Aboriginal Justice Strategy Evaluation, Final Report

1. Introduction

The Aboriginal Justice Strategy (AJS) provides timely and effective alternatives to the mainstream justice system in appropriate circumstances, in order to increase the involvement of Aboriginal communities in the local administration of justice and to decrease rates of crime, victimization and incarceration of Aboriginal persons in communities with AJS-funded programs. The Department of Justice conducted an evaluation of the AJS, for the period 2007-08 to 2011-12[1]. This report outlines the evaluation's findings and constitutes the program evaluation's final report.

1.1 Context of the Evaluation

To meet the federal government's commitment to Treasury Board as outlined in the AJS Results-based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF), the Department of Justice conducted a summative evaluation of the AJS in fiscal year 2011-12.

Over the course of the period 2007-08 to 2011-12, numerous activities were undertaken to support the evaluation. These include a mid-term evaluation of the period 2007-08 to 2008-09, and sub-studies on the relevance and performance of the AJS through case studies, community crime trends analyses, a recidivism study, and a cost analysis. Findings from these evaluation activities are also included in this report. Additionally, the level of implementation of the recommendations from the mid-term evaluation was assessed.

1.2 Objectives of the Evaluation

The core objective of the evaluation is to assess the relevance and performance (i.e. effectiveness, efficiency and economy) of the AJS between 2007-08 and 2011-12 in order to meet departmental reporting requirements to the Treasury Board. The evaluation includes a synthesis of findings from the AJS Case Studies and Community Trends Report and the AJS Recidivism and Cost Analysis Report. Findings from a police/Crown survey conducted in September 2009 as part of the AJS mid-term evaluation are also included.

1.3 Structure of the Report

This report contains six sections, including this introduction. Section 2 provides a description of the AJS, Section 3 describes the methodology for the evaluation, while Section 4 summarizes the key findings with respect to relevance and performance. Section 5 summarizes conclusions from the report's findings, and Section 6 includes recommendations and management response.

[1]  As the evaluation activities were undertaken in summer 2011, only impacts of activities from the first four months of 2011-12 are captured in the evaluation findings.

Date modified: