Evaluation of the Youth Justice Initiative

5 Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1 Conclusions

5.1.1 Relevance

The evaluation found that the YJI continues to be relevant to share the costs of the youth justice system with provinces and territories in priority areas. Over time, the youth justice landscape has evolved, including decreasing youth crime and violent crime rates. At the same time, cases in the youth justice system are becoming increasingly complex and the overrepresentation of Indigenous and racialized youth in the justice system has not attenuated.

The YJI provides a flexible approach to support provinces and territories to enhance rehabilitative programs and services outside of formal court and custodial settings (YJSFP), while providing funding to share the costs of intensive programming required for youth with complicated mental health issues who commit serious violent crimes (IRCS). Because the funding envelope is flexible, provinces and territories are able to spend the federal funds on interventions that respond to the jurisdictional context and the profile and needs of youth in conflict with the law.

5.1.2 Effectiveness

YJSFP Contribution to the YJI Expected Outcomes

The YJSFP makes an important contribution to share the costs of the youth justice system with provinces and territories. The Program increases the capacity of jurisdictions to offer programming in high priority programming areas that achieve federal policy objectives in relation to the YCJA. The proportionate share of the costs of youth justice by the federal level varies across jurisdictions and the funding formula to determine the federal contribution has not been changed in many years.

The annual report data confirm that multiple programs and services are supported by the YJSFP at various stages of the youth justice continuum. There are some concerns on the part of provinces and territories about capacity given prior funding reductions to YJSFP agreements. However, there is limited evidence of strain in the system such as waitlists. In terms of gaps, it was noted that only half of provinces and territories have programs and services to address youth in pre-trial detention.

National data indicate that fewer youth are being charged and, when charged, are less likely to receive a custody sentence. While these trends cannot be directly and solely attributed to the YJSFP, the funding contributed to this trend by offering alternatives to justice system officials so formal court and custody can be reserved for the most serious offences. YJSFP-funded programs are also addressing rehabilitation and reintegration of youth who are in conflict with the law through individualized programming. Recidivism data are not widely available, although smaller regional studies and the case studies illustrate the impactful nature of programs on a variety of indicators (beyond recidivism and re-contact with police).

IRCS Contribution to the YJI Expected Outcomes

IRCS has undoubtedly increased provincial/territorial capacity to assess and treat serious violent offenders with mental health issues and the case reports indicate that, for most youth, programs and services would have been available only in part or not at all without IRCS funding. At the same time, jurisdictions with IRCS cases also contribute their own resources in addition to IRCS.

Part D is highly valued to support system improvements and innovation, although the sustainability of this component is in doubt as IRCS cases have been increasing. There is a perceived need among many provincial/territorial representatives for funding for youth who have mental health issues, but who have not (yet) committed an offence that meets the ‘serious violent offence’ threshold requirement of Part C.

The impacts of the IRCS program on the rehabilitation and reintegration of youth is difficult to quantify. Anecdotally, there are success stories and the case records suggest that the program is beneficial and has resulted in improvements to mental health. However, recent re-contact studies are not available to assess re-offending or other meaningful impacts.

Other Effectiveness Considerations

The evaluation examined other issues related to effectiveness: the extent to which there are barriers to access YJI-funded programs and services; the effectiveness of programs for diverse youth; and the quality of FPT collaboration around youth justice. The evaluation found good capacity in the YJI-funded portion of the system, with the exception of barriers to accessing YJI-funded programs and services in rural and remote locations. There is evidence that provinces and territories are using individualised assessments and treatment where possible to tailor interventions to the needs of youth, and sources of funding such as IRCS Part D and the YJF have been used to increase capacity and pilot interventions for culturally responsive and culturally safe programs and services. The YJSFP does not have a specific priority related to responsiveness of programming, although high priority rehabilitative services are to include programs that address linguistic, gender, ethnic and cultural differences and respond to the needs of Indigenous young persons. Still, the overrepresentation of Indigenous and racialized youth in the youth justice system points to more to be done.

While FPT collaboration has been previously raised as a concern, the current evaluation found FPT stakeholders to be satisfied with the level of collaboration at the FPT WG and CCSO-YJ tables. Efforts to gather and engage stakeholders, such as regular teleconference and in-person meetings, are well regarded and have created the foundation for networks among the participants. Some improvements could be made to the administration of the committees to enhance their effectiveness, including more robust involvement of provincial/territorial representatives in co-chair positions and agenda setting.

5.1.3 Efficiency

The high priorities that are the intended focus of the YJSFP are viewed as appropriate and comprehensive. The vast majority of YJSFP funding is allocated to these priorities and provinces and territories have the flexibility to be selective across the priorities to implement YJSFP-funded programs in a way that makes sense for their jurisdiction.

The evaluation confirmed that the design and implementation of IRCS remains sound. The components which include basic (Part A) and enhanced (Part D) capacity building, as well as case specific funding are welcome by provinces and territories to support complex cases. While the fund and collaboration among jurisdictions are functioning well, the management of the financial claims and approvals should be examined given their time-consuming nature and capacity issues of some provinces and territories to submit their claims.

5.2 Recommendations

Addressing the Increasing Complexity of Youth who are in Conflict with the Law

There is consensus that youth in the justice system have increasingly complex mental health and addictions issues. While IRCS funding addresses the assessment and treatment needs of youth who have committed serious offences, a number of youth require similar attention, but have not met the threshold of a serious offence.

  1. The Policy Implementation Directorate, in consultation with its provincial-territorial partners, should explore the merits and consequences of expanding the current Part C (exceptional cases) offence eligibility criterion to include applications for youth who have serious mental health issues but have not met the serious offence criterion.
Overrepresentation of Indigenous and Racialized Youth

As evidenced in the evaluation, the YJI is funding efforts to enhance culturally responsive and culturally safe programs for youth in conflict with the law. Given the continued overrepresentation of Indigenous and racialized youth in the youth justice system and mandate letter commitment to continue work on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls for Action, continued attention in this area is required.

  1. The Policy Implementation Directorate, in consultation with its provincial/territorial partners, should review the YJSFP high priority funding areas and update them as required in order to support capacity development to deliver culturally responsive and culturally safe programs for Indigenous and other racialized youth as a way to work towards addressing their over-representation in the Canadian Justice System.
Addressing the Needs of Youth Living in Rural and Remote Areas

Service delivery in rural and remote areas remains a persistent barrier for access to programs and services. This is particularly true in areas where there is a lack of capacity and infrastructure.

  1. The Policy Implementation Directorate with its provincial/territorial partners should further discuss and share innovative practices specific to alleviating program delivery issues and service gaps in rural and remote areas.
FPT Collaboration in the Youth Justice Context

FPT collaboration in the youth justice context is essential to address policy issues of utmost national importance. As was evidenced in the evaluation, FPT collaboration has improved over the course of the evaluation period and current committee interactions are well regarded. More specifically, while progress addressing certain operational issues discussed at FPT meetings has improved, changes are not always achieved in a timely manner.

  1. The Family Law and Youth Justice Policy Section, in consultation with the Coordinating Committee of Senior Officials – Youth Justice, should continue to foster collaborative efforts and improved responses to emerging issues in a timely manner.
Date modified: