Socio-economic Gaps on First Nations Reserves—Indigenous Services Canada; Employment Training for Indigenous People—Employment and Social Development Canada

Opening Statement to the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs

Socio-economic Gaps on First Nations Reserves—Indigenous Services Canada

(Report 5—2018 Spring Reports of the Auditor General of Canada)

Employment Training for Indigenous People—Employment and Social Development Canada

(Report 6—2018 Spring Reports of the Auditor General of Canada)

24 October 2018

Jerome Berthelette
Assistant Auditor General

Madam Chair, thank you for this opportunity to present the results of two audits from our spring 2018 reports: one audit was on the socio-economic gaps on First Nations reserves and the other was on employment training for Indigenous people. Joining me today are Joe Martire, Principal and Maria Pooley, Director.

The Office of the Auditor General of Canada has a long history of auditing federal programs and activities that affect Indigenous peoples. Although successive governments have made numerous commitments to improve the well-being of Indigenous people, I am sorry to report that our decades of audits indicate that the results of the programs for Indigenous peoples have been unacceptable.

As you will see from the findings of the two recent audits we are discussing here today, recurring issues include the lack of information and the poor use of available data to understand and improve the impact the programs have on the lives of First Nations.

In the first audit, we assessed Indigenous Services Canada’s progress and reporting on closing the socio-economic gaps between on-reserve First Nations people and other Canadians. We also focused on whether the Department made adequate use of data to improve education programs to close the education gap and improve socio-economic well-being.

We found that the Department’s main measure of socio-economic well-being on reserves, the Community Well-Being index, was not comprehensive. While the index included Statistics Canada data on education, employment, income, and housing, it omitted several aspects of well-being that are also important to First Nations people—such as health, environment, language, and culture.

We also found that the Department did not adequately use the large amount of program data provided by First Nations, or other available data, to measure and report on whether the lives of people on First Nations reserves were improving.

For example, the Department did not adequately measure and report on the education gap. Using the education data collected by the Department, we calculated that the gap in levels of high school graduation (or the equivalent) between on-reserve First Nations people and other Canadians widened between 2001 and 2016.

We also found that First Nations had limited access to the Department’s Education Information System despite the government’s commitment made in 2008 to give them access to information in the system.

Indigenous Services Canada also made poor use of the education data it collected to improve education results. For example, the Department spent $42 million over 4 years to prepare First Nations students to enter post-secondary education programs. However, we found that only 8% of those enrolled actually completed this preparatory program. Despite these poor results, the Department did not work with First Nations or educational institutions to improve the success rate.

We found that the Department did not report on most of the education results it had committed to report on over the past 18 years to determine whether progress was being made to close the gap. For example, it did not report on student attendance or the delivery of First Nations’ language instruction.

We also found that the Department’s public reporting of First Nations education results was inaccurate. For example, the Department overstated First Nations high school graduation rates by up to 29 percentage points because it did not account for students who dropped out between grades 9 and 11.

We concluded that Indigenous Services Canada did not satisfactorily measure or report on Canada’s progress in closing the socio-economic gaps between on-reserve First Nations people and other Canadians. We also concluded that the use of data to improve education programs was inadequate.

Our second audit examined how Employment and Social Development Canada managed two programs: the Aboriginal Skills and Employment Training Strategy, and the Skills and Partnership Fund. The common goal of these two programs was to increase the number of Indigenous people who had sustainable and meaningful employment. For both of these programs, the Department worked with Indigenous organizations across the country that provided training and employment support to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit clients.

Overall, we found that the Department could not demonstrate that these programs increased the number of Indigenous people who got jobs and stayed employed.

Specifically, we found that the Department did not define the performance indicators necessary to demonstrate whether the programs were meeting their objectives. For example, the Department established an annual target for the number of clients employed after receiving services. However, the Department counted any employment obtained as a successful outcome—whether the work was short-term, seasonal, part-time, or full-time. This means that it did not know how successful the programs were in helping clients find sustainable employment.

We also found that the Department did not do enough to ensure the completeness and accuracy of the data it obtained from Indigenous organizations on the results their clients had achieved after receiving services. Notably, the Department did not know whether more than 20% of all clients who received services actually found a job or went back to school.

We found that the Department did not analyze the program data it collected to identify trends, problems, or good practices that could help Indigenous organizations improve their services and results. For example, the Department spent $130 million between the 2010–11 and 2016–17 fiscal years on wage subsidies for employers who hired clients for specific lengths of time. However, the Department did not track whether these clients continued working after the subsidies had ended.

In addition, the Department did not consistently monitor Indigenous organizations to ensure that they fulfilled their obligations under funding agreements, nor did it use the information from the monitoring it did to know how well the programs were working. This means that the Department missed the opportunity to explore ways to improve program delivery and to identify systemic issues requiring attention.

Following the tabling of our reports in Parliament in May, Indigenous Services Canada and Employment and Social Development Canada each prepared an action plan to address our recommendations. Your Committee may wish to ask them for an update on the implementation of their commitments.

Madam Chair, this concludes my opening statement. We would be pleased to answer any questions the Committee may have. Thank you.