Monthly Updates
December 2019
IFSD is pleased to provide monthly updates to its stakeholders on the progress of the First Nations Child and Family Services (FNCFS) Project – Phase 2.
Principal Updates
- Following the update on the results framework, this update will focus on the related necessary data.
- Relevant, available, comparable, and consistenly captured data is necessary to give life to a results framework.
- IFSD has prepared a draft alignment of necessary data and data gaps in the current universe of available information. Consult the full update for details.
- Overall participation in the questionnaire has increased to 42%. Saskatchewan’s participation has improved significantly to 37% (over double its previous rate). Important gaps remain however, for Alberta, Ontario, and Saskatchewan. The goal is to achieve at least 50% participation from each province/region to ensure agencies are represented. IFSD wishes to thank all those agencies that have participated and is asking that all agencies who have not yet participated to download and return the completed questionnaire as soon as possible.
- IFSD is now working with an Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) team tasked with delivery of the data consistent with the project’s requirements.
- IFSD welcomes your feedback throughout this work.
Are you an agency that hasn’t yet participated in the questionnaire?
Data alignment and data gaps
There are a variety of indicators proposed in the performance framework to capture progress across the four sub-strategic outcomes defined in Phase 1 – Enabling First Nations Children to Thrive. The table below summarizes the linkage between sub-strategic objective, measure and indicators, and includes the feasibility of accessing the data required.
| Green Feasible | Green means feasibly accessible because the data is already being captured or an agency could easily collect the data. |
| Yellow Somewhat feasible | Yellow implies somewhat feasibly accessible. While the data may not exist publicly, nor is it likely being captured by agencies, the request falls within the agency’s mandate and the data could be feasibly collected by an agency. |
| Red Difficult | Red indicates some challenge in accessing the data as it falls outside of a typical agency’s mandate, and may require collaboration with a third party to capture the information. |
| Sub-objective | Performance Area | Measure | Indicators |
| Safety | Protection | Protection from all forms of maltreatment | Recurrence of maltreatment |
| Serious injuries/deaths | |||
| Recurrence of child protection concerns after ongoing protection services | |||
| Non-accidental child injury | |||
| Child sexual abuse | |||
| Permanency | Permanency status | Out of home placement rate | |
| Number of moves in care | |||
| Timeliness of family reunification | |||
| Timeliness of adoptions | |||
| Out of home care | Percentage of children placed with kin and/or Indigenous families within their community | ||
| Quality of caregiver and youth relationship | |||
| Child well-being | Cognitive development | School readiness | Percentage of 3 and 4-year-olds participating in funded early years education |
| Basic literacy score | |||
| Basic numeracy score | |||
| Advanced literacy score | |||
| Interest in literacy/numeracy and memory score | |||
| Educational attainment | Literacy and numeracy test scores (middle childhood) | ||
| Positive attitude towards school/learning | |||
| Youth who intend on going to full-time post-secondary (e.g. college, trade school, university) | |||
| Social relationships | Social support and belonging | Youth who report positive relations with their parents or caregiver | |
| Youth with 5 or more close friends | |||
| Youth who report positive relations with siblings and extended family | |||
| Youth who report positive relations with non-family adults | |||
| Youth who report strong ties with elders in the community | |||
| Social engagement | Youth who report some involvement, participation or contribution within the community | ||
| Youth who participate in extracurricular activities | |||
| Psychological and emotional well-being | Child behaviour | Anxious and fearful behaviour | |
| Aggressive behaviour | |||
| Hyperactivity and inattentive behaviour | |||
| Social competence | Communication skills | ||
| Prosocial and helping behaviour | |||
| Social intelligence (e.g. cooperation, conflict resolution, trust, intimacy) | |||
| Subjective well-being | Self-reported happiness/life satisfaction | ||
| Self-reported mental health | |||
| Esteem | Sense of purpose | ||
| Optimism and hope | |||
| Resilience | |||
| Confidence | |||
| Agency | |||
| Cultural and spiritual well-being | Spirituality | Sense of belonging to cultural group | |
| Pride in Indigenous identity | |||
| Sense of connection to the land | |||
| Participation in spiritual practice/knowledge/ceremony | |||
| Tradition | Speaks traditional language | ||
| Eats traditional foods | |||
| Physical health and well-being | Overall physical health | Low birth weight | |
