Evaluation of the Contributions to the Provinces and Territories and to Aboriginal and/or Other Communities and Organizations (not-for-profit) - Canadian Firearms Program

Graph 1: Total Contributions and Expenditures Reported for the "Opt-in" Provinces for 2009 – 2014

Element Two - AOCO Contribution Funding Program

Information provided by the recipient demonstrates that this TPP funding provided Red Sky with 95% of its total funding in 2013/2014.^{Footnote 41} In addition, information provided by the recipient demonstrates that TPP funding represents 90% of the funding that the CSC receives from outside sponsors.^{Footnote 42} Both of these organizations are not-for-profit and seek to raise awareness surrounding safe storage, transport and handling of firearms and are providing a service to their communities. Interviewees explained that, in the case of Aboriginal communities, the funding allows for access to firearms training that might not otherwise be possible. It was further explained that there are many challenges faced by the remote Aboriginal communities which have impeded the availability of firearms training including: geographical remoteness, cultural considerations and language/literacy barriers. Interviewees suggested that existing firearms safety course service providers have not offered courses in the remote Aboriginal communities as it is not financially viable for the reasons cited above. The contributions program has provided funding to allow the communities to set up programs which provide firearms safety training that is flexible and tailored to meet the unique needs of the Aboriginal communities. Additionally, as a result of the funding, support and guidance is provided to the community members in completing their firearms license applications and addressing other firearms-related issues or concerns they might have.

In relation to other communities and organizations, the contribution program has afforded an opportunity for the RCMP to partner with the CSC to deliver firearms safety awareness information nationally.

Alignment with RCMP and Government of Canada Priorities

The objectives of both elements of the TPP directly align with the RCMP's Program Activity Alignment Strategic Outcome of, "Criminal activity affecting Canadians is reduced."^{Footnote 43} Additionally, the objectives are linked to the Government of Canada priority of a "Safer and Secure Canada."^{Footnote 44}

Element One provides funding for the "Opt-in" provinces to administer the Firearms Act within their respective provinces and the SDM outlined in the Contribution Agreements are explicit in listing the services that the provinces are required to provide.^{Footnote 45} All of these services enforce safety in firearms handling, transport, storage and use, which contributes both to RCMP and Government of Canada outcomes and priorities.

Element Two provides its recipients with funding to enable education and awareness of firearms safety and is therefore also supporting the previously mentioned outcomes and priorities. The CSC advertised broadly with respect to firearms safety and has established strong contacts nationally to help leverage their messaging around firearms safety. The RSMIN further supports the objectives as they target communities that otherwise might not have access to firearms safety training, education and awareness around firearms safety due to the uniqueness and remoteness of these communities.

Additionally, Element Two of the TPP is directly linked to the RCMP's Strategic Priority of "Aboriginal Communities,"^{Footnote 46} which is committed to contributing to safer and healthier Aboriginal communities. The TPP funding contributes directly to establishing a higher level of education and awareness surrounding the handling of firearms and seeks to increase firearms safety within Aboriginal communities.

The roles and responsibilities of the RCMP and recipients of TPP funding are clear and well understood. For both elements, interviewees had a similar understanding of what the RCMP's roles and responsibilities were, as well as their own.

In relation to Element One, the roles and responsibilities are clearly articulated in the Contribution Agreements and supporting documents such as the accompanying terms and conditions, which are agreed to by the responsible minister of each "Opt-in" province. For example, Section 7(1) of the Contribution Agreement states that Canada agrees to provide the province with a "functional and operational Canadian Firearms Information System" and to cover all related administrative costs. The SDM outlined in the Contribution Agreement provides further information about the specific roles and responsibilities of both the "Opt-in" provinces' CFOs and the RCMP CFP. Specifically, a summary of responsibilities is provided for the CFOs which speaks to their legal authorities and administrative responsibilities.^{Footnote 47} For the RCMP CFP, responsibilities for both the central processing site and Registrar of Firearms functions that the RCMP administers are clearly outlined.^{Footnote 48} Additionally, this document contains more detailed descriptions of the actions to be taken by the "Opt-in" provinces' CFOs and the RCMP CFP with regard to specific responsibilities, including: individual license processing, business licensing, reference hearings and stakeholder liaison.^{Footnote 49}

Evidence indicates that the roles and responsibilities of the RCMP program in administering Element Two of the TPP are also clear. Additionally, as with the Contribution Agreements between the RCMP and the "Opt-in" provinces, the recipients of the program also enter into project funding agreements that outline each party's obligations from reporting requirements to the timeliness of funding. As an example, page 6 of the Contribution Agreement outlines expectations for the RCMP CFP as well as the recipient. Specifically, explanations are provided on both the RCMP CFP's and recipients' responsibilities related to activity reporting, funding and official languages.^{Footnote 50} Recipients accept these responsibilities as part of the funding agreement.

