PACP Committee Report

OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The Need for Performance Indicators

Even with a clear set or roles and responsibilities, the Committee is not convinced that the Department has the will or ability to translate these statements into practical and useful policies, a process greatly aided by using an appropriate set of performance indicators. The Committee believes this kind of accountability framework is a crucial step towards improving the educational outcomes of First Nation people and that the Department should ensure that it can deliver on its responsibilities.

In her 2004 report, Auditor General Sheila Fraser indicated that the Department had already identified some potentially useful performance indicators but was concerned that it lacked the data needed to construct these indicators. The Auditor General recommended that INAC speed up its efforts to develop performances indicators.

The Department’s action plan says that the Department has completed a review of the data at its disposal, the rationale for the data and the authority under which it is collected. Its next task is to set up electronic information gathering processes, which it expects to have completed by November 2005, and then meet with First Nation representatives to ensure that the data gathering process is not overly burdensome. The Department expected to complete this process by November 2006, after which point it will “finalize performance indicators and reporting requirements” by June 2007.

It has been more than five years since the Committee and the Auditor General first recommended that the Department develop performance indicators and report on these in its Estimates documents beginning in 2001 2002. Again, at the time, the Department suggested that this information would be more appropriately published in its biennial review. The Committee was not and is not satisfied with this response or the timeline proposed in INAC’s action plan, especially since the Department appears to have completed a review of available data and promises to have electronic data-gathering processes in place by November 2005. It should not and must not take another two years to develop a set of performance indicators. The Committee therefore recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 3

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada complete a set of performance indicators for its elementary, secondary and post secondary education programs by the end of 2005 and report on these in its 2006 report on plans and priorities. These performance indicators must be used in future departmental performance reports.

RECOMMENDATION 4

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada keep the Standing Committee on Public Accounts abreast, on a semi-annual basis, of its progress in establishing performance indicators through periodic submissions.

With respect to the Post-Secondary Student Support Program (PSSSP) in particular, the Auditor General was critical of the Department for failing to provide a complete picture of the program and what is being achieved with departmental funds. According to the Auditor General, the Department’s Estimates documents fail to:

• Provide targets or timelines that would allow parliamentarians to judge the performance of the program;
  
  
• Compare post-secondary achievements of First Nation people, on or off reserve, with those of the broader Canadian population;
  
  
• Provide an accurate picture of how many students are being helped by the program. For example, while pointing to the fact that 25,000 received support in 2002-03, up from 250 in 1968 69, the Department failed to point out that the 2002-03 results were less than the 27,000 who received help in 1998-99;

Again, the Committee believes in the need for complete and accurate Estimates documents, as does the Auditor General. The Department’s April 2005 action plan makes a vague promise to complete the “comprehensive” management framework by June 2007 but, as noted earlier, makes no explicit mention of using Estimates documents to show how it is doing. The Committee recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 5

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada improve the quality of its Estimates documents by defining the objectives and expected results of all its educational programs and the Post Secondary Student Support Program in particular. It should report on costs and performance and clarify how the programs are making a difference in narrowing the education gap between First Nations and the broader Canadian population using comparable indicators.

Over the course of its first meeting with the Auditor General and officials from INAC, the Committee was told that there are some problems that the Department can fix now instead of later, action plan or no action plan. Ronald Campbell, Assistant Auditor General, told the Committee that while he understands the challenges of reforming First Nation education policies, “we shouldn’t lose sight of the things that can be fixed within the system, such as it is today.”

As an example, Mr. Campbell pointed to a departmental policy that requires an independent evaluation of each band-operated federal school every five years. According to the Auditor General’s 2004 report, “the Department does not know how many of these evaluations have been done or need to be done because it does not track this information.” INAC’s April 2005 action plan promises action on school evaluations but offers no timeline. The Committee believes that the Department should immediately resolve this issue, and recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 6

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada immediately take steps to ensure that school evaluations are completed and that recommendations flowing from these evaluations are addressed. The Department must report on its progress in its departmental performance report.

Similarly, the Auditor General points out that the Department has not been diligent in monitoring tuition agreements between First Nations and provincial school boards or between the Department and provincial school boards. While the Auditor General did find some progress in one region of the country, she also noted that “many agreements were still not in place, were in dispute or had expired. In some instances, officials believe that First Nations do not have the capacity to negotiate the agreements effectively. Nor is it clear that adequate support is available to help First Nations with this task.” Again, the Department’s action plan promises to address this issue but offers no timeline. Again, the Committee believes this is something that can be addressed relatively quickly, without further delay, and recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 7

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, in consultation with First Nations, immediately take steps to ensure that all tuition agreements between it, First Nations and provincial school boards are in place. The Department must also provide its regional offices with sufficient guidance and training to ensure that its responsibilities are understood and applied consistently. The Department should report annually on its progress in its departmental performance report.

TOP OF PAGE

Closing the Education Gap

Performance indicators built on clearly defined roles and responsibilities are, of course, only a means to an end. In this case, the “end” is a quality education for First Nation people. The Committee is therefore especially troubled by the persistent and growing education gap between First Nations and the broader Canadian population. Without a good education, it is difficult to be an active member of our society. In many instances, a lifetime of low paying odd jobs and economic insecurity awaits those who fail to complete a high school education, college or university degree.

The educational gap is all the more troubling because there is empirical evidence that while First Nation people with university degrees find it more difficult to obtain full-time work than their non-native counterparts, those who do find employment earn more, on average, than non-native people with comparable levels of education ^[13]. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s April 2005 action plan does not offer any specific target for closing the education gap, an unacceptable omission in the Committee’s view especially given the Department’s legacy of broken promises.

The Committee understands that the education gap is influenced by a wide variety of variables, many of which are largely outside the Department’s control. It nevertheless feels that the education gap could be a crucial orienting tool, a target which the Department can use to adjust its education policies as events unfold. The Committee therefore recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 8

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, in consultation with First Nation communities, set a timeline for closing the education gap between First Nation students and the broader Canadian population. The Department must report on its progress, or lack thereof, in closing the educational gap in its departmental performance reports.

TOP OF PAGE

Funding Issues

In her 2004 audit, the Auditor General identified a number of issues related to funding. With respect to elementary and secondary education, for example, the Auditor General said the Department had very little data on actual education costs nor could it compare the costs of the different delivery mechanisms it used. Without reliable and consistent cost information, the Department cannot manage its education programs effectively.

In its April 2005 action plan, the Department noted that a joint First Nations/INAC working group was put together in January 2004 to review the cost of providing education services on reserve compared with education services provided off-reserve. The action plan promises to produce a report on this subject by September 2005. It also notes that the Department is conducting an internal study which looks at costs specific to First Nation communities, including factors such as the remoteness of many First Nation communities and the extra costs of teaching English and French to children who have a different first language.

While the Committee welcomes the Department’s report and the suggested September 2005 deadline, it believes the Department should publicize the results of its internal study. These cost data are important for helping Parliament understand why providing First Nation education services might be more costly than for the broader Canadian population. The Committee accordingly recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 9

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada provide a copy of its report on the cost of a basic First Nation education to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts by the end of September 2005 for presentation to the Committee along with a separate report outlining costs specific to providing First Nation education.

RECOMMENDATION 10

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada update Parliament annually on the detailed cost of First Nations education in its departmental performance reports.

With respect to post-secondary education, the Auditor General identified a serious problem with the way the Department delivers its funding to First Nation communities. Simply put, the Department’s current funding mechanisms cannot guarantee equitable funding or even whether the available funding is going to all eligible students. This situation may be contributing to the education gap because, according to the Assembly of First Nations, federal funding shortfalls were preventing about 9,500 First Nation people from pursuing post secondary education.

The Department bases its funding on historic requirements which may not reflect the actual number of eligible students. As a result some First Nation communities receive more money than they need, others less. This situation is made worse by the use of “flexible transfers” or so-called multi-year “Alternative Funding Arrangements,” which allow First Nation communities to move monies to unrelated programs once they have satisfied certain criteria ^[14].

The Department’s April 2005 action plan does not offer any specific course of action to address these issues, noting only that it is working with First Nations to review accountability mechanisms. Given the potential link between the education gap and funding mechanisms and funding levels, the Committee feels this issue must be addressed immediately. The Committee recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 11

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada review its post-secondary funding mechanisms, including the use of flexible transfers, to ensure that they are delivering equitable funding to as many eligible students as possible. This review must be conducted within the context of the Department’s roles and responsibilities, which are expected to be completed by December 2005.

To make matters worse, the Department lacks the information needed to determine which reserves receive more or less than they need and whether the transferred money actually ends up in the hands of post secondary students. Again, the Department’s April 2005 action plan does not provide any specific solutions to this problem, making only vague promises about developing accountability mechanisms as part of its management framework due in June 2007. This issue must be addressed; the Committee therefore recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 12

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada immediately collect the necessary data to determine which communities receive a proper amount of post-secondary funding with regard to the number of eligible students. It must use this data to further its study of post-secondary funding mechanisms.

The Auditor General also pointed to “discrepancies” in the information provided to the Treasury Board by the Department about the Post Secondary Student Support Program (PSSSP). The Auditor General, noted, for example that the Department “does not track how the program funds are spent. … Therefore, the Department has no assurance that program funds are used only for the purpose intended, as it had led the Treasury Board to believe.” The Auditor General went on to recommend (5.88) that the Department “…ensure that it provides accurate information to the Treasury Board about the way in which the PSSSP operates.” The Department’s April 2005 action plan does not address the issue in a direct way. The Committee believes this is a serious matter and should have been addressed directly. Moreover, the Public Accounts Committee is concerned about the accuracy of information supplied to the Treasury Board. It therefore strongly recommends:

RECOMMENDATION 13

That Indian and Northern Affairs Canada provide accurate information and avoid the use of misleading language in its Treasury Board filings on the way in which the Post-Secondary Student Support Program (PSSSP) operates. The Department must also provide the Standing Committee on Public Accounts with a rationale for the information supplied to Treasury Board with respect to PSSSP funding.