Youth Justice Initiative Evaluation

Executive Summary

1. Introduction

The Youth Justice Initiative (YJI) is the federal government’s primary contribution to the continued implementation of the Youth Criminal Justice Act (YCJA). This report presents the findings of the evaluation of the YJI. The purpose of the evaluation was to examine the YJI and its components in terms of their relevance and performance (effectiveness, efficiency and economy). The Initiative was last evaluated in 2009.

2. Background on the Youth Justice Initiative

The ultimate objective of the YJI is to foster a fairer, more effective youth justice system. These characteristics are defined according to the following:

The YJI grew out of the Youth Justice Renewal Initiative (YJRI), which was launched in 1999 to support the development of the new legislative framework for youth justice, the YCJA, and to assist with its implementation. The YJI continued the programming elements developed under the YJRI, but shifted the emphasis from supporting the implementation of the YCJA to supporting programs and responding to new and emerging youth justice issues.

The YJI and the YJRI have encouraged the use of extrajudicial measures as alternatives to the formal court process where appropriate, and the application of in custody and community-based programs and services to reduce recidivism and help youth to integrate successfully back into the community. The YJI funding programs are designed to help maintain the array of programs and services put in place to implement the YCJA, and to position the youth justice system to respond effectively to emerging issues in keeping with the Act.

A key guiding principle of the YCJA is that the youth justice system is intended to protect the public by:

The YJI supports these principles by contributing to a range of programs and services that encourage accountability measures for unlawful behaviour that are proportionate to the severity of the offence and the degree of responsibility of the offender; encourage effective rehabilitation and reintegration of young persons into their communities; and, target the formal court process and custody to the most serious offences.

The YJI consists of the Policy Development, Monitoring and Support (Policy) Unit and three funding components, namely the:

3. Methodology

Methods for the conduct of the evaluation included 68 key informant interviews with Justice Canada officials, provincial and territorial justice officials and youth justice service providers; a review of relevant YJI-related documents and reports; analysis of YJI administrative and financial data; a literature review and review of available youth justice statistics; six case studies of projects funded under the YJF; and three thematic studies of YJI initiatives.

4. Findings

4.1. Relevance

The evaluation found ample evidence that there is a continued need for the YJI, in order to continue supporting the provinces and territories in developing and implementing programs and services in keeping with the YCJA and the objectives of the YJI, and to take a lead role in working toward a coordinated and innovative response to youth justice issues as they emerge. The evaluation also indicated that the YJI is consistent with current federal government priorities, and aligned with the Justice Canada strategic outcome of “a fair, relevant and accessible justice system that reflects Canadian values” (Department of Justice, 2009, July). It is also well aligned with the Department’s outcomes related to youth justice. The YJI and the Department’s activities under the Initiative were found to be in keeping with federal government roles and responsibilities in youth justice.

4.2. Performance

The YJSFP has produced federal, provincial and territorial funding agreements and knowledge sharing opportunities, and has provided funding as planned to provinces and territories to assist in sustaining a range of high priority youth justice services (e.g., rehabilitation and reintegration, alternatives to court, alternatives to custody). Provinces and territories are using the YJSFP funds in keeping with the agreements and in furtherance of YCJA objectives, and attribute their ability to expand the range of needed programs and services in significant measure to YJI support. In particular, it was found that federal government high priority areas represented close to 50% of all YJI program expenditures across the country. It is evident that without YJI funding fewer of these types of services would be available.

Evidence indicates that the IRCS Program support has resulted in increased alternative program and service capacity at the provincial/territorial level as planned, and greater use of these alternative services as against custodial sentences. Outside larger urban areas, capacity remains limited in some areas.

Data on the extent of use of these services by young persons in the last five years is beyond the scope of the evaluation research. However, the evaluation has found that there has been progress in the use of extrajudicial measures and community-based sentencing options as against charges and custodial sentences, which indicates that the use of these alternatives has increased along with their availability.

Through the activities of the YJF, the Department has been found to be increasing responsiveness to emerging youth justice issues, increasing community involvement in youth justice, and increasing collaboration and knowledge development.

The policy development, research and liaison and outreach component of the YJI is actively engaged in knowledge-sharing activities, and has been providing valued advice on youth justice issues and policies. In the evaluation period, this advice has led to important amendments to the YCJA, and funding and other decisions in keeping with YCJAobjectives. Provincial and territorial youth justice officials value the policy and legislative work that has been accomplished, but report a recent reduction in face-to-face meetings and consultation on policies and legislative initiatives, in particular regarding the recent YCJA amendments. This has reportedly diminished the quality of the working relationship, despite continued high quality communication at the officer level.

The evaluation found that the YJI has contributed to a more integrated and coordinated approach to youth justice in Canada, especially through funding that has brought improved and more coordinated programs and services. Integration and coordination has also increased at the federal, provincial and territorial levels through formal and informal collaboration, with the exception of the above-noted recent perceived reduction in consultation on policy development.

In the long term, the YJI seeks to enhance the ability of the youth justice system to respond effectively to youth crime in ways in keeping with the objectives of the YCJA. The evaluation has found evidence of changes in the way the justice system handles youth criminal activity, with fewer cases proceeding to the formal court process and fewer youth sentenced to custody. The long-term impact of these changes on youth involved in the youth criminal justice system is the subject of research beyond the scope of this evaluation. The evaluation has found that the YJI has contributed substantially to the availability of a range of new programs and services that are widely viewed as progressive and effective in improving the youth justice response. The evaluation has also presented data that indicates that these programs and services are being accessed by virtue of the significant reduction in youth crime charges, youth criminal court cases, and custodial sentences in the last ten years.

The evaluation noted remaining challenges, including persistent use of pre-trial detention, disproportionately high charging and custodial rates for Aboriginal youth, and emerging issues such as cybercrime and the need for resources and infrastructure to provide more programs and services outside large urban centres.

The evaluation was unable to determine conclusively whether or not YJI resources were sufficient to meet its objectives, mainly because YJI objectives are comprehensive and long-term and rely heavily on programs and services that are the responsibility of provincial and territorial governments. There is evidence that especially in smaller jurisdictions a reduction in federal contributions would have a direct negative impact on capacity to offer the alternative programs and services envisioned under the YCJA. On the whole, the YJI appears to be operating efficiently, with low administrative costs, and with actual spending corresponding reasonably to budgeted costs.

5. Measuring Outcomes

The evaluation concluded that there is limited data available linking on-the-ground developments in the administration of youth justice to the programs and services that the YJI funds in part. Each province and territory has its own set of programs and services designed to address youth justice issues. However, the outcomes identified for the YJI are phrased such that success is measured largely by whether or not YJI funds are being spent on programs, services and community-based projects that are intended to address the YJCA and YJI objectives. The effectiveness of the programs and services funded under the YJSFP and the IRCS Program are seen to be the responsibility of each province and territory. What this means is that evaluators are limited in their ability to establish a causal link between YJI contributions and improvements in the justice system response to youth justice issues. Given the maturity of the Initiative, it would be helpful to have more in-depth understanding of the impacts that are attributable to the federal funding and the effectiveness of specific types of programs and services to which the Department contributes.