2.2 Performance – Efficiency and Economy

The application requirements for Element Two are clearly laid out in the Terms and Conditions related to the AOCO funding program. These outline specific application requirements for eligible recipients, initiatives and projects, and eligible expenditures. As an example, the following articulates the criteria for an eligible project or initiative:

"Eligible initiatives will have a focus on promoting or enhancing safe use and handling of firearms, secure storage of firearms, or any other communication or educational campaign with a goal of this type, including delivery of the Canadian Firearms Safety Course or Canadian Restricted Firearms Safety Courses to groups or communities who are not well served by existing firearms safety training vehicles. Eligible initiatives may also focus on needs assessments, safety training validations, outreach and education of firearms clients and their families with respect to the Firearms Act and its safe storage/secure handling features."^{Footnote 51}

As of 2012, a section outlining the maximum allowances relating to a contribution was included to limit the amount of funding a recipient can receive for a similar project, as well as the length of time that this funding is available to them. The number of successive years the same organization can benefit from this funding is now restricted to five, and funding will never exceed $200,000 per fiscal year.^{Footnote 52}

Each year, the RCMP CFP forwards correspondence via e-mail to the CFOs ("Opt-in" and "Opt-out") advising them of the AOCO funding program and encouraging them to share information about the program with communities or organizations within their jurisdictions that might benefit.^{Footnote 53} If a community or organization is aware of the program and plans to participate, they can approach the RCMP CFP with a proposal. The proposal must include specific information, such as: a statement of purpose for how the funding will be used, background and organizational information, a work plan and an itemized budget outlining the amount requested and a detailed list of expenditures.^{Footnote 54} These criteria are also outlined in the Project Funding Agreement.

The RCMP CFP assesses funding applications and reviews the reports to ensure that, in the case of the financial information, funds budgeted are aligned with expenditures. Reported information is used to inform RCMP senior management of project progress and successful completion, and to contribute to the CFP's annual input to the RCMP Report on Plans and Priorities, and DPRs.

While the previously mentioned application requirements must be met in order to be eligible for funding in the first instance, another set of criteria is in place that allows for continued eligibility and receipt of funding during the life of the project, within the maximum amounts. Continued funding is provided when the organization has submitted the required interim/progress and final reports and they have been accepted by the RCMP CFP. Examples of the type of information reported to the RCMP CFP include: the number of safety courses delivered, number of attendees for the safety courses, number of individuals who received assistance with license applications, and number of firearms safety awareness products produced and distributed.

The two recipients interviewed in relation to Element Two of the TPP confirmed that there was no confusion with the processes and application requirements for both the proposal submission and continued eligibility for funding.

Although there is evidence of standard processes and application requirements being in place regarding Element Two,^{Footnote 55} there appears to be a gap in awareness and knowledge among the CFOs about the AOCO funding program. Of the CFOs who were interviewed, most (4/5) indicated that they had little to no knowledge about this element of the funding program. As demonstrated in Table 3, over the last 5 years, the only applicants and subsequent recipients for the AOCO funding program have been the same two organizations.

RCMP CFP representatives recognized that there are some challenges to increasing awareness about the AOCO funding program. They indicated that because there is limited funding available yearly this limits the ability to fund more than a few recipients. It has been noted that should the limited funds be shared amongst too many recipients it is less likely that the grant would be successful in achieving the stated outcomes.

The small pool of applicants suggests a limited awareness regarding Element Two and presents a challenge with respect to transparency of the process with the same two organizations receiving funding each year. This challenge may further have an impact as no project after 2012 may be approved for longer than five successive years^{Footnote 56}, potentially causing a lapse in successful applicants in 2017 if the pool of applicants is not increased and/or new projects are not introduced.

Recommendation #1: Together, the CFOs and the RCMP CFP should examine ways to improve both internal and external communications in support of increasing awareness about the funding available under Element Two. This would mitigate the risk that funds made available in 2017 won't be utilized, as well as diversify the pool of applicants and projects eligible.

Evidence demonstrates that both elements of the TPP are achieving their expected results.

Specific to Element One, it is expected that the "Opt-in" provinces will provide services in a timely and efficient manner to all firearms clients in their jurisdictions.^{Footnote 57} The services are to ensure the safe use, storage and ownership of firearms. Performance data collected through the required activity reporting from the "Opt-in" provinces account for outputs such as: number of firearms range inspections, number of Canadian Firearms Safety Courses delivered, number of authorizations to carryprocessed (this would include background investigations, approvals and refusals) and firearm transfers processed.^{Footnote 58} A CFP interviewee indicated that the "Opt-in" provinces' levels of activity are comparable to the national average, this is further supported by the RCMP DPR;

"Quarterly activity-based reporting to Canadian Firearms Program (CFP) for 2012 – 2013, by provincial CFOs, included the ongoing provision of business inspections, range inspections, firearms safety training, firearms verifier training, activities related to gun show and auctions, and the issuance of authorizations, which fulfilled the responsibilities of CFOs for the administration, management and delivery of key components of the Firearms Act."^{Footnote 59}

The following graph highlights the population receiving services provided by the "Opt-in" province CFOs.

When asked, all interviewees responded that they agree that the "Opt-in" provinces were achieving their expected result to provide services in a timely and efficient manner to all firearms clients in their jurisdictions. This is further supported by performance data for fiscal years 2012/13 and 2013/14 indicating that the "Opt-in" provinces ranged from 91% - 99% for properly completed individual license applications processed with the 45 day service standard. As a result, all "Opt-in" provinces exceeded the service standard target of 90%^{Footnote 60} and were comparable to the 2013/14 national average of 92.3%.^{Footnote 61}

Some interviewees did comment that there may be some inconsistencies or differences with respect to service delivery between "Opt-in" provinces when compared to other "Opt-in" provinces or compared to "Opt-out" provinces. Reasons cited for these differences included the fact that there may be additional layers of provincial legislation which impact service delivery. For example, Quebec's "Anastasia's law" increases the responsibilities and potential activities of the CFO. Specifically, Section 11 of the Act states:

"The clerk of the Court of Quebec must inform the chief firearms officer immediately of an application referred to in article 778 of the Code of Civil Procedure (R.S.Q., chapter C-25) relating to a person whose mental state presents a danger to that person or to other persons and provide chief firearms officer with the name, address and date of birth of the person and with the court file number. The Chief firearms officer must verify whether the person is in possession of a firearm, has access to a firearm or holds a license to acquire a firearm..."^{Footnote 62}

As well, interviewees indicated that the differing reporting structures between the CFP and the "Opt-in" vs "Opt-out" provinces contribute to some differences in service delivery. There are Standard Operating Guidelines (SOGs) in place which guide the "Opt-out" provinces.^{Footnote 63} The "Opt-out" province CFOs are RCMP employees who are obligated to comply with the SOGs. An example would be the SOGs in place to inform employees on the processing of individual registration applications. The SOGs are available and are shared with the "Opt-in" provincial CFOs, however, they are not obligated to comply with the guidelines as they are not directly accountable (aside from what obligations are identified in the Contribution Agreements) to the CFP but rather to their respective provinces. There are no indications that these inconsistencies or differences are impeding any of the "Opt-in" provinces from providing services to the firearms clients within their respective jurisdictions.

The CFP holds an annual conference which is attended by the CFOs of both "Opt-in" and "Opt-out" provinces. This conference provides a venue where the CFP can discuss any concerns or emerging issues that might impede the "Opt-in" provinces' CFOs in achieving their expected results. Evidence indicates that there are also semi-regular teleconferences between all CFOs and the CFP. Through interviews with "Opt-in" province CFOs, some concerns were raised about the need for more enhanced communication. Although these CFOs explained that they have participated in both "face-to-face" conferences and teleconferences, they identified some gaps regarding the information being shared from the CFP. [*]

One challenge identified in relation to the timeliness and efficiency of the administration of the TPP was the delays in finalizing and signing Contribution Agreements. As an example, one recipient indicated that it was necessary to make adjustments to their planned activities as the funds were not available when originally anticipated. This situation has been acknowledged by the CFP, which has indicated that it is making the efforts that are within its control to ensure that agreements are processed in as timely a manner as possible.

Evidence supports that Element Two of the TPP, AOCO, is achieving its expected results by increasing safety benefits provided by the CFP through partnerships as well as support to Aboriginal and non-profit community groups.^{Footnote 64} All interviewees indicated that this element of the TPP is achieving its expected results. One interviewee provided the example of the media attention that has been received about the work being done by the RSMIN recipient. Articles profiling the successes of the RSMIN have been published in both the RCMP Gazette and The Outdoor Guide.^{Footnote 65},^{Footnote 66}

As previously mentioned, within the last 5 years there have been two recipients of funding under this element of the TPP. The CSC is a not-for-profit organization which strives to, among other messages, deliver information on the Firearms Act to the public. The second recipient, the RSMIN, provides firearms safety training as well as other forms of support to the Aboriginal communities it services. Table 4 demonstrates the safety training that was provided by the RSMIN over the three year period, 2011 - 2014. Evidence indicates that both groups are delivering these services.

