Introduction - Funding to Support Community Justice Centres (CJCs)

An evaluation of the Funding to Support CJCs (the CJC Initiative) was conducted, covering fiscal years (FYs) 2021-22 to 2024-25. It examined the relevance, design and delivery, and early results related to effectiveness and efficiency of the CJC Initiative. This report provides an overview of the main findings as well as conclusions

Introduction

Purpose of the evaluation

This report presents the key findings of the Evaluation of the CJC Initiative. The Evaluation was undertaken as part of the Department of Justice Canada’s (Justice Canada) 2025-2026 to 2029-2030 Departmental Evaluation Plan and was conducted in accordance with the Treasury Board’s Policy on Results (2016).

Evaluation scope

The evaluation covered four FYs, from 2021-22 to 2024-25. A review of available information, as well as consultations with key internal stakeholders regarding key issues and questions of interest informed the scope of the evaluation.

Given that this is the first evaluation of the CJC Initiative, which is a time-limited program, the evaluation had a formative focus. The evaluation considered:

The evaluation scope included the activities undertaken by Justice’s Innovations, Analysis and Integration Directorate (IAID) within the Programs Branch to manage the CJC Initiative, and the Ad Hoc Committee’s activities and results. While the evaluation includes the CJC pilots, it is not an evaluation of the individual CJCs.

Evaluation methodology

Methods

The following methods were used to address the evaluation questions:

See Appendix A for more information on the methodology

Evaluation Approach

Evaluation Questions

Relevance

  1. Does the CJC Initiative address a continued need?

Design and Delivery

  1. To what extent does the design of the CJC Initiative support flexibility in addressing the needs of specific communities (including Indigenous Peoples and Black Canadians)?
  2. Are there any opportunities for improvement that could be implemented to enhance the design and delivery of the CJC Initiative?
  3. What are the challenges, lessons learned, and best practices from the CJC pilots? Have any unintended outcomes resulted from the pilots?
  4. How well are the CJC Initiative activities aligned with outputs and outcomes as stated in the Justice System Partnerships logic model?
  5. To what extent do performance measures enable ongoing monitoring of the CJC Initiative and support decision-making?

Effectiveness

  1. To what extent does the CJC approach enable the use of alternative measures through integrated services and community support?
  2. To what extent has the CJC Initiative increased the capacity of justice system partners to develop and offer integrated activities and services to the target client groups?
  3. To what extent has the CJC Initiative contributed to increasing access to community social supports and addressing the root causes of crime?
  4. How has the CJC Initiative enabled progress towards the development of a framework for a potential national program?

Efficiency

  1. Given the limited timelines for implementation, what measures were put in place to ensure the efficient management of the CJC Initiative?
  2. Are CJCs an efficient approach to the delivery of justice and program supports for vulnerable accused people and their communities?