Centre For Public Management Inc. (June, 2008). Infrastructure Canada Program First Nations Component - Technical report For case Studies of First Nations.
Centre For Public Management Inc. (June, 2008). Infrastructure Canada Program First Nations Component - Technical report For Interviews of Representatives of First Nations.
Consulting and Audit Canada. (September, 2005). Infrastructure Canada Program: Mid-Term Evaluation Final Report.
Infrastructure Canada. (November 30, 2005). Integrated Results-Based Management And Accountability Framework (RMAF) And
Risk-Based Audit Framework (RBAF) for the Infrastructure Canada Program.
Infrastructure Canada. Infrastructure Canada Program - First Nation Component: Terms and Conditions for the Payment of Contribution.
Infrastructure Canada. (Mai, 2008). Rapport Technique 1 - Programme d'Infrastructure Canada (PIC) (Volet Premières Nations).
Infrastructure Canada. (Avril, 2008). Rapport Technique 2 - Programme d'Infrastructure Canada (PIC) (Volet Premières Nations).
SIMSI Reports on Project Benefits.
Various Treasury Board Submissions
Appendix B: List of Interviewees from INFC and INAC
Infrastructure Canada Program First Nations Component
Program management
INFC
Director General, Intergovernmental Operations Directorate
INFC
Manager, Western Programs, Intergovernmental Operations Directorate
INFC
Manager, Quebec, Nunavut and First Nations Programs,
Intergovernmental Operations Directorate
INFC
Program Analyst, Intergovernmental Operations Directorate
Q4. Are you satisfied with the co-operation of partners?
Why?
Q5. Is the Canadian government's role in infrastructure well understood and accepted by the partners?
If so, how well?
If not, why not?
Q6. Is the Canadian government's role in infrastructure well understood and accepted by the partners?
If so, how well?
If not, why not?
Q7. Are you aware that the funds earmarked for the First Nations Component have not been fully spent or allocated?
More than $700,000 was returned.
Why were funds allocated otherwise than originally budgeted?
Q8. Might other projects have been funded rather than return the money?
If so, how?
E.g., affordable housing, etc.
Q9. Do the infrastructure projects include a maintenance plan?
If so, are these plans adequate?
Have they caused any difficulties or problems? Please specify.
Q10. Has funding been provided for the operation of the maintenance plans?
If so, is it adequate? Please explain.
If not, how do we solve the problem of funding?
Q11. Do the maintenance plans ensure project sustainability?
If not, what other means could be used to ensure the long-term survival of the projects?
Q12. Are the Program outcomes satisfactory?
E.g., as regards attainment of objectives.
If so, how satisfactory?
If not, why not?
Q13. Is the Program cost-effective?
E.g., in terms of monies invested by the government versus funds generated by partners.
Q14. Might there have been other ways to achieve the same outcomes?
E.g., other programs or initiatives?
If so, specify.
Would these other ways have been more economical?
Q15. What changes would you make to the Program?
E.g., changes in order to more easily get outcomes.
E.g., collaboration, management, monitoring and reporting, communications, allocation of funds, governance, accountability, stacking, commitments and conditions, selection criteria.
Q16. Has ICP allowed you to increase your understanding of the community infrastructure needs of First Nations?
E.g., affordable housing, cultural and recreational facilities, community safety (response times for emergency vehicles, risk of flooding, fire protection, compliance of the project with the building code and safety standards.
If so, to what extent?
Q17. Has the Program contributed to more efficient decision making?
E.g., choice of projects, setting goals, challenges, etc.
E.g., group meetings, etc.
Q18. Is the process for selecting projects effective?
If not, why not?
If so, how effective?
E.g., better justification of projects chosen.
Q19. Has the Program contributed to more efficient decision making?
E.g., choice of projects, setting goals, challenges, etc.
E.g., group meetings, etc.
Q20. Is the process for selecting projects effective?
If not, why not?
If so, how well?
E.g., better justification of projects chosen.
Do you have any other comments?
E.g., problems encountered, suggestions etc.
Q21. Do you have any other comments?
e.g., problems encountered, suggestions etc.
Interview guide
Program managers / INAC
List of questions asked of INAC program managers
Q1. Is there a procedure to be followed for entering data into the SIMSI data management system?
If so, what is it?
E.g., how, when etc.
If not, should there be one?
Q2. Why wasn't all project data entered into the system?
for example, by whom, how, when, etc.
Q3. Can the data gathered for the SIMSI management system be used to gauge achievement of outcomes?
If not, why not?
Are the data recorded reliable and accurate?
Q4. Are there other data you would like to see entered into the SIMSI data management system?
If so, what?
Q5. Are data also recorded in another system?
If so, please specify.
Is that system more efficient? Please explain.
Q6. Are you aware that the funds earmarked for the First Nations Component have not been fully spent or allocated?
More than $700,000 was returned.
Why were funds allocated otherwise than originally budgeted?
Q7. Might other projects have been funded rather than return the money?
If so, how?
E.g., affordable housing, etc.
Q8. Was the First Nations component of ICP delivered as planned within INAC's Capital Facilities Program?
If not, why not?
If so, what are the benefits?
Did this allow for effective, efficient program delivery?
Q9. Do the infrastructure projects include a maintenance plan?
If so, are these plans adequate?
Have they caused any difficulties or problems? Please specify.
Q10. Has funding been provided for the operation of the maintenance plans?
If so, is it adequate? Please explain.
If not, how do we solve the problem of funding?
Q11. Do the maintenance plans ensure project sustainability?
If not, what other means could be used to ensure the long-term survival of the projects?
Q12. Are the Program outcomes satisfactory?
E.g., as regards attainment of objectives.
If so, how well?
If not, why not?
Q13. Is the Program cost-effective?
E.g., in terms of monies invested by the government versus funds generated by partners.
Q14. Might there have been other ways to achieve the same results?
E.g., other programs or initiatives?
If so, specify.
Would these other ways have been more economical?
Q15. What changes would you make to the Program?
E.g., changes in order to more easily get results.
E.g., collaboration, management, monitoring and reporting, communications, allocation of funds, governance, accountability, stacking, commitments and conditions, selection criteria.
Q16. Has ICP allowed you to increase your understanding of the community infrastructure needs of First Nations?
E.g., affordable housing, cultural and recreational facilities, community safety (response times for emergency vehicles, risk of flooding, fire protection, compliance of the project with the building code and safety standards).
If so, how well?
Has the Program contributed to more efficient decision making?
E.g., choice of projects, setting goals, challenges, etc.
E.g., group meetings, etc.
Q17. Is the process for selecting projects effective?
If not, why not?
If so, how well?
E.g., better justification of projects chosen.
Q18. Has the Program contributed to more efficient decision making?
E.g., choice of projects, setting goals, challenges, etc.
E.g., group meetings, etc.
Q19. Is the process for selecting projects effective?
If not, why not?
If so, how well?
E.g., better justification of projects chosen.
Q20. Do you have any other comments?
E.g., problems encountered, suggestions, etc
List of questions asked of communications officers / INFC, INAC
Q1. Were all projects to be announced?
If so, by whom?
Is there a specific procedure for this? If so, what is it?
Q2. How many projects did you announce?
Q3. By what means were projects announced, or by what promotional activities?
E.g., website, news releases, events, etc.
Did you encounter any difficulties? If so, what?
Q4. In your opinion, has the Program made it possible to enhance federal government visibility in First Nations communities?
If so, how well?
E.g., Government of Canada logo, etc.
Q5. Do you have any other comments?
E.g., problems encountered, suggestions, etc.
List of questions asked of officers in charge of the SIMSI data management system at INFC
Q1. Is there a procedure to be followed for entering data into the SIMSI data management system?
If so, what is it?
For example, by whom, how, when, etc.
If not, should there be one?
Q2. Why wasn't all project data entered into the system?
E.g., delays, omissions, etc.
Q3. Can the data gathered for the SIMSI management system be used to gauge achievement of outcomes?
If not, why not?
Are the data recorded reliable and accurate?
Q4. Are there other data you would like to see entered into the SIMSI data management system?
If so, what?
Q5. Are data also recorded in another system?
If so, please specify.
Is that system more efficient? Please explain.
Q6. Do you have any other comments?
e.g., problems encountered, suggestions, etc
List of questions asked of Regional Directors, INAC
Q1. Has the Infrastructure Canada Program (ICP) made it possible to enhance federal government visibility in First Nations communities?
Should projects all be announced? If so, by whom? And is there a specific procedure for this? Please explain.
How many projects have you announced?
By what means have promotional activities or projects been announced? E.g., website, press releases, events, etc. And have you encountered any problems?
To what extent do you think the Program has increased the visibility of the Government of Canada in First Nations communities? E.g., logo of the Government of Canada
Q2. Has ICP resulted in a common understanding (enhanced knowledge and acceptance) by partners of the federal government's role in the area of infrastructure?
Have you maintained relations with other partners involved in the Program? E.g., First Nations, the management committee, INAC, INAC regional offices, project managers, INFC.
What is the nature of relations between partners involved in the Program? E.g., bilateral meetings, group meetings, e-mail, phone, etc.
Have you encountered any problems or obstacles that may affect the effectiveness of the relations between partners? How have they been overcome? E.g., effective communication, risk management, innovative solutions.
Are you satisfied with the cooperation of partners? Why?
Q3. To what extent have the projects funded by ICP-FN led to environmental improvements in the communities where they took place?
Drinking Water projects:
Number of households connected to the municipal water distribution
Improved water quality; improved drinking water production
Number of plants that have installed meters to measure the distribution of drinking water
Reductions in chemical agents for the treatment of drinking water or waste water
Number of service interruptions and incidents requiring the boiling of water before drinking
Waste Water Projects:
Number of incidents of rejection of wastewater not meeting standards;
Number of households served by a wastewater treatment system and whose wastewater will be treated more effectively,
Number of plants having increased their wastewater treatment capacity;
Number of households connected to municipal wastewater collection and treatment systems.
Solid waste projects:
improved air quality due to less waste incinerated
better solid waste management
more solid waste sent to recycling or composting
less methane emissions
Energy efficiency projects
reduced use of electricity and fuel for heating buildings
Q4. To what extent have the projects funded by ICP-FN improved the economies in the communities where they took place?
Transportation projects:
more efficient transportation of people and goods
safer transportation
fewer accidents
better traffic capacity
Economic Growth:
permanent jobs created as a result of the projects
capital investment by the private sector
economic activities resulting from the projects
Telecommunications projects:
Number of users of the Internet, telephones
Number of institutions with telecommunications services (high-speed Internet)
Tourist Market:
Number of tourists and visitors in a community as a result of the project
Increase in average length of tourist stay
Q5. To what extent have the projects funded by ICP-FN improved the community infrastructure in the communities where they took place?
Affordable Housing
Number of additional units of affordable housing
Number of occupants in the new units of affordable housing
Benefits for occupants of the new units of affordable housing
Cultural and Recreational facilities
Number of visits to the heritage or cultural facilities
Number of heritage sites designated for the preservation and renovation
Projected number of annual use of recreational facilities.
Community Safety/Security
Decrease in response times for emergency vehicles
Number of households with decreased risk of flooding
Number of households with better fire protection
projects conform to building code and safety standards.
Q6. Have the infrastructure projects in First Nations communities improved the following aspects?
Increased the number of partnerships? E.g., public-private-NGO partnerships and investment
Use of new approaches and best practices? E.g., best construction practices, confirmation of reduced consumption as a result of use of demand management techniques.
More efficient use of existing infrastructure? E.g., increased use of infrastructure, reduction in operating costs.
Encouraged innovation? E.g., use of the best current technology, proven and cost-effective technology, benefits achieved.
Q7. Are you aware that the funds allocated to the First Nations have not been completely spent or allocated? E.g., more than $ 700 000 has been returned.
Do you know why this is the case?
Why have the funds been allocated differently than what was budgeted?
Would it have been possible to finance other projects rather than returning this money? And if so, how? E.g., affordable housing, etc.
Q8. Did delivery of the First Nations component of ICP within INAC's Capital Facilities Program allow for effective, efficient program delivery? Please explain why or why not.
Q9. Does ICP satisfy First Nations infrastructure priorities? E.g., drinking water and wastewater, air, solid waste, energy, transport of people and goods, economic growth, telecommunications, tourism market, etc.
What other infrastructure priorities should the ICP First Nations program have addressed?
Q10. Does the ICP-FN program complement existing INAC infrastructure programs?
Q11. Do the infrastructure projects have a maintenance plan ensuring project sustainability?
If so, are they adequate? Have they caused any difficulties or problems?
Has funding been provided for the maintenance plans? Is it adequate? If not, how do we solve the problem of funding?
Do the maintenance plans ensure the sustainability of projects? If not, what other means could be used to ensure the long-term survival of the projects?
Q12. To what extent is the Program cost-effective?
Do the results of the Program provide good value for the cost?
Were the funds invested by the federal government effective in generating funds from partners? Is this an effective means of getting infrastructure projects funded?
Would there have been other ways to achieve the same results, e.g., other programs or initiatives? And would they have been more economical?
Q13. What changes could be made to improve program delivery, effectiveness and efficiency?
What changes would you make to the Program to better achieve results? (E.g., changes to collaboration, management, monitoring and reporting, communications, allocation of funds, governance, accountability, stacking, commitments and conditions, selection criteria)
Q14. Has ICP allowed you or your organization, INAC, to increase your understanding of the community needs of First Nations? To what extent?
E.g., affordable housing, cultural and recreational facilities, community safety (response times for emergency vehicles, risk of flooding, fire protection, conformity of the project in the building code and safety standards).
Q15. Has the Program contributed to more efficient decision making? E.g., choice of projects, setting goals, challenges, etc.
Is the process for selecting projects effective? Why or why not?