The CSC has run a total of three television public service announcements largely focusing on safe storage, and their reach is extensive; it is estimated that their television ads have been viewed by at least 5.1 million people.^{Footnote 70} Additionally, CSC news releases have had approximately 1.2 million in readership.^{Footnote 71} This includes items such as magazine articles, posters or pamphlets (distributed both by hard copy and via new media). Evidence demonstrates that the CSC has also placed a focus on sharing information with Aboriginal groups who have reproduced and further distributed the CSC's firearms safety material to hard-to-reach communities.

The RSMIN provides a hands-on approach to firearms safety education by visiting Aboriginal communities and providing them with safety training, application assistance, translation, and other forms of support. The RSMIN is required to submit interim reports on its activities throughout the year as well as a final report at the end of each contribution funding agreement. All reports have been submitted as required. RSMIN reports outline exactly which community they were serving at a given time, how many candidates registered for the Safety Course, how many people took and passed the course, and other information. For example, in the month of October 2010, they assisted 350 people over the phone and assisted 120 people with their firearms applications.^{Footnote 72} These are all people who otherwise would have had little or no training or assistance, which has historically contributed to a low Firearms Act compliance level. Whereas resistance was high at the beginning of the program, now the RSMIN has stopped actively advertising as the demand for their services has increased to the point where advertising is not necessary.

Recommendation #2: The RCMP CFP should examine opportunities to strengthen communications between the CFP and the "Opt-in" provinces where possible.

It was difficult to attribute exact costs against the management and administration of the elements of the TPP due to a lack of data. Interviewees stated that the current levels of effort and cost necessary to administer their respective elements of the TPP are reasonable. As an example, the human resources required for the administration and management of Element One of the TPP are estimated to account for one full-time employee position; and less than one full-time employee position for Element Two. Additionally, there are periods where specialized resources such as financial and legal services are required and utilized. It is also acknowledged by interviewees that the level of effort required for management and administration of the TPP spikes at periods generally linked to activities including the renewal of Contribution Agreements, review of quarterly reports and funding periods.

3.0 Conclusion

The evaluation found that the mandate of the TPP is relevant and is aligned with RCMP and government priorities. The evaluation found that both elements of the TPP are achieving their expected outcomes of:

Element One: "Opt-in" provinces provide services in a timely and efficient manner to all firearms clients in their jurisdictions.^{Footnote 73} The services are to ensure the safe use, storage and ownership of firearms.

Element Two: The organizations are increasing safety benefits provided by the CFP through partnerships and support to Aboriginal and non-profit community groups.^{Footnote 74}

Generally the administration and management is being done in a timely and efficient manner, however, some concerns were identified regarding delays in finalizing Contribution Agreements. There are opportunities to strengthen communications between the CFP and the "Opt-in" provinces to ensure that they are fully aware of all elements of the TPP as well as to address any emerging issues or concerns.

4.0 Management Responses and Action Plan

4.1 Management Responses

This evaluation report has been reviewed and accepted by senior officials of the responsible program areas.

4.2 Management Action

Recommendation 1

Together, the CFOs and the RCMP CFP should examine ways to improve both internal and external communications in support of increasing awareness about the funding available under Element Two. This would mitigate the risk that funds made available in 2017 won't be utilized, as well as diversify the pool of applicants and projects eligible.

Responsibility:

Director of Firearms Regulatory Services

Planned Action

The CFP's Firearms Regulatory Services (FRS) Directorate will foster dialogue between the Firearms Management and Strategic Services (FMSS) Directorate and Chief Firearms Officers (CFOs) to improve internal and external communications and awareness about the funding initiatives. Time will be allocated at FRS face-to-face meetings with CFOs, as well as occasions to provide periodic updates at scheduled teleconferences throughout the year, so that FMSS can clearly describe the funding opportunities and application process to CFOs, and provide supporting documentation. Improved internal communications will subsequently enhance FMSS outreach activities, done in cooperation with CFOs, to better identify initiatives requiring funding from a larger group of organizations.

Diary Date

Fiscal Year 2015-2016

Recommendation 2

The RCMP CFP should examine opportunities to strengthen communications between the CFP and the "Opt-in" provinces where possible.

Responsibility

Director of Firearms Regulatory Services and Director of the Firearms Management and Strategic Services.

Planned Action

The FRS Directorate will increase face-to-face meetings with all CFOs (including the "Opt-in" CFOs) to strengthen communications between the CFP and the "Opt-in" provinces, and foster discussions on the funding opportunities. The FRS will also increase the number of teleconferences with all CFOs (including "Opt-in" CFOs), to bring forward information in a more timely manner. The FMSS Directorate will evaluate the merit of project proposals against an established set of objective criteria.

Diary Date

Fiscal Year 2015-2016

Appendix A: Bibliography

• Bahonis, M., The Outdoor Guide. "Hunting Guns and Safety." March 2014. Print.
• Government of Canada, Canadian Firearms Program. Commissioner of Firearms Report." 2013. p.7.
• Government of Canada, Canadian Firearms Program. "Service Standard." May 30, 2014. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Canadian Firearms Program. "Standard Operating Guidelines." N.p.
• Government of Canada. "Financial Administration Act." (R.S.C., 1985, c.F-11). Print.
• Government of Canada. "Firearms Act" [S.C., 1995, c.39].
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2009 - 2010 Departmental Performance Report." Ottawa, NCR: 2009. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2010 - 2011 Departmental Performance Report." Ottawa, NCR: 2010. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2011 - 2012 Departmental Performance Report." Ottawa, NCR: 2011. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2012 - 2013 Departmental Performance Report." Ottawa, NCR: 2012. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2013 - 2014 Departmental Performance Report." Ottawa, NCR: 2013. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. " 2009 - 2010 Departmental Performance Report - Details of Transfer Payment Program." Ottawa, NCR: 2009. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. " 2010 - 2011 Departmental Performance Report - Details of Transfer Payment Program." Ottawa, NCR: 2010. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2011 - 2012 Departmental Performance Report - Details of Transfer Payment Program." Ottawa, NCR: 2011. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2012 - 2013 Departmental Performance Report - Details of Transfer Payment Program." Ottawa, NCR: 2012. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2013 - 2014 Departmental Performance Report - Details of Transfer Payment Program." Ottawa, NCR: 2013. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2013 – 2014 Report on Plans and Priorities." Ottawa, NCR: 2013. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2014 – 2015 Report on Plans and Priorities." Ottawa, NCR: 2014. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2012 – 2013 Report on Plans and Priorities - Details of Transfer Payment Programs." Ottawa, NCR: 2012. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2013 – 2014 Report on Plans and Priorities - Details of Transfer Payment Programs." Ottawa, NCR: 2013. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "2014 – 2015 Report on Plans and Priorities -Details of Transfer Payment Programs", Ottawa, NCR: 2014. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police: Canadian Firearms Program. "Business Case: Designing and Implementing a Strategy for Firearms Safety in Northern Communities." Ottawa, NCR: 2013. Print.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "Canadian Firearms Program." March 31, 2015.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "Canadian Firearms Program Evaluation Report." (PDF) Ottawa, NCR: 2010.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "Contribution Agreement respecting the Federal-Provincial Financial Agreement addressing the Administration of the Firearms Act and Regulations, Reporting Requirements, Objectives and Instructions (Appendix E)."2012. [46-48] Print.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "Family Violence Initiative Fund Summary 2012 – 13." Ottawa, NCR: 2013. N.p. Web.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police."Program Alignment Architecture." Ottawa, NCR: 2013. N.p. Print.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "Strategic Priority: Aboriginal Communities." N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "Terms and Conditions related to the Aboriginal and/or Other Communities and Organizations (Not for Profit) Funding Program." Ottawa: 2012. Print.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police. "Terms and Conditions related to the Firearms Funding Program for "Opt-In" provinces." Ottawa, NCR: 2011. Print.
• Government of Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat, "Overview of Government Spending and Performance, Descriptors for Government of Canada Outcome Areas."2015. N.p.
• Government of Canada, Royal Canadian Mounted Police.Disclosure of Grant and Contribution Awards Report." 2013-2014 (2nd Quarter).
• Progestic International Inc. "Audit of the Aboriginal and Other Communities and Organizations Funds Program." (PDF) Ottawa, NCR: 2005.
• Quebec National Assembly, Bill 9, "An Act to protect persons with regard to activities involving firearms and amending the Act respecting safety in sports." (PDF) Chapter 30. 2007.
• RCMP Gazette. "Firearms Safety Training in isolated Regions." July 2013. N.p.
• Red Sky Metis Independent Nation. "2010 – 2011 Activity Reports." Print.
• Red Sky Metis Independent Nation. "Safety Training Funding Outreach Proposal." August 23, 2010. N.p. Print.

Date modified:

2016-01-07