| Breastfed for at least 6 months | |||
| Children living with a disability or chronic illness | |||
| Healthy habits | Eating habits | ||
| Level of physical activity | |||
| Sleep habits | |||
| Risk management | Teenage birth rate | ||
| Percentage who report using illicit drugs in the past month | |||
| Percentage who report binge drinking in the last month | |||
| Smoking in the last month | |||
| Family well-being | Self-sufficiency | Secure parental employment and parental participation in the labour force | Labour force status |
| Job tenure/permanency | |||
| Ability to meet basic needs | Household income sufficient to meet basic needs for transportation, housing and utilities, food, clothing, childcare and other necessary expenses | ||
| Family health and protective factors | Physical health status of parents or caregivers | Chronic conditions | |
| Eating habits | |||
| Drug use (alcohol, smoking, illicit drugs, prescription medication) | |||
| Mental health status of parents and caregivers | Self-reported mental health | ||
| Symptoms of anxiety and depression | |||
| Thoughts of suicide/self-harm | |||
| Family protective factors | Parental resilience | ||
| Social connections | |||
| Knowledge of parent and child development | |||
| Concrete support in times of need | |||
| Developmental parenting and attachment | |||
| Community well-being | Access to basic needs | Access to potable water | Number of long-term drinking water advisories affecting FN water systems |
| Access to suitable housing | Percentage of homes that are suitable | ||
| Percentage of homes in need of major repairs | |||
| Access to broadband connectivity | Percentage of homes with internet connectivity | ||
| Community infrastructure | Presence of point of community assembly, health centre, elementary school, recreational space or facility | ||
| Overall poverty level | Median household income compared to provincial or national poverty line | ||
| Mental health and counselling services | |||
| Child and family services/social services | |||
| Health and medical services | |||
| Respite care | |||
| Transportation and accommodation (medical and non-medical appointments) | |||
| Public safety and community health | Health and safety | Rates of reported suicide attempts | |
| Rates of reported heavy drinking | |||
| Rates of reported drug use | |||
| BMI rates | |||
| Rates of chronic health conditions | |||
| Rates of violent crime | |||
| Educational attainment | High school graduation rate | ||
| Rate of post-secondary education |
IFSD welcomes your feedback on the alignment of data and indicators. IFSD looks forward to continuing to refine this framework with its stakeholders.
Beyond the availability of data, there are considerations relative to its accessibility and its sufficient detail for analytic use. Publicly accessible data tends to be available (e.g. housing, access to potable water) but aggregated, which limits its applicability for decision-support in specific domains. Granular data may be available at the level of the individual agency or First Nation, but is not always readily available, comparable or consistently captured (i.e. loss of time series).
The draft diagram below plots the indicators from the performance framework based on their current-state accessibility and granularity. A significant majority of indicators are accessible but insufficiently granular (bottom right quandrant). This suggests that while there is aggregate data at the level of a First Nation, a province or region, the data may not have the necessary detail to measure the indicator defined in the performance framework. For instance, there may be data at the level of the First Nation on alcohol and drug misuse (for assessment of the risk management indicator), but that data may not be available for the individual child. Even though individual data will not be shared, it is a useful internal metric for agency decision-support and planning for the child and family. The mismatch between accessibility and granularity is not insurmountable. It will require agency action with requisite resources.
The upper right quadrant is both accessible and sufficiently granular. Most of this data relates to child safety, as it is expected that agencies already collect this information at the level of the individual child for their case files. It is anticipated that while this data will not be made public at the level of the individual, the aggregated data can be a reliable source of information to asses overall outcomes for children and families in a community. Some community level data is also included, as it can be accessed from public sources at the level of the First Nation. Such data includes housing suitability and access to potable water to fulfill certain indicators. The two community well-being indicators related to infrastructure and health and social services in the bottom left corner are deemed both insufficiently granular and insufficiently accessible because the data does not tend to exist. It would be up to individual communities or agencies to collect or produce this data.
