Status of Women Committee on Feb. 29th, 2012

[Linda Savoie]

I am talking about projects for making score cards in order to identify the number of women and members of other minority groups who sit on the boards of directors of the country's 500 largest companies. In the other case, the funding went to a social enterprise that, unfortunately, falls under the definition.... Many social enterprises are for-profit. It comes down to how the enterprise is classified by the Canada Revenue Agency.

Social enterprises tend to be for profit and would not be otherwise eligible for our funding if we didn't have that exception.

I apologize for continuing in English, but I was unsure whether “entreprises à vocation sociale” rendered exactly what I was trying to say when talking about social enterprises.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Another recommendation was that Status of Women Canada remove the limitations on funding for research and advocacy activities in the revised terms and conditions of the Women's Program.

I have with me a document that lists about 35 organizations whose funding was reduced or totally eliminated under the Conservative government. Those organizations' activities include the advancement of equality, research, women's rights advocacy and political action. Giving money to those types of groups was part of the recommendations. Therefore, despite the fact that the recommendations were made by the committee, it appears that several of them have not been implemented. Is that what you have seen in your everyday work?

[Linda Savoie]

I think it would be better to put this question to political representatives rather than to bureaucrats. That being said, I find that the program's terms and conditions ensure that 99.9% of our funding goes to non-profit organizations.

If you want a political answer to your question, I suggest you ask the minister.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you very much. I will ask some different questions.

On your website, you talk about the three priority areas the program addresses, including improving women's and girls' economic security and prosperity. You also talked about that today.

Do you have an idea of what proportion of the funding applications are submitted by girl-specific types of groups?

[Linda Savoie]

I will not venture to give you a figure on the proportion of applications. As for the proportion of what we fund, I can say that roughly a quarter of our projects focus specifically on women's and girls' economic security or prosperity.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Okay.

I also want to know how many organizations had their applications approved, but that does not help me if I don't know how many organizations applied.

[Linda Savoie]

I think I should let you know that, every time we issue a call for proposals, we receive a lot more proposals than we can fund; that goes without saying.

[The Chair, NDP, Irene Mathyssen]

Thank you very much. Perhaps we can save that for the next round.

Madam Bateman.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

Thank you for your presentation. I am very impressed by your work.

I understand your intake is year-round. Can you tell me when that happened and if you've encountered administrative efficiencies as a result? I've administered programs in the past, and when we have these artificial deadlines, sometimes we create false requirements for work and then we have to manage peaks that don't really exist. So I'd like to know when that happened and what the impacts on your business capacity were.

[Linda Savoie]

In June 2010, we moved from calls for proposals at fixed dates to a system where we were accepting applications all year. That's going to be two years ago this spring. There were benefits for us in managing the peaks and valleys of workloads and making the best use of our resources, but the primary driver was benefits to groups. Groups were not always able to align the funding from the various sources. These dates, these deadlines, could be different for the federal government, the provincial government, or the municipal government, and they were all seeking support for specific initiatives. By removing our deadline, we gave them more flexibility and the ability to work with whatever the deadline of the remaining funder was, and we would just hop along on that.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

That's so helpful and respectful to your funding colleagues. I appreciate that.

By getting rid of the peaks and valleys, were you able to achieve any staffing efficiencies? How did that affect you?

[Linda Savoie]

It allowed us to put more emphasis on our assessment of program results and to better inform our decisions for future funding. So it's definitely a priority for us to analyze.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

That's my next question, and perhaps my bigger question. You spoke in your presentation—and thank you so much for that—about your various objectives and how you're making your assessments and how you are assessing the worth of your decisions. Could you speak a little bit about that? Tell us what you're looking for and how you do that work.

[Linda Savoie]

As to process, since June 2010, we've been involving other federal departments as much as possible. We are seeking their input on our project proposals and we are seeking opportunities to piggyback and co-fund certain initiatives. This also allows us to engage departments that should have been engaged but were not. We work with them on issues such as violence, where we don't have the levers that some other departments have. So with respect to process, we've been moving more and more into project sharing and common assessments.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

How do you manage the common assessments, and what are the criteria you're looking for?

[Linda Savoie]

It can be challenging, because each program or department has its own terms and conditions. However, we look for things such as value for money. We look for alignment with our three pillars, and we consider whether there are emerging issues and whether they align with the priorities of the federal government. So we have a number of—

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Do you ever go back and actually align it to what's in a throne speech, for example?

[Linda Savoie]

Absolutely.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

That would be common ground for both departments, of course.

[Linda Savoie]

Yes.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

You said the terms and conditions are always different, but do you decide upon goals? If you're going to decide on funding a project, say, with Public Safety to help protect women, for example, do you decide on what you're trying to achieve before you fund the project?

[Linda Savoie]

For instance, before we do a call for proposal we'll consult with members of the federal family in other departments to see if there's an alignment there. What that—

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I'm just curious. Once you actually make the decision to fund a particular project, is it your responsibility as a co-funder with your colleagues from whatever department, but Public Safety, say, for argument's sake.... Do you then say, okay, what are we trying to achieve? We've decided...a call for proposal, blah blah blah. We are choosing this one because they're going to do X, Y, and Z. And then how are we assessing that?

I don't understand how it would be different for both departments if you're co-funding. Do you know what I'm saying? I'm having trouble leaping to that part.

[Pascale Robichaud]

I was thinking about that.

Actually, we did fund a project with Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. We—the Status of Women and Aboriginal Affairs—sat down to see what the need was, to look at our respective—

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

The point is to Madame Savoie, encore une fois. When you're co-funding a project, do you or do you not write out what you're trying to achieve?