Library and Archives Canada
Symbol of the Government of Canada

Institutional links

ARCHIVED - About Us

Archived Content

This archived Web page remains online for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. This page will not be altered or updated. Web pages that are archived on the Internet are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats of this page on the Contact Us page.

Formative Evaluation of the National Archival Development Program
Final Report

5.3 Management response

1. Evaluation question: Is the program being implemented as designed?

  • There is a general approval of the five national objectives by all stakeholders within the NADP. The system of setting local priorities at the provincial and territorial levels is working well and should continue.
    • Management Response: Accepted.
    • LAC is pleased with the success of the national objectives with all stakeholders. The system is flexible enough at the local level to allow a wide variety of projects to be funded under the national objectives. The current system will stay in place.
  • There is a continued need for the NADP, as it is either the only source or a major source of funding for many groups.
    • Management Response: Accepted.
    • LAC is aware that the NADP is one of the few options available for the archival community to receive funding for various and important activities and/or projects. LAC is committed to make the NADP as successful and relevant as possible to the applicants and beneficiaries.
  • The application form, which was considered to be onerous by applicants, should be simplified to the extant possible, in collaboration with LAC, to ensure that all the information currently being requested is necessary.
    • Management Response: Accepted.
    • LAC and CCA have already made significant changes to the various application documents and have also worked on providing improved guidelines and assistance for applicants. The wide range of quality in applications and perceived level of burden by applicants indicates that some of these changes have been beneficial. LAC commits to collaborate with the CCA to further improve the application forms to help reduce the burden as much as possible for applicants, while ensuring that the necessary reporting requirements for contributions programs are met.
    • Completion date: Improved application forms in place for fourth year of the program (2009-2010).
  • Given the large number of small-sized projects, and the fact that many applicants are volunteers, the program could consider providing grants, instead of contributions, for small-sized projects, when the program is renewed.
    • Management Response: This option will be examined when the program is renewed.
    • The question of grants versus contributions was examined when the program was re-designed in 2006. LAC chose to make the NADP a contribution program based on the findings and recommendations of the audit and evaluation of the previous version of the program, done in 2003 and 2004, as well as advice from the Treasury Board Secretariat. LAC commits to examine the situation and gauge the various options available when the program will be reviewed and evaluated for its renewal.
    • Completion date: A decision on whether grants will be included in the program for certain projects will be made by end of fiscal year 2010-2011.

2. Evaluation question: Is appropriate performance information being collected, captured and used?

  • A comprehensive performance measurement strategy is in place. However, at this point, work is required to collect, organize, and report on performance of the NADP.
    • Management Response: Accepted.
    • Developing a Performance Measurement Plan was in fact a successful accomplishment for both the CCA and LAC during the 07-08 fiscal year. The implementation of the plan was a priority as soon as it was approved, one of the first steps was to modify the structure of certain parts of the program (forms, reporting) to allow the capture of data required for the indicators. Substantial progress has been made in the past few months and a process is now in place for the majority of indicators. Organization and analysis have taken place for about one third of the indicators contained in the plan. LAC commits to provide the necessary resources to complete the process so that organization and analysis are in progress for all indicators before the audit of the program.
    • Completion date: End of fiscal year 2009-2010.
  • Data for a number of indicators has been collected and exists in completed recipient reporting forms. The LAC and CCA should continue to work together to establish the baseline data from the information that has already been collected.
    • Management Response: Accepted.
    • Both LAC and CCA understand the need to make progress on baseline data using what is already available in reporting forms. Work is already underway to establish baseline data for these indicators during the 08-09 fiscal year. Both the CCA and LAC have demonstrated flexibility to assign responsibility so as to facilitate implementation of the plan.
    • Completion date: In progress
  • Consideration could be given to funding NADP projects, under the five objectives, that address performance measurement at the local level. Such projects could help to gain an additional perspective and familiarize project recipients with performance measurement. A portion of a funded project could be directed toward developing the tools and capacity to measure performance under the project's objective.
    • Management Response: Accepted
    • LAC will examine this possibility in conjunction with the CCA. Although performance measurement in itself is not part of the program objectives, an evaluation criterion could be added to favour projects that would include performance measurement information, in addition to the ones already required through forms and reports.
    • Completion date: A decision will be taken with the CCA on this matter in October 2008.
  • A more detailed explanation of the rationale for performance measurement within the NADP could be described in the application forms and reporting forms.
    • Management Response: Accepted
    • LAC recognizes that the archival community (beneficiaries/applicants) requires a better understanding of the need and context of performance measurement. LAC commits to collaborate with the CCA to present an overview of the process, the plan and the analysis of results to the next CCA Annual General Meeting in October 2008 as well as consideration towards modifying the forms to provide more detailed explanation. Other communication options will also be explored.
    • Completion date: End of fiscal year 2008-2009
  • Given the current circumstances with regard to performance measurement, there is some doubt that sufficient evidence will be available at the end of five years to accurately report on all of the designated performance indicators. Enhanced efforts in performance measurement will strengthen the case for program renewal.
    • Management Response: Acknowledged.
    • LAC recognizes the significant cultural and work change which performance measurement has meant for the archival community and is working closely with the CCA to implement the performance measurement plan and to ensure that proper data is collected and analyzed for all indicators to facilitate the renewal of the program in 2011. LAC will review the progress in collaboration with the CCA and make appropriate adjustments as required to ensure that the plan is fully implemented by the end of the fourth year of the program.
    • Completion date: end of fiscal year 2009-2010.

Previous | Table of Contents