To help to close the data gaps and ensure data is relevant for the proposed results framework, a mix of existing and new data will have to be collected and analysed.
This is an opportunity for agencies to standardize the capture of relevant data to support planning, decision-making, and the alignment of activities and resources for the well-being of children, families and communities.
In the coming months, IFSD looks forward to sharing a data framework that agencies may wish to leverage to capture their own information.
Participation gaps – questionnaire
Manitoba and British Columbia have reached the 50% participation threshold, and the Atlantic region has surpassed it at 55%. Saskatchewan has more than doubled its participation rate in less than four weeks. IFSD is grateful for this effort. To reach the 50% target participation rate per region, we are asking agencies in Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Quebec to continue to complete the questionnaire if they have not already done so.
The information from the questionnaire will help IFSD to ensure alignment to need as a funding approach is developed and more accurately cluster agencies to model the effects of transition.
By sharing your experience, you’re making this work more representative and reflective of your agency’s reality.
Next steps
- Present a full draft results framework and data alignment to working group members, including case study agencies and experts (scheduled to meet in February 2020).
- Continue to build comparative assessments of results-focused funding approaches.
- Finalize FNCFS agency participation to complete the questionnaire and analyze data provided through the questionnaire.
- Continue to work with ISC to complete the data request.
Contact information
IFSD is pleased to respond to requests for further information or to provide individual briefings on the project and its project. For questions about the project or to participate, please contact:
Dr. Helaina Gaspard, Director, Governance and Institutions
Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy
helaina.gaspard@ifsd.ca
1 (613) 983-8461
November 2019
IFSD is pleased to provide monthly updates to its stakeholders on the progress of the First Nations Child and Family Services (FNCFS) Project – Phase 2
Principal Updates
- At this time 37% of FNCFS agencies have completed the questionnaire. There are significant participation gaps in Saskatchewan, Ontario and Alberta. The goal is to achieve at least 50% participation from each province/region to ensure agencies are represented. IFSD wishes to thank all those agencies that have participated and is asking that all agencies who have not yet participated to download and return the completed questionnaire as soon as possible.
- A draft results framework is available in the full update, which builds from the goal of enabling First Nations children to thrive defined in Phase 1. This framework will serve as the point of departure for the funding approach. IFSD welcomes feedback from agencies on this work.
- IFSD is continuing to work with Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) to complete its August 2019 data request on departmental spending.
- IFSD is grateful to all of the agencies who have come forward to serve as case studies and regular collaborators for this project. We look forward to visiting and learning from you.
- IFSD welcomes your feedback throughout this work.
Are you an agency that hasn’t yet participated in the questionnaire?
Participation gaps – questionnaire
The short (7-question) questionnaire is designed to capture basic information on funding (e.g. total expenditures, CHRT funding requested) and performance practices among FNCFS agencies. Most of the questionnaire can be completed by checking boxes.
The information from the questionnaire will help IFSD to ensure alignment to need as a funding approach is developed and more accurately cluster agencies to model the effects of transition.
 |
In Phase 1, the participation rate for 100+ question survey was 76%. The overall participation rate for the Phase 2, 7-question questionnaire, is currently 37%. IFSD is targeting at least 50% participation from each province/region for representivity. By sharing your experience, you’re making this work more representative and reflective of your agency’s reality. We encourage all agencies to complete the survey.
Results framework
The results framework is designed to ‘flip the current structure on its head’ by defining the end goal (thriving First Nations children) and building out a funding approach that aligns to that outcome.
The table below is a high-level overview of the overall goal, the means through which it can be achieved and the way in which progress can be monitored by agencies.
