Reports

Page5

6.0 Evaluation Strategy

A key component of this RMAF is the evaluation strategy for the Complaint Process.  Evaluation provides an opportunity for an in-depth analysis of how well the Complaint Process is performing toward the achievement of its stated outcomes.

Evaluations typically occur at two stages in the lifecycle of a program or process: near the beginning to see if adjustment is needed (formative evaluation), and after the program or process has been in place long enough to measure outcome achievement (summative evaluation).  The Complaint Process has been in place for many years, therefore a formative evaluation would more properly examine:

• Whether there are any design and delivery issues related to the Process, and
• Whether the Process is likely to meet its objectives.

The Treasury Board Guidelines on Evaluation state that a summative evaluation should examine three primary issue areas: 

• Relevance – Does the Process continue to be consistent with departmental and government-wide priorities, and does it realistically address an actual need? (This question of “need” is not relevant to the Complaint Process since it is mandated by the Act)
• Success – Is the Process effective in meeting its intended outcomes, within budget and without unwanted negative outcomes?  Is the Process making progress toward the achievement of final outcomes?
• Cost-Effectiveness – Are the most appropriate and efficient means being used to achieve outcomes, relative to alternative design and delivery approaches?

The evaluation strategy for the Complain Process set out below analyzes what should be examined during an evaluation. 

A Formative Evaluation

A formative evaluation could be conducted at any time to obtain a “quick reading” on whether the Complaint Process is progressing toward achieving its intended results.  The main results statements and evaluation questions related to a formative evaluation would be the following:

Formative Evaluation Results	Evaluation Questions
Complainants, respondents, and stakeholders understand their rights, responsibilities and the role of the CHRC	To what extent do complainants, respondent and other stakeholders understand their rights and responsibilities? To what extent do they understand the role of the CHRC?
Service standards that are acceptable to Canadians have been met	To what extent are complaints being processed and settled/resolved within defined service standards? To what extent are service standards acceptable to Canadians?
The CHRC has continued to adapt how it responds to Human Rights complaints in a flexible way (new ways are found)	To what extent has the CHRC developed new tools to address Human Rights complaints?
The CHRC has taken a flexible and tailored approach to inquiries, complaints and issues (new ways are used)	To what extent have new tools and approaches been used to address complaints?

A Summative Evaluation

In principle, a summative evaluation of the Complaint Process would examine the three areas set out in Treasury Board’s Evaluation Policy: Relevance, Success and Cost-effectiveness.  However, it would not be practical to evaluate the relevance of the Complaint Process, since it is an integral part of the CHRC’s mandate. The main results statements and evaluation questions related to a summative evaluation would be the following:

Summative Evaluation Results	Evaluation Questions
Complaints have been resolved/settled consistent with private and public interest.	To what extent do parties feel that the settlements have been satisfactory? Are the resolved/settled complaints resulting in a suitable outcome for all parties? Is the public interest being protected?
Key government organizations have recognized the importance and value of the Complaint Process.	To what extent do government central agencies and other federal organizations recognize the role and value of the CHRC’s Complaint Process?
The Complaint Process has become recognized by Canadians as timely, effective, efficient, and transparent.	To what extent do Canadians believe that the CHRC’s Complaint Process is efficient, transparent and timely? To what extent do they believe that it contributes to resolving Human Rights issues?
The Complaint Process has focused on broad based public interest issues.	To what extent have complaints been used to further public interest Human Rights issues?
The CHRC has taken a flexible and tailored approach to inquiries, complaints and issues (new ways are used)	How well have these tools contributed to successful and fair resolutions that reflect the public interest?

Previous Page

Table of Contents

Next Page