventions such as SLG may be due to the fact that they target on employability need (e.g., skill enhancement) necessarily requiring a longer time horizon to realize and detect labour-market impacts.

• Based on the observed short-term impacts from this formative evaluation, it is possible to articulate certain hypotheses regarding possible modification to certain interventions that may improve their effectiveness but which would require further research to substantiate. For instance:

  • the finding that self-serve products led to negative outcomes from men and younger participants may simply reflect the fact that the use of such products distracted these groups from seeking more intensive employment assistance.

    Further analyses may be able to shed light on the true impact of these products and suggest ways to improve the promotion of programs and/or referrals among LMDA partners; and

  • the poor showing the Rural Experience and Job Action relative to Entrepreneur and Partners in terms of employment outcomes is not surprising given that the former are designed to provide only short-term employment experience. Nonetheless, the short-term nature of these job placements may encourage recurring use of EI. Further research on longer-term impacts may be able to shed light on the extent to which this may be occurring.

Response

The Joint Evaluation Committee is responsible for establishing the statement of work for the summative evaluation, and will take these points into consideration.