IFSD encourages you to share your input and ideas to enhance the framework.
| Strategic Outcome: Thriving First Nations Children The overarching goal, to which all activities contribute. | ||||
| Sub-Strategic Outcomes Areas of focus to achieve the strategic outcome. | Safety Children are protected from harm and achieve permanency in their living situation. | Child well-being Children reach their full developmental potential and have hope, belonging, purpose and meaning. | Family well-being Families enjoy a safe, stable environment in which to foster healthy relationships. | Community well-being Communities have adequate infrastructure, services, resiliency and belonging to ensure collective safety, stability and well-being. |
| Performance Areas The lenses through which progress on sub-strategic outcomes can be understood. |
|
|
|
|
| Measures Means of assessing progress in performance areas. |
|
|
|
|
| Examples of key performance indicators The variable measured. |
|
|
|
|
Next steps
- Finalize FNCFS agency participation to complete the questionnaire and analyze data provided through the questionnaire.
- Continue to identify and acquire federal spending data required to establish a clear portrait of allocations and spending.
- Continue to refine the results framework and comparative assessments of results-focused funding approaches.
- Continue to work with ISC to complete the data request.
Contact information
IFSD is pleased to respond to requests for further information or to provide individual briefings on the project and its project. For questions about the project or to participate, please contact:
Dr. Helaina Gaspard, Director, Governance and Institutions
Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy
helaina.gaspard@ifsd.ca
1 (613) 983-8461
October 2019
IFSD is pleased to provide monthly updates to its stakeholders on the progress of the First Nations Child and Family Services (FNCFS) Project – Phase 2.
Principal Updates
- IFSD has extended the questionnaire deadline to November 6, 2019. FNCFS gencies are encouraged to complete the short questionnaire and return it via email to IFSD, if they haven’t already done so.
- Some basic data on FNCFS program spending was shared by ISC pursuant to IFSD’s August 2019 request for required data. The balance of the request is in-progress.
- IFSD is seeking other FNCFS agencies to join those which have already agreed to serve as case studies and regular collaborators for this project. This will be a unique opportunity to share your experiences and have them inform this work on funding approach development.Are you an agency that hasn’t yet participated in the questionnaire, or would like to inquire about being a case study agency?
Current state spending by Indigenous Services Canada (ISC)
IFSD submitted a request for data in August 2019 to ISC. Some basic elements of the request have been fulfilled (and others are in progress). The data delivered by ISC suggests that:
- FNCFS program spending has trended upward since 2014-15, with an important increase between 2017-18 and 2018-19.
- Over time, Manitoba, Ontario and Alberta have received the largest total FNCFS program transfers.
- Ontario-based agencies have received the highest amount of CHRT-mandated supplementary funding.
- Agencies serving at least one community inaccessible by year-round receive larger transfers than those serving communities accessible by year-round round (using only identifiable agencies in ISC’s data).
Would your agency like to be considered as a case study agency?
In addition to the questionnaire, IFSD is seeking in-depth engagement from approximately 12 FNCFS agencies and two communities not served by a FNCFS agency. These agencies, all with different characteristics (e.g. geographic location, size, etc.), will be selected to serve as representative cases for the project. These agencies/communities will work closely with IFSD to evaluate and test models and frameworks throughout the project.
Are you an agency that hasn’t yet participated in the questionnaire, or would like to inquire about being a case study agency?
Next steps
- Finalize FNCFS agency participation to complete the questionnaire.
- Compile and analyze data provided through the questionnaire, once at least a 30% participation rate is achieved.
- Continue to identify and acquire federal spending data required to establish a clear portrait of allocations and spending.
- Finalize the complement of case study agencies who will work closely with IFSD throughout this phase of work.
- Leverage experiences from experts and jurisdictions in the United States, e.g. State of Tennessee, Chapin Hall (University of Chicago), to identify lessons and practices for a holistic approach to child welfare. There is no wholesale transfer of any model, but we can learn from what worked and what did not in other jurisdictions. Any approach will have to be informed by cultural practices and the goal of holistic well-being.
- Continue to refine the performance architecture and comparative assessments of results-focused funding approaches.
Contact information
IFSD is pleased to respond to requests for further information or to provide individual briefings on the project and its project. For questions about the project or to participate, please contact:
Dr. Helaina Gaspard, Director, Governance and Institutions
Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy
helaina.gaspard@ifsd.ca
1 (613) 983-8461