Management Response and Action Plan

Project Title: Justice Partnership and Innovation Program Evaluation

Responsibility Centre: Innovations, Analysis and Integration Directorate

Conclusions Recommendations Management Response Action Plan Responsible Manager
Planned Implementation Date

Complexity of Objectives

The JPIP program currently has ten objectives. Although some of these objectives are goal-focused, others are very specific, targeting designated agencies or organizations rather than the desired outcome of program funding. Further, the goals of the organizations funded in this way are aligned with the core aims of the Program, resulting in redundancies in the stated program objectives.

The evaluation recognized that the strength of JPIP lies in its flexibility to be able to fund a broad range of projects. This will continue to be the case with a more streamlined set of objectives focused on the principal aims of the Program; the organizations currently receiving JPIP funds could still meet the requirements necessary to apply for future funding.

1. Streamline the objectives to focus on the primary goals of the Program.


The objectives of the Program will be reviewed and streamlined to facilitate an understanding of what the Program aims to achieve and to ensure continued alignment with government priorities.

The Directorate has already begun a review of the Program’s objectives. Following this review, the objectives of the Program will be streamlined.

Marc Rozon
(Director, Innovations, Analysis and Integration Directorate)

December 31, 2012

Performance Measurement

One of the noted limitations of the evaluation was the limited information that was collected from ultimate beneficiaries of JPIP funding.

Although it is important not to overburden organizations seeking funding with exigent performance measurement requirements which take away from program delivery, funding recipients could be required to choose select products or events for which beneficiary feedback is collected. For instance, an organization that conducts conferences could administer a participant survey to gather performance information.

2. Strengthen performance measurement by requiring funded organizations to collect some data from beneficiaries as a part of the funding agreement.


A participant conference survey tool has already been developed and used. Program managers will be reminded of the importance of ensuring that funding recipients provide this data to the Department when submitting a final project report. The information thus collected will feed into the overall Program performance measurement as well as into the performance measurement of each of the Program’s components.

The Directorate has already developed a conference survey tool which is currently being used.  It will be revised to ensure its relevancy and will be sent to each funding recipient involved in an information sharing activity, such as conferences, to ensure that the necessary data is collected to reinforce the performance measurement of the Program.

Marc Rozon
(Director, Innovations, Analysis and Integration Directorate)

April 30, 2012

Date modified: