Evaluation of the West Coast Energy Infrastructure Initiative (WCEI)

Audit and Evaluation Branch
Natural Resources Canada
November 5, 2020

Table of Contents

• Acronyms
• Executive Summary
• Introduction
  • Program information
  • Evaluation objective and methodology
• Findings
  • Relevance
  • Performance – efficiency and economy
• Conclusion and lessons learned
• Evaluation team
• Appendix 1: Program information
• Appendix 2: Logic model
• Appendix 3: Financial information- allocated budget
• Appendix 4: financial information- planned and actuals
• Appendix 5: WCEI results achievement

List of acronyms

CEMI

Cumulative Effects Monitoring Initiative

CIRNAC

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada

DGIC

Directors General Investment Committee

ECCC

Environment and Climate Change Canada

ESDC

Employment and Social Development Canada

FNMPC

First Nations Major Project Coalition

IAMC

Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committees

INAC

Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada

IPO-West

Indigenous Partnerships Office – West

ISC

Indigenous Services Canada

KI

Key Informant

LNG

Liquefied Natural Gas

MPMO-W

Major Project Management Office-West (former name of IPO-West)

NRCan

Natural Resources Canada

PIP

Program Information Profile

SPF-WCE

West Coast Energy - Skills and Partnership Fund

SPI-WCE

Strategic Partnerships Initiative – West Coast Energy

WCEI

West Coast Energy Infrastructure Initiative

Executive Summary

About the Evaluation

This report presents the findings from the evaluation of the West Coast Energy Infrastructure Initiative (WCEI).

This horizontal federal initiative was launched in 2014 to facilitate a coordinated federal response to the 2013 Eyford Report that suggested addressing Indigenous concerns related to major energy projects on the West Coast through building effective relationships.

WCEI is led by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). It is comprised of Indigenous Partnerships Office – West (IPO-West) delivered within NRCan, Skills and Partnership Fund - West Coast Energy (SPF-WCE) delivered within Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC), Strategic Partnerships Initiative - West Coast Energy (SPI-WCE) delivered within Indigenous Services Canada/ Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (ISC / CIRNAC), and Cumulative Effects Monitoring Initiative (CEMI) delivered within Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC).

WCEI roles and responsibilities did not include project-specific consultations (e.g., liquefied natural gas [LNG] projects or pipeline expansion projects), with that role being under the responsibility of other federal organisations, such as the Major Project Management Office (MPMO).

The focus of the WCEI horizontal evaluation was to assess the performance, relevance and efficiency of the initiative and was informed by the 2016 Policy on Results. The objective was to measure progress made towards the achievement of WCEI’s intended outcomes particularly in the areas of engagement and relationships; Indigenous issues and priorities; collaboration and coordination; and environmental stewardship and habitat restoration. This evaluation was scheduled in NRCan’s evaluation and audit plan. The evaluation covered WCEI $65 million (M) expenditures (actuals) for the period of 2014-15 to 2017-18.

The evaluation consists of a summary analysis based on the findings of one component evaluation and two technical reports: IPO-West (evaluation conducted by NRCan), SPF-WCE (technical report conducted by ESDC’s Evaluation Directorate) and SPI-WCE (technical report conducted by ISC/CIRNAC’s evaluation branch). To finalize the horizontal evaluation, the evaluation team also collected program information about CEMI through documents and interviews. The main limitation of this evaluation is that it is based on a limited number of interviews conducted with Indigenous respondents, including 2 interviews for the CEMI component, 11 interviews for the IPO-West component, and interviews with community members from 10 communities (SPI-WCE component).

This report first presents a detailed description of the WCEI and its components, then describes the evaluation’s methodology and presents findings. Evidence is presented by program component (where the information was available) for clarity, and a general summary statement pertaining to the overall initiative is also included under each evaluation question.

What the Evaluation Found

Overall, the evaluation found that the WCEI initiative is supported by a strong rationale for early and broad engagement with Indigenous communities, beyond the legal duty to consult, for potential action in the areas of business development, skills and employment, and environmental stewardship. WCEI was the direct response to the report written by Douglas Eyford, Special Federal Representative on West Coast Energy Infrastructure. This report and other sources of evidence confirm that there is a general need for a federal government initiative that facilitates a coordinated federal presence on the West Coast and ensures that federal engagement with Indigenous communities is translated into concrete actions and investments. There is an opportunity for Indigenous communities to partake in energy development projects, and an ongoing need to provide them with the skills and tools to allow them to seize these opportunities.

However, energy projects also raise environmental concerns, and communities express a need to monitor effects, and obtain baseline data which can in turn inform discussions and decision-making on energy development. The horizontal evaluation found that WCEI is aligned with federal priorities and roles and responsibilities, although questions were raised as to whether SPI-WCE is well aligned with ISC/CIRNAC’s mandate and the broader objectives of SPI.

Views about the effectiveness of the WCEI governance structure were mixed. There is evidence that WCEI was facilitated by the horizontal model where information and proposals were shared between federal departments and the government of British Columbia (BC) for input and feedback. However, many government respondents were unclear as to the exact role of IPO-West. Views about the effectiveness of the single-window approach and the decision-making processes regarding funding were mixed.

The evaluation found that all components of the WCEI were in an under-budget financial situation. Various factors explain this financial performance, including delayed hiring, delays dues to competing in priorities, travel budgets not fully utilized, delayed energy projects, and the time required to build effective relationships with Indigenous communities.

According to findings, the WCEI engaged Indigenous communities through a variety of activities initiated by IPO-West, with the support of other departments. The Initiative provided opportunities to bring together various partners. The projects and activities increased Indigenous participation in decision-making related to energy projects, as well environmental monitoring. Although CEMI pilot projects did not proceed to implementation, SPI-WCE projects allowed many communities to engage in monitoring activities, although not in a single-window approach. Also, under SPI-WCE, a number of projects contributed to capacity development.

Delays in the energy projects have generally delayed the developmental activities designed to help communities directly participate in the energy projects. Projects supported by SPF-WCE were still in their early development when the component evaluation was conducted, but have shown early positive results in terms of skills development and employment.

Concerns were expressed about the future of WCEI: According to findings, the components of WCEI raised the expectations of community stakeholders towards the federal government and key informants are concerned that if WCEI is downscaled or interrupted, relationships built up to this point may be damaged.

Lessons learned included:

• There is value in a single-window approach for Indigenous engagement on West Coast energy projects and NRCan has developed a body of knowledge on how Indigenous communities can be engaged in this context. This body of knowledge should be documented for other natural resources projects development in other regions of Canada.
• The whole-of-government approach is maximized when all departments involved are clear about the new roles and responsibilities of each department in relation to their mandate, as well as potential risk of internal and external duplications when new and existing policy instruments are combined to build meaningful relationship with Indigenous communities with respect to natural resources project development.
• Significant efforts upfront are essential to clarify and document the governance structure in order to kick-start the new programming activities.
• Experimentation with collaboration tools with provincial governments, Indigenous communities, local governments, and other stakeholders are a key factor of success to improve existing and future natural resources development programs with a flexible and innovative model that takes into account economic interests, cumulative effects and sustainable development.

Recommendations and Management Action Plan

Recommendations in the following table have been made to ensure that departments reinforce a whole-of-government approach for early and broad engagement with Indigenous communities beyond project-specific legal duty to consult, clarify roles and responsibilities, reduce delays and lengthiness of decision-making processes when funding engagement projects, and share lessons learned and best practices from this evaluation within federal government.

 

Recommendations	Management Action Plans
Recommendation 1: Given that Canada is advancing reconciliation through targeted efforts and effective relationships, and considering concerns about cumulative effects of multiple resource developments, it is recommended that Departments involved in the WCEI use engagement approaches consistent with, and building on observations in the 2013 Douglas R. Eyford Report. Eyford advocated for early and broad engagement with Indigenous communities that goes beyond a project-specific legal duty to consult, using a whole-of-government approach. To support future approaches to jointly funded priority projects such as WCEI, a detailed assessment of engagement approaches (i.e., whole-of-government and single window), including best practices and lessons learned should be undertaken. NRCan will lead this effort.	NRCan management agrees In response to this recommendation, in 2018-19 and 2019-20, NRCan documented best practices and lessons learned for Indigenous engagement in BC regarding energy infrastructure, including the development of the SPI – WCE Projects Summary Review and a summary placemat. The Project Summary Review identifies trends and observations that emerged from the WCEI and found that the continuance of WCEI approaches (e.g. proposal development support) was strongly encouraged by Indigenous and federal government program participants. NRCan also produced a summary placemat of lessons learned regarding the success factors for Indigenous partnerships. The information was shared within NRCan and with WCEI partner departments (ISC, ECCC, Fisheries and Oceans Canada [DFO], Western Economic Diversification Canada and Transport Canada), and discussed with federal departments and agencies participating in the Major Projects Management Office Initiative (MPMOI), to inform future approaches to Indigenous engagement on energy infrastructure and related horizontal initiatives. Actions taken to address the recommendation include: In February 2019, the SPI – WCE Projects Summary Review were developed in collaboration with Indigenous and federal government WCEI participants. The lessons learned were shared with WCEI partner departments through the Director General Investment Committee (DGIC) in June 2019. On April 24, 2019, lessons learned were discussed with federal departments and agencies participating in MPMOI to inform future approaches to Indigenous engagement on energy infrastructure. Responsible manager – NRCan’s Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) of MPMO Due Date – September 30, 2020
Recommendation 2: Considering the delays in the energy projects and the continued need for the Government of Canada to engage Indigenous communities in resource development, notably in West Coast energy development, it is recommended that NRCan clarifies and communicates IPO-West roles and responsibilities, with special attention to the role played by other federal departments and agencies that are working with west coast Indigenous communities on socio-economic issues.	NRCan management agrees In 2019-20, NRCan integrated IPO-West into the MPMO portfolio. MPMO is now responsible for the accountability and oversight of IPO-West, and has now clarified and communicated roles and responsibilities to relevant departments involved or implicated. Budget 2019 renewed key components of the WCEI, including NRCan’s strategic regional presence in Western Canada to deliver targeted funding focused on increasing Indigenous participation in the natural resource sectors through the Indigenous Natural Resource Partnerships (INRP) program. The renewed funding supported Indigenous economic participation in the energy sector in BC and Alberta. This approach complemented the active work of other federal departments, but reduced the need to engage with departments like ECCC and DFO. The Economic and Fiscal Snapshot 2020 provided two more years of funding, starting in 2020-21, to IPO – West to continue to build Indigenous capacity to participate in and benefit from natural resource infrastructure development in BC and Alberta. In 2020, the Minister of Natural Resources, in consultation with the Ministers of Indigenous Services and Environment and Climate Change, was asked by Treasury Board to develop a policy proposal with a long-term plan for the Indigenous Partnerships Office initiative. This proposal is to include an assessment of the continuing need and the appropriate governance for the initiative, and opportunities to leverage existing resources at NRCan, ISC and the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada (IAAC) to support Indigenous engagement in resource development projects. Actions to be taken to address the recommendation include:   A long-term plan for the Indigenous Partnerships Office initiative will be developed, including the appropriate governance for the initiative and opportunities to leverage existing resources at NRCan, ISC and IAAC to support Indigenous engagement in resource development projects. Responsible manager – NRCan’s ADM of MPMO Due Date – April 1, 2022
Recommendation 3: Given the findings related to the lengthiness of Grant and Contribution (G&C) decision-making processes, it is recommended that an IPO-West G&C budget be retained by NRCan to reduce delays and lengthiness of decision-making processes when funding engagement projects with Indigenous communities in West Coast energy development. In so doing, NRCan should initiate additional work with WCEI Departments to ensure that the activities funded through this budget avoid duplications with existing federal government funding mechanisms and align with NRCan’s mandate.	NRCan management agrees On June 20, 2019, NRCan received policy and financial authorities to implement a simplified process to deliver contribution funds directly to Indigenous communities through the INRP program. Budget 2019 renewed key components of the WCEI, including a G&C budget of $6M over one year, which was delivered directly by NRCan in Western Canada. The funding focused on NRCan’s mandate to support Indigenous economic participation in the energy sector, and a simplified process was implemented to deliver funding directly to Indigenous communities. The INRP established the capacity of NRCan to deliver an Indigenous-focused G&C program in Western Canada beyond 2019-2020. In 2020, IPO-West was renewed for two years with a G&C budget of $12M. This level of funding is consistent with historical levels of funding for the INRP program ($6M over one year). NRCan will build on the regional capacity it established in 2019-20 to deliver $12M directly to Indigenous communities in 2020-22, and will establish a mechanism to ensure federal departments are engaged on project decisions where relevant. Actions to be taken to address the recommendation include:   As of March 31, 2019, NRCan had designed and implemented a streamlined process to deliver $6M in contribution funds over one year directly to Indigenous communities, in consultation with relevant federal departments and provincial stakeholders. In August of 2020, IPO-West will engage with relevant federal departments to discuss potential interdepartmental collaboration and coordination on project reviews and decisions. Responsible manager – NRCan’s ADM of MPMO Due Date – September 30, 2020
Recommendation 4: Considering the significant work related to engaging with Indigenous groups and to monitoring cumulative effects under the WCEI, lessons learned from this evaluation should be shared across federal government and best practices should be jointly developed by the Departments involved in the WCEI to inform current and future natural resources program initiation and implementation by federal departments.	NRCan management agrees NRCan facilitated the sharing of best practices and lessons learned related to engaging with Indigenous groups and to monitoring cumulative effects within NRCan via the Policy Science Integration Committee (PSIC), and with other relevant federal departments through the MPMOI. Best practices and lessons learned informed the cross-government development of Trans Mountain Expansion accommodation measures (June 2019) including the Aquatic Habitat Restoration Fund (Fish Habitat Renewal projects under SPI-WCE), and the Terrestrial Cumulative Effects and Salish Sea Initiatives (the WCEI’s CEMI). Evaluation results and lessons learned will inform program delivery over the next two years, including efforts to support related activities in other parts of Alberta and BC; and the long-term plan for the Indigenous Partnerships Office initiative. These considerations will be undertaken in collaboration with relevant federal departments, including ISC, ECCC, DFO, and IAAC. Responsible manager – NRCan’s ADM of MPMO Due Date – September 30, 2020

Program information

The West Coast Energy Infrastructure Initiative (WCEI) was launched in 2014 to facilitate a coordinated federal response to Indigenous concerns related to major energy projects on the West Coast. The WCEI was a response to Douglas Eyford’s primary observation in the 2013 Eyford Report that the Government of Canada and Indigenous communities need to build effective relationships, best achieved through sustained federal engagement. To this end, federal spending was targeted to facilitate Indigenous participation in West Coast energy infrastructure development in areas such as business development, skills and employment, early and ongoing engagement, and environmental action.

WCEI complements the integrated whole-of-government approach to Indigenous consultation for major resource projects that has been endorsed by the courts. Its roles and responsibilities did not include project-specific consultations (e.g. liquefied natural gas projects [LNG^{Footnote 1}] or pipeline expansion projects), with that role being under the responsibility of other federal organisations, such as the Major Project Management Office (MPMO).

WCEI consists of a horizontal federal initiative led by Natural Resource of Canada (NRCan), and is comprised of components delivered by different departments, described below. A detailed description of each component is presented in Appendix 1 along with the WCEI logic model in Appendix 2. A Performance Measurement and Risk Strategy (PMRS) was developed in 2016, which involved changes to the logic model with emphasis on Indigenous communities’ capacity to make informed decisions on West Coast energy, and on Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects.

NRCan administers the Indigenous Partnership Office-West (IPO-West; formerly Major Project Management Office-West or MPMO-West). IPO-West was established to provide an on-the-ground federal presence and serve as a single window for Aboriginal communities on energy development. This component is expected to enhance federal engagement by performing key functions: conduct and coordinate engagement activities with Indigenous communities and organizations; and liaise with partner departments on program responses to Indigenous concerns. Originally, IPO-West was also to serve as the secretariat for the Tripartite Energy Forum; and assisting the Minister of NRCan to engage Special Ministerial Representatives to work with communities. Although the Office does not manage Grants and Contributions (Gs&Cs) directly, it does provide oversight for investments in West Coast energy infrastructure through a two-key approvals approach, which requires that all spending proposals be subject to the approval of NRCan senior management and the responsible Minister (or delegated departmental authority) (The Business Plan Progress Report p.1-2^{Footnote 2}). This applies to the Strategic Partnerships Initiative – West Coast Energy (SPI-WCE) (Indigenous Services Canada/ Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada [ISC/CIRNAC]), as well as Cumulative Effects Monitoring Initiative (CEMI) related funding decisions (Environment and Climate Change Canada [ECCC]). According to program documentation, in the event of interdepartmental disagreements regarding which opportunities should be supported, a clear process has been established to bring the discussion to the MPMO Director General (DG) Committee and, if needed, to the MPMO Assistant Deputy Minister’s (ADM) committee.

It should be mentioned that all Ministers of involved departments maintain ultimate authority and oversight for the activities and programs delivered by their respective departments. The WCEI is guided by the existing interdepartmental MPMO^{Footnote 3} Deputy Ministers’ (DM) Committee, and uses the existing MPMO governance structure (regular meetings of DG, ADM and DM Committees) as the forum to share information and resolve issues. It was decided that Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC), Western Economic Diversification Canada (WD) and any other relevant departments that are not permanent members of the MPMO Executive Committees (DG, ADM and DM levels) would be invited to participate when West Coast energy infrastructure issues were discussed.

ISC and CIRNAC (formerly Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada [INAC]) administer the Strategic Partnerships Initiative - West-Coast Energy (SPI-WCE). SPI-WCE activities are targeted to four priority areas: early and ongoing engagement; creating jobs and growth; environmental action; and fish habitat restoration. SPI-WCE funding is intended to enable communities to effectively participate in a dialogue with industry and government. SPI-WCE funding also supports Indigenous communities to participate in and undertake projects to preserve, protect, and restore areas affected by energy infrastructure development.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) is a member of SPI-WCE Investment Committee, and was lead on fish habitat restoration projects under SPI-WCE.

ESDC is responsible for the Skills and Partnership Fund - West Coast Energy (SPF-WCE). This component is based on the existing SPF program infrastructure. SPF-WCE is intended to provide the federal government with the ability to respond quickly to forecasted labour market needs by funding targeted training-to-employment activities for Indigenous persons in British Columbia (BC), providing them with the skills necessary to participate in planned resource development projects.

ECCC administered CEMI, through which ECCC was to develop a pilot cumulative effects monitoring initiative (the Cumulative Effects Monitoring Initiative) in collaboration with the Government of BC and Indigenous communities. Cumulative effects refer to changes to the environment caused by a variety of activities over time. Funding was provided for the first two years of the initiative, during which ECCC engaged relevant parties to scope the location for two pilot projects and support Indigenous participation in prioritizing and planning a monitoring system. There was a requirement for ECCC and NRCan to seek a mandate in order to implement CEMI. ECCC and NRCan did not move to seek further mandate and the pilot projects did not proceed to implementation.

The expected roles and responsibilities of the key participating departments are illustrated in the following figure.

 

The WCEI allocations totalled $103.7 million (M), including NRCan ($19.6M), ISC/CIRNAC ($64.5M) and ECCC ($6.4M) budget comprised with existing and new allocations. DFO and ESDC existing budget totalled respectively $1.9M and $11.2M.

Table 1 Total Allocated Budget (New vs. Existing dollars)

	Type Allocation	2014-19	2014-19	2014-19
NRCan Vote 1	New funding	19,125,000	19,658,649	19%
	Existing funding	533,649
ISC/CIRNAC Vote 1	Existing funding	3,251,701	64,502,413	62%
	New funding	61,000,000
ISC/CIRNAC Vote 10	Existing funding	250,712
ECCC Vote 1	New funding	717,000	6,437,145	6%
	Existing funding	2,937,145
ECCC Vote 10	New funding	2,783,000
DFO Vote 1	Existing funding	1,880,228	1,880,228	2%
ESDC Vote 1	Existing funding	1,191,976	11,191,976	11%
ESDC Vote 5	Existing funding	10,000,000
TOTAL			103,670,411	100%

Appendix 1 provides further details on components of the WCEI and Appendix 3 holds more detailed financial information for IPO-West and SPI-WCE.

Evaluation objective and methodology

The focus of the WCEI horizontal evaluation was to assess the performance, relevance and efficiency of the initiative and was informed by the federal Policy on Results. The objective was also to measure progress made towards the achievement of WCEI’s intended outcomes and to draw lessons learned particularly in the areas of engagement and relationships; indigenous issues and priorities; collaboration and coordination; environmental stewardship and habitat restoration, and cumulative effect monitoring. This evaluation was scheduled in the department evaluation and audit plan. The evaluation covered WCEI $64.3M expenditures (actuals) for the period of 2014-15 to 2017-18.

The horizontal evaluation of the WCEI was conducted based on a documentary review of evaluations completed for each component of the initiative. Technical reports were conducted for SPI-WCE and SPF-WCE, by the program’s respective lead departments, and an external evaluation of IPO-West was conducted by consultants.

Prior to the horizontal summary evaluation, a targeted document review and a few complementary interviews were conducted regarding the CEMI component, mainly to gain a better understanding of the work done under the ECCC initiative and identify the reasons why the pilots did not go forward. The IPO-West evaluation report, the two technical reports (for SPF-WCE and SPI-WCE) and complementary observations on CEMI were examined and synthesized for the WCEI evaluation. Overall conclusions about WCEI as a horizontal initiative are summarized in this report under each evaluation question. The evaluation covers the program spending of $64.3M over the period of 2014-15 to 2017-18. Data collection was completed in the fall and winter of 2017-2018. The evaluation had been identified in the Departmental Evaluation Plan, 2017-18 to 2021-22.

The main limitation of this evaluation is that it is based on a limited number of interviews conducted with Indigenous respondents, including two interviews for the CEMI component, 11 interviews for the IPO-West component, and interviews with community members from 10 communities (SPI-WCE component) (the exact number of individual interviewees is unknown). The other limitation is associated with the fact that, in some instances, the SPI-WCE and SPF-WCE technical reports employed different methodologies, namely regarding approaches to evidence, informant interviews, and the evaluation of efficiency and lessons learned. Each report focused on different components of the initiative and used different methodologies to collect and analyze evidence. It should be mentioned that the SPF-WCE evaluation was completed prior to this evaluation. The differences in scope did not impact the core findings of this evaluation.

Findings

Relevance

The evaluation found that the WCEI initiative is supported by a strong rationale for early and broad engagement with Indigenous communities, beyond the legal duty to consult, namely in the areas of business development, skills and employment, and the environment. WCEI was a direct response to the report written by the Special Federal Representative on West Coast Energy Infrastructure, Douglas Eyford. This report described a need for a federal government initiative to facilitate a coordinated federal presence on the West Coast, and ensure that federal engagement with Indigenous communities is translated into concrete actions and investments. Furthermore, there is an ongoing need to provide Indigenous communities with the skills and tools to allow them to partake in energy development projects. The horizontal evaluation found that WCEI is aligned with federal priorities and roles and responsibilities, although questions were raised as to whether SPI-WCE is well aligned with SPI in general at ISC/CIRNAC.

Is there a continued need for the WCEI?

Need for IPO-West

According to stakeholders interviewed for the IPO-West evaluation, there is a need for the IPO-West office to build and maintain good relationships with communities through coordinated engagement. Also, according to documentation, early and ongoing Indigenous engagement requires a stronger federal presence in BC. Vancouver is the major travel hub for the province, and locating the IPO-West in Vancouver was to allow federal staff to travel to communities across the province in the fastest and most cost-effective manner. This being said, some interviewees felt that given new circumstances, a review of IPO-West’s mandate may be warranted. These circumstances include new policies, the split of the former department of INAC into two separate departments (ISC and CIRNAC); new market realities (including low oil prices); growing interest in developing clean energy sources and other natural resources development, and changes in the timelines of oil and gas infrastructure projects. Some respondents wondered if IPO-West is the most adequate model to meet the need for engagement.

Need for SPF-WCE

There was also a need to invest in training activities to allow Indigenous community members to take part in the economic activities associated energy projects.

SPF-WCE was launched to address human resources needs within large scale LNG development. ESDC conducted a preliminary environmental scan to identify stakeholders, the timelines of infrastructure projects, the pre-established agreements with communities, population and unemployment figures, as well as a list of current Aboriginal Skills and Employment Training Strategy (ASETS) or SPF Agreement Holders. Two Agreement Holders were selected to receive SPF-WCE funding, based on their existing relationships with communities and industry partners. The two SPF-WCE funded projects were designed to target the higher level skills required for the jobs most in demand in the affected areas. Both funding recipient organizations completed assessments of market needs, demonstrating labour market demand for the areas. With those results and through close working relationships with industry partners, the Agreement Holders could ensure that their programming would provide training aligned with job demand. Furthermore, all participants in the SPF-WCE funded training programs reported that they were facing multiple barriers to employment including economic obstacles, lack of education, lack of work experience, remoteness and lack of transportation.

This exemplifies the need for training in the targeted communities. The projects were also focussed on skills transferable to other industry occupations in the area and suitable to other regional job opportunities (e.g., in forestry, mining, construction, electricity and goods movement) considering possible delays in energy project implementation. The two agreements are to sunset in 2021.

Need for SPI-WCE

According to the ISC/CIRNAC evaluation technical report, SPI-WCE addresses a demonstrable need for engagement of Indigenous communities in West Coast energy infrastructure projects. Needs are associated with each of the SPI pillars, including fish habitat restoration; early and ongoing engagement; environmental action; and creating jobs and growth.

SPI-WCE responds to the need for greater capacity in Indigenous communities to examine energy projects and assess their impact through project funding. Small band offices are especially ill-equipped to deal with big projects and companies approaching Indigenous communities. Communities also identified the need to assess both business opportunities and environmental issues.

The fish habitat restoration pillar recognizes the cultural and economic importance of fish species such as salmon, to many Indigenous communities in BC. It also responds to community needs to understand and protect fish against past and future impacts of industrial activity. Some projects funded through SPI-WCE, such as in fish habitat restoration or cultural employment, reflect pre-existing and ongoing needs in communities, regardless of whether they are related to energy infrastructure development.

The early and ongoing engagement pillar responds to a need for greater knowledge and information about the impacts of energy infrastructure development on the environment, society, economies, and ancestral territories of Indigenous communities.

The environmental action pillar addressed the need for greater capacity development in leadership and management positions in environmental services. It also addressed the need for certifications in providing environmental services in order to compete with large companies that offer these services in the region and throughout the province, and the need for businesses of this type to be owned and operated by First Nations.

The creating jobs and growth pillar addressed a variety of needs connected to capacity, employment, and economic development. It also addressed the need for support to First Nations in finding access to capital, making informed decisions, carrying out due diligence, preparing for business negotiations, improving financial literacy and understanding of corporate structures and revenue sharing options, and applying appropriate environmental stewardship to energy development.

Respondents felt that there was a need to support projects related to clean energy, but that these were not supported by SPI-WCE. On the other hand, there is evidence that the many funded projects were only loosely related to energy development. Also, SPI-WCE placed significant emphasis on LNG development in the early and ongoing engagement pillar. Some informants expressed the view that this emphasis was relevant to only few communities.

Need for CEMI

CEMI was designed to meet the need for cumulative effect monitoring. According to findings, while the CEMI pilot projects were never concretely implemented, cumulative effect monitoring remains a high priority for communities. In fact, communities applied for and obtained supports through SPI and other funding mechanisms to implement or operationalize cumulative monitoring elements.

Environmental impacts of energy projects on ecosystems (especially marine) and livelihoods were identified in the Eyford Report as a major concern to Indigenous communities. In the regions where engagement was conducted through CEMI, First Nations indicated a clear interest in working with the federal government on cumulative effects and “in particular, working with federal science experts from DFO and ECCC” (CEMI Interim Report p.3)^{Footnote 4}. In the CEMI contribution agreements, representatives of participating First Nations describe a current need for cumulative effect monitoring to obtain baseline data which can in turn inform discussions and decision-making on energy development.

Does the program align with current federal government priorities?

According to evidence, the mandate and activities of IPO-West are aligned with current federal priorities of building renewed, collaborative, respectful relationships with Indigenous communities, and increasing Indigenous participation in a variety of sectors, including energy development. The 2017 Budget highlights a priority to develop partnerships and collaborate with Indigenous groups in various domains, including the energy sector.

IPO-West

According to most federal informants, the IPO-West’s mandate is aligned with the federal government’s focus on Reconciliation, and building nation-to-nation relationships, which is coherent with the recent government commitment towards a Recognition and Implementation of Rights Framework. The objectives of IPO-West are also aligned with the priorities of the Ministry of Natural Resources.

The Minister of Natural Resources’ current Mandate Letter states that “it is time for a renewed, nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous Peoples, based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership”. NRCan leads the whole-of-government effort on energy market diversification, and IPO-West is located under the NRCan Energy Market Access and Diversification sub-program.

IPO-West is also mentioned in and in-line with the 2018-19 NRCan Departmental Plan. IPO-West appears under NRCan’s Core Responsibility 3: Globally Competitive Natural Resource Sectors. The Departmental Plan states that “The Indigenous Partnerships Office–West will continue to offer a coordinated approach to early and ongoing engagement on west coast energy infrastructure development, and identify concrete actions that address Indigenous priorities and interests.”

CEMI

CEMI is not explicitly mentioned in current ECCC plans (2018-2019) as the CEMI pilot projects were not implemented. According to some government interviewees, implementation of the pilot projects and further engagement work were not pursued under CEMI notably because at the time, actions to respond to cumulative effects were being contemplated in several other venues including specific project monitoring committees, the OPP and regulatory reviews.

SPF-WCE

The Skills and Partnership Fund webpage describes the national SPF program as complementary to the Aboriginal Skills and Employment Training Strategy and as “a demand-driven, partnership-based program that supports government priorities through strategic partnerships”. Although the evaluation of the SPF-WCE component did not include a relevance question focussed on government priorities, the program’s basic premise is aligned with federal government goals of supporting capacity-building and development in indigenous communities.

The SPF program in general supports the Government of Canada’s goal of developing “a skilled, mobile and productive workforce” as stated in Budget 2015. The West Coast Energy-SPF, as a component of the SPF, also meets this alignment. It is also consistent with the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Labour mandate letter that includes the following result: Improve Canadians' access to good quality job training (2018).

SPI-WCE

According to the ISC/CIRNAC evaluation technical report, the SPI-WCE design was relevant insofar as it fit with the NRCan strategic objective of making Canada’s natural resource sectors globally competitive, but some key informants felt it was not as well aligned with the broader objectives of SPI. In their view, the WCEI as an initiative was not totally in line SPI’s logic model, which supports the former department of INAC’s departmental strategic outcome of: “Full participation of First Nations, Métis, Non-Status Indians and Inuit individuals and communities in the economy.”

Is there a legitimate and necessary role for the federal government in the area?

The documentation shows that WCEI activities are coherent and aligned with the role of the federal government in engaging with Indigenous communities. Although those activities reside outside the formal framework of duty to consult, the Eyford Report concluded that the government has a role to play in ensuring broader, early engagement with communities, and in supporting their capacity to participate in energy development.

IPO-West

IPO-West’s mandate is consistent with the legal framework which defines NRCan’s powers and responsibilities regarding the development and use of Canada’s natural resources, and cooperation with provincial government and non-governmental organizations. The Minister’s general duties listed in the Department of Natural Resources Act include “seeking to enhance the responsible development and use of Canada’s natural resources and the competitiveness of Canada’s natural resources products.” The Act also states that the Minister shall “promote cooperation with the governments of the provinces and with non-governmental organizations in Canada”, which includes Indigenous stakeholders. According to documentation, the Minister of Natural Resources leads the whole-of-government effort on energy market diversification, including responsibility for the Government’s response to the Eyford Report.

Only a few interviewees were unsure whether NRCan is in the best position to tackle potentially competing objectives of addressing Indigenous concerns, discussing environmental issues, and propelling energy development.

CEMI

While CEMI pilot projects were not implemented, the initiative itself is in line with ECCC’s mandate. As indicated in the Department of the Environment Act, the Minister shall (among other duties) “ensure that new federal projects, programs and activities are assessed early in the planning process for potential adverse effects on the quality of the natural environment and that a further review is carried out of those projects, programs, and activities that are found to have probable significant adverse effects, and the results thereof taken into account.” The Act also states that the Minister shall “promote and encourage the institution of practices and conduct leading to the better preservation and enhancement of environmental quality, and cooperate with provincial governments or agencies thereof, or any bodies, organizations or persons, in any programs having similar objects”. As well, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act specifies that ECCC (the Minister) must exercise its powers in a manner that protects the environment and human health and applies the precautionary principle.

SPF-WCE

SPF was established in 2010 under the authority of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act. Under the Act, the Minister may “establish and implement programs designed to support activities or other activities that contribute to the development of human resources of Canada and the skills of Canadians, and the Minister may make grants and contributions in support of the programs”. Also, the Act states that “For the purpose of facilitating the formulation, coordination and implementation of any program or policy relating to the powers, duties and functions conferred by this Act, the Minister may enter into agreements with a province or a provincial public body, financial institutions and other persons or bodies that the Minister considers appropriate”. The Act also established that the Minister can exercise their powers and function “with a view to improving the standard of living and quality of life of all Canadians by promoting highly skilled and mobile workforce and an efficient and inclusive labour market”.

SPI-WCE

According to the ISC and CIRNAC evaluation report, the SPI-WCE design was not as well aligned with the mandate of INAC. According to the report, by accepting the SPI-WCE objectives, the former department of INAC assumed a non-neutral position with respect to energy projects rather than supporting Indigenous communities seeking to make their own decisions about economic development. The drivers behind SPI-WCE – Canada’s competitiveness in global energy markets, the need for infrastructure to bring resources to tidewater, the potential for Indigenous opposition to block infrastructure projects – belong to NRCan, but not to ISC and CIRNAC.

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: Given that Canada is advancing reconciliation through targeted efforts and effective relationships, and considering concerns about cumulative effects of multiple resource developments, it is recommended that Departments involved in the WCEI use engagement approaches consistent with, and building on observations in the 2013 Douglas R. Eyford Report. Eyford advocated for early and broad engagement with Indigenous communities that goes beyond a project-specific legal duty to consult, using a whole-of-government approach. To support future approaches to jointly funded priority projects such as WCEI, a detailed assessment of engagement approaches (i.e., whole-of-government and single window), including best practices and lessons learned should be undertaken. NRCan will lead this effort.

Performance – efficiency and economy

Views about the effectiveness of the WCEI governance structure were mixed. There is evidence that WCEI was facilitated by a horizontal model where information and proposals were shared between federal departments and the government of BC for input and feedback. However, the evaluation found a certain lack of clarity regarding the role of IPO-West and collected mixed reviews on the effectiveness of the single-window approach. Stakeholders also noted delays and challenges associated with the funding allocation processes. The evaluation also found that all components of the WCEI were in an under-budget financial situation. Various factors explain this financial performance, including delayed hiring, delays dues to competing priorities, travel budgets not fully utilized, and delayed energy and SPF projects.

To what extent did the WCEI governance structure improve the delivery or effectiveness of the individual initiatives? Of the entire initiative?

There are mixed views regarding the governance structure that oversaw the SPI-WCE funding mechanism. For many, roles and responsibilities of the various departments involved in funding decision-making processes were unclear, especially in the early years of the initiative. Some interviewees felt that processes and roles have been clarified in the latter years. For others, the two-key decision-making approach (ISC/CIRNAC and NRCan) was not effective, led to delays and was not inclusive of the other participating departments. There was a general agreement that the funding decision-making mechanism suffered from multiple delays.

IPO-West

Most government respondents confirmed that IPO-West plays a meaningful role within WCEI, but with some challenges associated with the horizontal nature of the initiative. At the beginning of the WCEI, there was some confusion as to the role of IPO-West and the responsibilities of other departments in the initiative. According to most informants, the roles and responsibilities were clarified over time, but a few interviewees felt that these remain unclear. For instance, the fact that the participating departments have different mandates and different criteria to evaluate projects has created barriers to timely decisions within the SPI-WCE DGIC^{Footnote 5}. On the other hand, there is evidence that IPO-West plays a positive role in assisting Indigenous communities to develop funding applications for their projects, and that without the work of IPO-West, some projects would not have been identified or funded.

However, it was mentioned that many of the same department and community representatives are involved in multiple committees or meetings directly or indirectly related to energy development, which are held by various departments or governments (including a few committees coordinated by IPO-West). Respondents found that these committees are very time-consuming for them and are concerned about potential overlap and duplication.

SPF-WCE

The SPF-WCE evaluation found that cooperation and communication across the federal government departments involved in WCEI was facilitated by the IPO-West horizontal model where information and proposals were shared between federal departments and the BC government for input and feedback. Key informants reported that this new way of doing business worked well because it brought federal stakeholders together in a cohesive way. Key informants highlighted that clearly communicating a vision and expectations to potential Agreement Holders during the proposal-writing and Funding Agreement processes helped speed up the process.

CEMI

CEMI key informants explained that IPO-West was involved in the early scoping stage of the initiative, but that most of the engagement phase was conducted by ECCC itself, (which was sound considering the department’s scientific and technical expertise and pre-existing relationships with some communities the department had previously worked before). In this regard, ECCC’s engagement as part of CEMI was deemed specific and purposeful. According to both ECCC and NRCan interviewees, challenges and a lack of clarity around roles existed, and these governance issues impacted decision-making around the pilot projects. A lack of documentation did not allow the evaluation team to validate why pilot projects did not proceed.

SPI-WCE

Evidence gathered for the SPI-WCE evaluation indicates that there are mixed views about the effectiveness of SPI-WCE governance, with some considering it adequate and others finding significant deficiencies. Views about the DGIC were mixed; some respondents said that although it took time to develop a clear framework of overall outcomes and appropriate roles for participating departments, the current DGs have moved the SPI-WCE “toward a clearer picture”. This group of respondents said that senior people from the departments were engaged and gave good feedback on proposals and on budget issues.

On the other hand, others said that the two-key decision-making approach (ISC/CIRNAC and NRCan) was not effective, led to delays and was not inclusive of the other participating departments. Some informants suggested that SPI-WCE should have been accountable to the existing national SPI governance structure with its broader decision-making process. Tensions existed between NRCan and ISC/CIRNAC senior managers regarding project approvals, even though ISC/CIRNAC considered itself accountable for the funds and exercised its own due diligence. According to some respondents, the DGIC’s challenge function was limited, despite the efforts of some stakeholders, to debate the merits of projects. There was a lack of time to review project proposals and decisions were made without careful assessments. Supporting documentation to proposals was deemed weak.

Also, a problematic change to the governance structure in the view of some key informants was the shift of ISC/CIRNAC’s seat on the DGIC from headquarters to its BC regional office, which left headquarters accountable, but with an unclear role with respect to funding decisions.

Views were also mixed about the SPI-WCE Technical Working Group (TWG), whose purpose is to “support a strategic, coordinated approach to identify and assess project synopses and potential projects for the SPI-WCE program”. Some said that the TWG is working well since 2016-17 and was providing information to the DGIC for discussion. However, other key informants said the TWG was not performing a gatekeeping function, should have had more ability to vet projects, and should have used a scoring or ranking system to evaluate projects and make objective decisions on proposals.

The intent of SPI-WCE – as in the SPI national program – was to use the SPI authority rather than separate departmental authorities and processes to create a single window for Indigenous communities to apply for funding, receive funding, and submit reporting. The IPO-West office was also established to provide an on-the-ground presence and serve as a single window for Indigenous communities on energy development. In practice, findings indicate that this single-window approach did not work as intended. Different departments had different systems for managing Gs&Cs. The single-window approach, if applied, should have lessened administrative burden for Indigenous recipients, but it appears that it has not.

Performance monitoring was also deemed weak. The deficiencies in performance measurement in SPI-WCE reflect an overall weak use of results-based management. INAC did not create a logic model and performance measurement framework specific to SPI-WCE. There is no clear indication in program documentation whether reporting would be done on the basis of the SPI national logic model and performance measurement strategy or according to the WCEI performance measurement and risk strategy (PMRS). The latter was discussed at some meetings of the DGIC, but most discussion at the DGIC on reporting was about financial reporting and disbursement rather than results.

Overall, several key informants said there was a lack of strategic direction in decision-making about projects accompanied by a lack of focus on the larger results expected from SPI-WCE investments. Although a ‘Strategic Partnership Initiative West Coast Energy Action Plan’ was drafted shortly after SPI-WCE was launched, it appears not to have guided decision making until the third year. Other mid-term strategic documents were also crafted, including ‘SPI West Coast Energy 3 to 5 Year Priorities’, and a ‘SPI West Coast Energy 2017-18 Strategy Placemat.’ Nevertheless, the extent to which these strategic documents were used to guide the decision-making process is uncertain, according to the report.

Finally, no efforts were made in project development and delivery to integrate gender equality considerations. A federal key informant said that gender considerations were low order of priority in early SPI-WCE program delivery, which was described as overwhelming owing to pressure to develop projects and disburse funding.

Are there alternative delivery models that can achieve similar outcomes at lower cost?

Only the IPO-West evaluation addressed this issue. Most key informants felt that IPO-West’s approach is achieving outcomes effectively considering its level of resources, and few made recommendations on ways to improve program efficiency. Recommendations included: expanding the work to other sectors under the NRCan portfolio; IPO-West managing its own Gs&Cs to improve the timeliness of funding decisions; and adding flexibility in terms of what is eligible for funding. According to interviewees, these changes could result in efficiency gains and could inform future programming.

To what extent have resources been used as planned to produce intended program outputs?

All components of the WCEI were in an under-budget financial situation (Appendix 4). Based on the available financial information, the various combined components of WCEI spent $64.3M against a budget of $103.7M.
As of 2017-2018, IPO-West expended 67% of its $11.6M budget for the 2014-2018 period; SPI-WCE spent 79% of its $66.9M budget for the 2014-2017 period; CEMI spent 42% of its $6.4M budget; and SPF-WCE spent $1.2M of its $11.2M budget.

The available evidence did not indicate the extent to which the unspent forecasted amounts were discussed between involved departments, and whether any re-profiling avenues were explored.

Various factors explain this financial performance, including delayed hiring, delays dues to competing priorities, travel budgets not fully utilized, and delayed energy and SPF projects. It also took time to build effective relationships with Indigenous communities in a number of areas, according to one key informant.

IPO-West

IPO-West has been allocated $11.6M for the 2014-2018 period, and expended $7.8M as of April 1, 2018. Programme documentation states that there was a greater need for human resources expenditures than anticipated. Based on documentation, IPO-West has met 88% of its primary output target, which was to engage with all targeted communities at least once. Given the fact that IPO-West met with most communities, the resources are deemed well spent at this point in time.

IPO-West has spent approximately 67% of its planned budget (detailed results are presented in Appendix 3). According to documentation, under-spending occurred because of the following reasons:

• Delayed staffing for IPO-West in the first year;
• Cancellation of Tripartite Energy Forum (representing a yearly planned amount of $500,000);
• Less resources used for training and conferences for IPO-West staff;
• Travel budget not fully utilized; and
• Engagement activities delayed for various reasons, including competing priorities.

SPI-WCE

SPI-WCE underspent its budget during the entire cycle, for a total spent of $52.6M of a budget of $66.9M (2014-18).

According to evaluation results, delivery of SPI-WCE led to a significant administrative burden for ISC/CIRNAC without adequate human resources and O&M. ISC/CIRNAC was to allocate $3.5M in O&M to administer the $61M SPI-WCE in Gs&Cs. The department used existing resources and did not hire extra personnel. The staff assigned in the first years to run the SPI-WCE secretariat were all part of the national SPI program. They carried out the tasks related to SPI-WCE in addition to their regular work. When the SPI-WCE secretariat was transferred to the BC regional office, INAC headquarters used salary dollars from the SPI national program to pay for a single coordinator position in the BC office to implement SPI-WCE. Several federal key informants said that SPI-WCE was under-resourced in comparison to other federal programs similar in size and value. The under-resourcing of SPI-WCE contributed to delays in funding delivery from ISC/CIRNAC and other departments.

SPF-WCE

The SPF-WCE program was allocated a total budget of $11.2M, including $10M for Gs&Cs. The Gs&Cs funding was assigned to two current Aboriginal Skills and Employment Training Strategy (ASETS)^{Footnote 6} Agreement Holders who demonstrated adequate capacity to deliver within the short timelines of the project (2014-2017). The two funded projects are:

• Tribal Resources Investment Corporation’s (TRICORP) Training to Employment in LNG Sector project (end date of March 2021);
• The Prince George Nechako Aboriginal Employment and Training Association’s (PGNAETA) Industry Connections project, with an end date of December 2020. Both projects were therefore ongoing when the evaluation was conducted.

TRICORP and PGNAETA’s projects have a combined budget of just over $10M between 2015-2016 and 2020-2021. Commitments post-2017 (approximately $7.2M) will be funded under the regular allocation of SPF’s budget
(See Table 2 below).

Table 2: West Coast Energy-SPF Funding By Fiscal Year (Planned) (FY 2015-16 to 2020-21)

Funding by fiscal year
	2015-16	2016-17	2017-18	2018-19	2019-20	2020-21	TOTAL
TRICORPFootnote 7	$434,937	$207,793	$733,032	$918,032	$733,032	$670,233	$3,697,059
PGNAETA	N/A	$441,437	$1,750,232	$2,145,159	$1,838,590	$946,215	$7,121,633
TOTAL	$434,937	$649,230	$2,483,264	$3,063,191	$2,571,622	$1,616,448	$10,818,692

Source: TRICORP and PGNAETA West Coast Energy-SPF Funding Agreements^{Footnote 8}.

Key informants confirmed that the two selected organizations have significant capacity, experience in labour market program delivery and good relationships and communications with industry partners. Although the evaluation occurred while the two interventions were ongoing, evidence indicates that the investments made through SPF-WCE are likely to yield the expected results. The training and/or certificates delivered under the West Coast Energy-SPF projects are meant to lead to high skilled employment for participants.

CEMI

According to financial information related to CEMI, no amounts were spent beyond 2016. The Initiative only expended $2.7M of its budget of $6.4M.

Recommendations

Recommendation 2: Considering the delays in the energy projects and the continued need for the Government of Canada to engage Indigenous communities in resource development, notably in West Coast energy development, it is recommended that NRCan clarifies and communicates IPO-West roles and responsibilities, with special attention to the role played by other federal departments and agencies that are working with west coast Indigenous communities on socio-economic issues.

Recommendation 3: Given the findings related to the lengthiness of Gs&Cs decision-making processes, it is recommended that an IPO-West Gs&Cs budget be retained by NRCan to reduce delays and lengthiness of decision-making processes when funding engagement projects with Indigenous communities in West Coast energy development. In so doing, NRCan should initiate additional work with WCEI Departments to ensure that the activities funded through this budget avoid duplications with existing federal government funding mechanisms and align with NRCan’s mandate.

Performance – Effectiveness

To what extent is the program achieving the intended immediate, intermediate and final intended outcomes?

The expected ultimate outcomes of the Initiative included two items: Indigenous communities have improved capacity to make informed decisions on West Coast energy infrastructure; and increased Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects in BC.

Results achieved by the WCEI are presented by component and following the expected outcomes as depicted in the logic model (Appendix 2). Based on the evidence, each WCEI component evaluations results are deemed “partly achieved” where the results from the different components were mixed. A summary of the state of overall achievement is presented in the Appendix 5.

At the immediate level, outcomes pertaining to engagement with communities, enhanced understanding of issues, interdepartmental collaborative engagement and coordinated investments and action were achieved through WCEI. Outcomes related to building positive relationships with communities, federal response to non-regulatory issues, and support for Indigenous participation on addressing environmental concerns and cumulative effect monitoring were partly achieved.

WCEI expected intermediate outcomes were partly achieved. The evaluation found that the initiative did contribute to renewed relationships, helped in addressing identified issues in a coordinated way, contributed to a whole-of-government response and supported the involvement of some communities in environmental monitoring. However, success varied between the different components.

Progress was made to achieve the ultimate outcomes of the WCEI. The evaluation findings indicated progress towards improving the capacity of Indigenous communities to make informed decisions on West Coast energy infrastructure projects. However, it is too early to determine whether the WCEI has increased Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects, given that energy projects have been delayed.

IPO-West

According to evidence, IPO-West has contributed to all immediate outcomes. IPO-West has contributed to building trust and good relationships with Indigenous stakeholders, even with communities that may be strongly opposed to energy development projects. Some government interviewees felt that the IPO-West engagement model was successful, and could be emulated in other sectors.

The engagement activities undertaken by IPO-West allowed the office to identify a wide range of needs, issues and priorities expressed by Indigenous communities. Also, there is evidence that IPO-West activities have increased government stakeholders’ understanding of Indigenous concerns and issues, and resulted in a more collaborative and coordinated government response. IPO-West also contributed to a coordinated approach to project funding with the BC provincial government. The engagement activities undertaken by IPO-West have allowed the office to identify a wide range of needs, issues and priorities expressed by Indigenous communities. Nearly half of the issues/priorities have been addressed, which is above target.

IPO-West conducted engagement activities with most Indigenous communities through direct contact with stakeholders, meetings, workshops, forums, other events and funded projects. Indigenous key informants noted that prior to the creation of IPO-West, engagement by the federal government was very limited. Indigenous respondents for the most part provided positive feedback on the efforts deployed by the Office to engage communities directly, in respectful and innovative ways (e.g., co-development of terms of reference for the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committees [IAMC]).

IPO-West contributed to a coordinated approach to project funding with the BC provincial government. It also played an active role in addressing the issues and concerns of the communities through various activities, including supporting the communities in applying for funds, forwarding community questions/issues to the appropriate authority, and taking part of the project funding selection process with the other federal partners, and responding to communities that had pending questions/enquiries.

The other intermediate outcomes were partly achieved. IPO-West conducted engagement activities with most Indigenous communities through direct contact with stakeholders. At the same time, cooperation and collaboration among federal departments around West Coast energy issues has increased through SPI-WCE, although some government respondents remain unsure of the roles of IPO-West.

The achievement of the ultimate outcome Indigenous communities have improved capacity to make informed decisions on West Coast energy infrastructure is in progress. Capacity-building covered a wide range of activities, whether focused on knowledge or skill development or strengthening community processes, abilities and resources required to participate in initiatives related to energy development. Documentation and interviews provided examples of projects supported by IPO-West which have increased participation in processes around energy projects (e.g., vote on benefit agreements, participation in environmental monitoring, and the establishment of economic development plans).

Interviewees insisted on the importance of having Gs&Cs available to support a diversity of capacity-building undertakings in communities. The capacity-building activities of IPO-West also impacted other stakeholders, including the National Energy Board and industry. Some industry decisions, such as pipeline routes and technology designs, were changed as a result of talks supported by the capacity-building supports to the communities. Although some of the major infrastructure projects have not been undertaken on the ground yet, SPI-WCE projects helped Indigenous communities and stakeholders prepare and build their capacity in prevision of projects being implemented.

Because the delays in the energy projects have generally delayed the developmental activities to help communities directly participate in the energy projects, it is too early to assess the expected ultimate outcome “Increased Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects in BC”.

SPF-WCE

There was limited information to discuss the contribution of the SPF-WCE to the WCEI immediate and intermediate expected outcomes.

Available evidence for this evaluation indicate partial achievement of the WCEI ultimate outcome Increased Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects in BC. While too early to evaluate, evidence showed that funding targeted training-to-employment activities for Indigenous persons in BC, in order to provide them with the skills necessary to participate in planned resource development projects.

According to findings, two projects were approved for the West Coast Energy-SPF: TRICORP Training to Employment in LNG Sector project (end date of March 2021); and the PGNAETA’s Industry Connections project, with an end date of December 2020. Both projects were therefore ongoing when the evaluation was conducted. The activities funded (training and/or certificates) are expected to prepare participants for jobs created by targeted projects in the oil and gas industry. Training was conducted in various trades, from labourers to skilled trades in the areas of construction and transportation.

Among the two ongoing projects, the large majority of participants were still receiving training services at the time of the evaluation, so outcomes could not be assessed in summative terms. However, in one project to date, of 73 participants who completed their action plans, 41 are employed or have returned to school, and 18 are unemployed. Just over a third of the participants were female. Considering the type of training offered, this may indicate that they are moving into occupations typically held by males. The other project served 25 participants, with fewer than 10 currently employed. Most of PGNAETA clients (21) were still receiving interventions at the time of the data analysis.

Key informants were however confident that the project would achieve its targets by the Funding Agreement end date. Furthermore, findings on incremental impact from previous evaluations of Indigenous labour market programs (e.g., ASEP^{Footnote 9}) have shown that this type of skills development programming can be effective at improving employment and earnings levels among Indigenous individuals compared to similar individuals who did not participate. All key informants agreed that labour market research and working relationships between the Agreement Holders and industry partners helps ensure that programming would result in trained individuals capable of responding to job demand.

CEMI

Through CEMI, ECCC was to develop a pilot cumulative effects monitoring initiative in collaboration with the BC government and Indigenous communities, and ultimately contribute to community capacity building to make informed decisions, as well as generally contribute to a renewed federal relationship with Indigenous communities.

The Initiative was to be conducted in two phases: funding was to be provided for the first two years of the initiative, during which ECCC was to engage relevant parties to scope the location for two pilot projects and support Indigenous participation in scoping and designing a monitoring system. In order to advance Phase 2 (implementation) of the pilot projects ECCC and NRCan were required to seek further funding approvals from government

CEMI activities and projects were expected to contribute to immediate and intermediate expected outcomes, including involvement of communities in assessing and addressing environmental impacts; and certainty for communities about how the cumulative effects will be tracked.

At the immediate level, positive relationships was developed with Indigenous communities bringing communities together and creating working relationships between various department officials, government-based experts, community-based experts and other community stakeholders.

In each of the two regions where the engagement phase took place, a list of prioritized values and principles were produced through CEMI discussions and a final product (an interim plan and a pilot proposal) were produced.

Overall, despite the fact that the pilots did not proceed, the engagement segment of CEMI produced good immediate results in terms of outreach, relationships and trust building between stakeholders.

The remaining immediate and intermediate outcomes were partly achieved, as CEMI pilot projects did not take place. However, communities were able to implement cumulative impact monitoring activities through the use of other components of the WCEI (e.g., SPI-WCE).

Interviewees from the government and from Indigenous communities confirmed that this was less than ideal because resources to implement projects had to be secured from a variety of different sources in a piecemeal fashion rather than through one centralized contribution agreement. This was definitely not in line with the whole-of-government and single-window approach to which WCEI aimed for. Furthermore, while CEMI offered significant flexibility, requirements to secure funding from other sources were most stringent and less adapted to the communities’ cumulative assessment needs.

One key informant remarked that CEMI had offered complete flexibility in terms of communities contributing to every step of the engagement stage and being able to bring forth their concerns and priorities in a way that was suitable to their needs. This was not available through the other sources of funding utilized to undertake the project. Final reports to the contribution agreements also indicate that Indigenous participants were appreciative of ECCC’s flexibility in amending timelines and the nature of the final document to be produced during the engagement phase.

SPI-WCE

Overall, the SPI-WCE partly achieved the immediate and intermediate outcomes. The achievement of some of those outcomes is in progress.

Results were mixed as to the extent to which SPI-WCE contributed to more positive relationships between the federal government and Indigenous communities. Some communities reported having acceptable relations with ISC/CIRNAC, while others said that the program had not contributed to a more positive relationship. Several key informants said SPI-WCE contributed to the ability of other government departments to build relationships with First Nations, especially in departments that had little previous experience working with Indigenous communities.

According to findings, achievement has been limited in communication of, and federal response to, issues of concern to Indigenous communities that could be impacted by energy development. Processes for hearing concerns and responding to them are informal, limited, and vary by department. Workshops organized under the early and ongoing engagement pillar produced little or no documentation of Indigenous concerns, feedback, or next steps.

SPI-WCE contributed to interdepartmental collaboration and partnerships. The evaluation found that some SPI-WCE projects served as opportunities to bring various partners together in order to share information and to explore collaboration. For example, the Haisla Nation strengthened its partnerships with the Regional District of Kitimat-Stikine, the Kitimat Rod and Gun club, the BC Ministry of the Environment, the Canadian Wildlife Federation, and academic researchers. Among the partnerships reported by Kitselas First Nation was a knowledge-sharing exercise with two Northeast BC First Nations that are running a native plant nursery that is supported by SPI-WCE. The First Nations Major Projects Coalition (FNMPC^{Footnote 10}) said it has revitalized partnerships with the Assembly of First Nations, and the BC government, among others. In its project, Sumas First Nation forged good relationships with two local real estate developers and with the City of Abbotsford.

With respect to federal investments and actions coordination with Indigenous, provincial and other partners, findings indicate that cooperation among federal departments around West Coast energy issues has increased through SPI-WCE.

Three departments and agencies (DFO, ECCC, and WD) signed interdepartmental letters of agreement (ILA) with ISC/CIRNAC to specify the flow of SPI-WCE funding from INAC for projects being administered by the respective departments and to set out the roles and responsibilities of each party. ESDC participated in SPI-WCE in two projects through its Skills Partnership Fund (SPF), but it drew upon that fund rather than the SPI-WCE funding to finance the projects. SPI-WCE contributed to improved partnerships with other stakeholders as well, including with provincial ministries, non-profit organizations and academia.

According to several federal key informants, one of the weaker aspects of cooperation and collaboration at the federal level was the lack of a strategic approach around major energy projects. Instead of all federal parties collaborating with private sector companies and Indigenous communities on the diagnosis of a particular project and on how best to support communities, and then flowing money through that strategic effort, SPI-WCE became project based.

Progress was made in the area Indigenous participation in addressing environmental issues of energy infrastructure development. Case study evidence indicates that project funding allowed communities to participate in projects related to environmental monitoring, research and capacity building. For example, in one community, SPI-WCE funding allowed its fisheries department to gather baseline data on fish and associated marine life, monitor water quality and take remedial actions that contributed to the protection of fish habitat and the restoration of fish populations.

New knowledge generated through collaborations with academic research teams acted as a counterweight to industry-generated information and helped Haisla council make informed decisions. The project also helped the community to improve its relationship with DFO and advance partnerships with a range of local and external stakeholders including the Regional District of Kitimat-Stikine, the BC Ministry of the Environment, and the Canadian Wildlife Federation.

In another project, funding led to training activities for six community members who then carried out environmental monitoring activities to identify watercourses and opportunities for restoration activities. These monitors acted as the Nation’s “eyes and ears on the ground” and prevented minor environmental incidents from happening. They educated potential energy proponents about Indigenous cultural aspects and fishery values in an effort to have such information incorporated into planning for energy infrastructure development. The project provided opportunities for the community to partner with its neighbouring municipality in resource management planning processes.

SPI-WCE achieved the ultimate outcome Indigenous communities have improved capacity to make informed decisions on West Coast energy infrastructure. According to results, SPI-WCE has contributed to capacity development to make informed decisions on West Coast Energy. The federal departments participating in SPI-WCE did not collaborate to assess capacity development needs in order to create a comprehensive capacity development strategy. However, a number of projects contributed to capacity development, including the project delivered by FNMPC (funded by SPI-WCEI).

Several results are associated with the FNMPC project related to capacity development, including:

• Accessing tools (for land-use planning,), and providing a common understanding of the concepts of development, environmental planning, and project planning;
• Developing Indigenous organizations’ own legal, environmental and financial expertise and sources of information;
• Creating new opportunities for better management of land and energy projects by First Nations and for equity participation in projects;
• Assisting communities in establishing sound structures and processes for governance, wealth and financial management;
• Helping communities gain access to the First Nations Financial Management Board, which allows them to get certification and be in a position to take advantage of energy development opportunities; and
• Using structures such as working groups to support communities in identifying their primary concerns about involvement in major projects.

Another project enhanced the community’s capacity to make decisions about their participation to energy projects. SPI-WCE partnered with New Relationship Trust to establish an Economic Development Support Team (EDST) whose role was to assist communities in developing and implementing action plans on major resource development opportunities. The EDST was composed of 10 Indigenous business specialists who worked throughout BC to equip First Nations to take the next steps regarding complex business decisions. Support and advice was tailored to the specific needs of each community, which involved business development, implementation, and evaluation and analysis phases of economic projects. Originally designed to support 12 First Nations projects, the EDST had worked with 24 First Nations on various economic development initiatives by the second year of this three-year initiative.

The SPI-WCE evaluation indicates that there is limited evidence to assess the achievement of Increased Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects in BC. During the first three years, $20.63M was invested in 45 projects under the creating jobs and growth pillar. Certain projects funded under this pillar will help prepare the ground for potential future participation in energy infrastructure projects, according to the report, which also states that participation in
SPI-WCE does not equate to support for participation in energy infrastructure projects.

To what extent have external factors influenced (positively or negatively) the achievement of WCEI outcomes?

Factors mentioned by interviewees that influenced program outcomes while residing outside of IPO-West’s control include:

• The political and regulatory environments related to major oil and gas projects;
• Change in leadership following the 2015 federal election;
• Diversity of views among Indigenous communities;
• The ups and downs in oil and gas prices;
• The existence of other cumulative effect monitoring projects (e.g. at the Provincial level and through the OPP), which may have influenced the decision of not going forward with implementation since other initiatives were underway at the time; and
• The historical lack of trust between Indigenous communities and the federal government; changing energy markets; and varying levels of partners’ readiness to work with IPO-West.

Interviewees noted that these various factors impacted stakeholder expectations, and can present a challenge when trying to establish or maintain relationships and collaboration. Since the activities of IPO-West are generally related to infrastructure projects, factors that have an impact on those developments are likely to change important parameters on which projects or conversations with Indigenous stakeholders may be based. Although these external factors created challenges for IPO-West and sometimes required shifts in the office’s activities, they were not found to have a major detrimental impact on WCEI’s outcomes overall.

To what extent have there been unintended outcomes (positive or negative) resulting from the program?

In terms of positive unintended outcomes, most interviewees noted that IPO-West’s activities created positive relationships not only between the Office and communities, but also between other participating stakeholders, namely between First Nations communities.

It was also noted by multiple interviewees that the program raised Indigenous communities’ expectations regarding federal engagement. Some key informants were concerned as to what would happen if IPO-West could not effectively meet those new expectations over time. On the other hand, a few interviewees wondered if the new government approach which encourages all departments to engage and consult with Indigenous stakeholders may result in increased pressure on communities, if not adequately coordinated. In that context, overlap may also appear with other departments and agencies.

Ares there any lesson learned that could improve the achievement of expected outcomes and future programming?

Lessons learned included:

The WCEI is one element of the government response to an advanced Crown-Indigenous dialogue about resource development, as advocated in the Eyford Report. It complements the integrated whole-of-government approach to Indigenous consultation for major resource projects that has been endorsed by the courts.

The whole-of-government and single window approaches to support the Indigenous communities in building their capacity for effective participation in West Coast energy project development lessens the barriers and the cost in resources and in time associated to their participation.

There is value in whole-of-government and single-window approaches for Indigenous engagement on West Coast energy projects and NRCan has developed a body of knowledge on how Indigenous communities can be engaged in this context. If documented, this body of knowledge will inform other natural resources projects development in other regions of Canada.

The whole-of-government and single-window approaches are maximized when all department involved are clear about the new roles and responsibilities of each department in relation to their mandate. Otherwise, potential risk of internal and external duplications could undermine the expected value of this approach to build meaningful relationship with Indigenous communities with respect to natural resources project development, especially when new and existing policy instruments are combined.

Significant efforts upfront are essential to clarify and document these aspects of governance and the potential challenges associated to the combined policy instruments in order to kick-start the new programming activities.

Experimentation of singular collaboration tools with provincial governments, indigenous communities, local governments, and other stakeholders are key factor of success to improve existing and future natural resources development programs with a flexible and innovative models that takes into account economic interest, cumulative effects and sustainable development.

Recommendation

Recommendation 4: Considering the significant work related to engaging with Indigenous groups and to monitoring cumulative effects under the WCEI, lessons learned from this evaluation should be shared across federal government and best practices should be jointly developed by the Departments involved in the WCEI to inform current and future natural resources program initiation and implementation by federal departments.

Conclusion and lessons learned

Assessment of relevance and performance

Overall, the evaluation results show that the WCEI initiative is supported by a strong rationale for earlier and broader engagement beyond the legal duty to consult, for potential action in the areas of business development, skills and employment, and environmental stewardship. Findings indicated the implementation of successful activities at the community level. However, WCEI initiative delivery was challenged by the implementation of the whole-of-government, single-window approach.

WCEI and IPO-West in particular were the direct response to the report written by the Special Federal Representative on West Coast Energy Infrastructure, Douglas Eyford. This report and other sources of evidence confirm that there is a general need for a federal government initiative that facilitates a coordinated federal presence on the West Coast, and ensures that federal engagement with Indigenous communities is translated into concrete actions and investments. There is an opportunity for Indigenous communities to partake in the energy development projects, and an ongoing need to provide them with the skills and tools to allow them to seize these opportunities. There is a need to support the communities to close gaps related to education and work experience that prevent indigenous workers from participating in energy-related economic activities.

However, the energy projects also raise concerns from an environmental perspective, and there is an expressed need among the communities to monitor effects, and obtain baseline data which can in turn inform discussions and decision-making on energy development. Documented evidence also shows alignment with federal priorities and roles and responsibilities, although questions were raised whether SPI-WCE is well aligned with SPI in general at ISC/CIRNAC.

The evaluation assessed efficiency by reviewing the governance structure, potential alternatives, and the use of resources against budgets. Views about the effectiveness of the WCEI governance structure were mixed. There is evidence that WCEI was facilitated by the IPO-West horizontal model where information and proposals were shared between federal departments and the BC government for input and feedback. However, many government respondents were unclear as to the exact role of IPO-West. As well, the fact that the participating departments have different mandates and different criteria to evaluate projects has created barriers to timely decisions within the DGIC. Others said that the two-key decision-making approach (ISC/CIRNAC and NRCan) was not effective, led to delays and was not inclusive of the other participating departments. Views about the effectiveness of the whole-of-government, single-window approach were also diverse: while some suggested that processes have now become more efficient through the DGIC, others said that the whole-of-government, single-window approach was not totally realized, especially with respect to the environmental projects that involved many departments.

Overall, all components of the WCEI were in an under-budget financial situation. Various factors explain this financial performance, including delayed hiring, delays dues to the federal elections, travel budgets not fully utilized, and delayed energy and SPF projects. With respect to alternatives, it was mentioned that efficiencies could be achieved by allowing IPO-West to manage its own Gs&Cs program.

WCEI was expected to achieve two ultimate outcomes: Indigenous communities have improved capacity to make informed decisions on West Coast energy infrastructure; and increased Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects in BC. This was to be achieved through various engagement activities and funded projects.

According to findings, engagement activities were conducted with most Indigenous communities through a variety of activities initiated by IPO-West, with the support of other departments. The Initiative provided opportunities to bring various partners together in order to share information and to explore collaboration. The projects and activities increased Indigenous participation in decision-making, as well environmental monitoring. Although CEMI pilot projects did not proceed to implementation, SPI-WCE projects allowed many communities to engage in monitoring activities, although not in a single-window approach.

Also under SPI-WCE, a number of projects contributed to capacity development. For example, some projects helped develop Indigenous organizations’ own legal, environmental and financial expertise and sources of information; create new opportunities for better management of land and energy projects by First Nations and for equity participation in projects; and use structures such as working groups to support communities in identifying their primary concerns about involvement in major projects. Results were mixed as to the extent to which SPI-WCE contributed to more positive relationships between the federal government and Indigenous communities.

Delays in the energy projects have generally delayed the developmental activities designed to help communities directly participate in the energy projects. Projects supported by SPF-WCE, while ongoing, have shown early positive results in terms of skills development and employment.

The components of WCEI raised the expectations of community stakeholders towards the federal government, and key informants are concerned that if WCEI is downscaled or interrupted, relationships built up to this point may be damaged.

Lessons learned drawn from the evaluation findings

The WCEI is one element of the government response to an advanced Crown-Indigenous dialogue about resource development, as advocated in the Eyford Report. It complements the integrated whole-of-government approach to Indigenous consultation for major resource projects that has been endorsed by the courts.

The whole-of-government and single window approaches to support the Indigenous communities in building their capacity for effective participation in West Coast energy project development lessen the barriers and the cost in resources and in time associated to their participation.

There is value in whole-of-government and single-window approaches for Indigenous engagement on West Coast energy projects and NRCan has developed a body of knowledge on how Indigenous communities can be engaged in this context. If documented, this body of knowledge will inform other natural resources projects development in other regions of Canada.

The whole-of-government and single-window approaches are maximized when all department involved are clear about the new roles and responsibilities of each department in relation to their mandate. Otherwise, potential risk of internal and external duplications could undermine the expected value of this approach to build meaningful relationship with Indigenous communities with respect to natural resources project development, especially when new and existing policy instruments are combined.

Significant efforts upfront are essential to clarify and document these aspects of governance and the potential challenges associated to the combined policy instruments in order to kick-start the new programming activities.

Experimentation of singular collaboration tools with provincial governments, indigenous communities, local governments, and other stakeholders are key factor of success to improve existing and future natural resources development programs with a flexible and innovative models that takes into account economic interest, cumulative effects and sustainable development.

Evaluation team

Christian Asselin, Chief Audit and Evaluation Executive (CAEE)
David Ash, Senior Advisor to the CAEE
Olive Kamanyana, Program Evaluation Manager
Goss Gilroy Inc.

Appendix 1: Program information

The West Coast Energy Infrastructure Initiative (WCEI) was launched in 2014 to facilitate a coordinated federal response to Indigenous concerns related to major energy project on the West Coast. The objective of the WCEI is to create both the environment and the mechanisms necessary to effectively engage with key Indigenous leaders to address priorities, issues and concerns identified by Indigenous communities. Ultimately, WCEI is intended to ensure that federal engagement with Indigenous communities is translated into concrete actions and investments to address Indigenous priorities.

The WCEI was a response to Douglas Eyford’s primary observation in the 2013 Eyford Report that the Government of Canada and Aboriginal communities need to build effective relationships, best achieved through sustained federal engagement. To this end, federal spending was targeted to facilitate Indigenous participation in West Coast energy infrastructure development in areas such as business development, skills and employment, early and ongoing engagement, and environmental action.

WCEI is a horizontal federal initiative comprised of different components delivered by four departments:

• Natural Resource Canada’s (NRCan) Major Projects Management Office – West (MPMO-W), renamed in October 2017 to Indigenous Partnerships Office-West (IPO-W);
• Environment and Climate Change Canada’s (ECCC) Cumulative Effects Monitoring Initiative (CEMI) pilot;
• Indigenous Services Canada/Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada’s (ISC/CIRNAC) Strategic Partnerships Initiative – West Coast Energy (SPI-WCE); and
• Employment and Social Development Canada’s (ESDC) Skills and Partnership Fund - West Coast Energy (SPF-WCE).

Through the WCEI, NRCan provides a single window to build relationships with Indigenous communities outside of the formal Crown consultation process, and to work across multiple federal departments to facilitate Indigenous engagement and participation in West Coast energy infrastructure development. This engagement is oriented towards a range of priorities expressed by communities (e.g. land use planning, environmental remediation, training and employment) and is not linked to any specific major project consultation or accommodation undertaking.

Components

The Indigenous Partnerships Office – West (IPO-W)

The creation of IPO-West responds to the recommendation in Mr. Eyford’s report that Canada should build on the model it has developed with the Major Projects Management Office, and establish a sustained presence of senior officials on the ground in British Columbia (BC), with capacity to enable Crown engagement and conduct consultations with Indigenous communities on key issues related to the development of energy infrastructure. Delivered by NRCan, IPO-West was provided with a budget of $16.4 million (M) (Operating and Maintenance) for 2014-2019. It is located in Vancouver and has staff presence in Ottawa.

IPO-West engages with Indigenous communities to develop relationships, identify priorities and issues related to West Coast energy infrastructure development, and seek to respond to and address these priorities and issues. IPO-West assists the Minister of NRCan to engage Special Ministerial Representatives (SMRs) to work with communities and was expected to be the secretariat for the Tripartite Energy Forum. The Forum did not go forward as planned but was intended to provide a venue for senior federal and BC officials and Indigenous leaders to share information in order to enable a collaborative approach to solutions that benefit communities while also advancing development.

The Strategic Partnerships Initiative – West Coast Energy (SPI-WCE)

In response to the Eyford Report’s recommendation to help prepare Indigenous communities for economic opportunities, and address Indigenous priorities and issues associated with energy infrastructure development, $61M in Grants and Contribution (Gs&Cs) funding was provided over five years to the Strategic Partnerships Initiative -West Coast Energy. Activities are targeted to four priority areas: early and ongoing engagement; creating jobs and growth; environmental action; and fish habitat restoration. Many of the Indigenous communities impacted by proposed energy projects are small and remote, and have limited human and financial resources to engage with industry proponents. SPI-WCE funding is intended to enable these communities to effectively participate in a dialogue with industry and government. It is also recognized that some local Indigenous groups lack the capacity to undertake work that would allow them to assess the environmental, socio-cultural and economic impacts of multiple proposed projects through their traditional territories. SPI-WCE funding dedicated to environmental action, engagement, jobs and growth, and fish habitat restoration supports Indigenous communities to participate in and undertake projects to preserve, protect, and restore areas affected by energy infrastructure development. Targeted areas for SPI investment in regions impacted by West Coast energy development are identified through IPO-West engagement with both Indigenous groups and the provincial government, and by on-the-ground intelligence garnered from Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada and SPI partner departments.

Skills and Partnership Fund - WCE (SPF-WCE)

Improving the economic prospects of Indigenous individuals and communities was identified in the Eyford Report as a condition for Indigenous support for major energy infrastructure projects. ESDC extended its Skills and Partnership Fund (SPF)^{Footnote 11} program to fund projects that support West Coast energy infrastructure development in BC, and to employ Indigenous people in BC’s oil and gas sector between 2014-15 and 2016-17. To be eligible for funding, all projects must have met the selection criteria of supporting training-to-employment for Indigenous peoples in BC, while also benefitting West Coast energy development.

SPF is a proposal-based program that encourages stakeholders, such as training institutions, community organizations, local businesses and industry, to partner with Indigenous organizations to support skills development for Indigenous people. These partnerships are intended to address a broad range of Indigenous socio-economic issues, while also better meeting labour market demand. Only pre-existing budgets were to be used by SPF for WCEI (no additional funds were provided by the initiative).

Cumulative Effects Monitoring Initiative (CEMI)

For the purposes of the program, “cumulative environmental effects” is defined as a change in the environment caused by multiple interactions between human activities and natural processes that accumulate across space and time. Following the Eyford recommendation to address concerns regarding the cumulative effects of major energy projects in BC, and in light of the limited cumulative effects work in BC at the time, ECCC was tasked to develop a pilot CEMI, in collaboration with the BC Government and Indigenous communities. Under CEMI, ECCC was to engage relevant parties to scope the location for two pilot projects and support Indigenous participation in scoping and designing a monitoring system. These included a project with First Nations in Prince Rupert involving monitoring of marine-based species, and one with Burrard Inlet/ Howe Sound First Nations. As energy infrastructure spans a number of BC’s ecosystems and impacts close to 100 Indigenous communities, the choice of location of the monitoring pilots required sensitive negotiations involving multiple considerations around scientific, policy and Indigenous issues^{Footnote 12}.

For this initial funding cycle, the focus was to make a final decision on the location of the two areas for the pilots, and on the development of the monitoring pilots themselves, including scoping and design issues. Opportunities for Indigenous engagement in implementation of monitoring on an ongoing basis would also be identified. CEMI was provided with a budget of $662K in O&M ($161K in new funding and $495K from internal reallocation) and $2.7M in Gs&Cs to deliver this component of WCEI (for 2014-2019).

The WCEI logic model is presented in Appendix 2.

Appendix 2: Logic Model

 

Appendix 3: Financial information - Allocated Budget

Financial information- Allocated budget

	Type Allocation	2014-15 Allocated Budget (dollars)	2015-16 Allocated Budget (dollars)	2016-17 Allocated Budget (dollars)	2017-18 Allocated Budget (dollars)	2018-19 Allocated Budget (dollars)	2014-19 Total Allocated Budget (New vs. Existing dollars)	2014-19 Allocated Budget (dollars)	2014-19 Allocated Budget (%)
NRCan Vote 1	New funding	3,125,000	4,000,000	4,000,000	4,000,000	4,000,000	19,125,000	19,658,649	19%
	Existing funding	114,475	104,794	104,794	104,794	104,794	533,649
ISC/CIRNAC Vote 1	New funding	0	0	0	0	0	0	64,502,413	62%
	Existing funding	809,623	1,221,039	1,221,039	0	0	3,251,701
ISC/CIRNAC Vote 10	New funding	15,000,000	15,000,000	15,000,000	8,000,000	8,000,000	61,000,000
	Existing funding	63,410	93,651	93,651	0	0	250,712
ECCC Vote 1	New funding	320,000	397,000	0	0	0	717,000	6,437,145	6%
	Existing funding	1,274,342	1,662,803	0	0	0	2,937,145
ECCC Vote 10	New funding	1,180,000	1,603,000	0	0	0	2,783,000
	Existing funding	0	0	0	0	0	0
DFO Vote 1	New funding	0	0	0	0	0	0	1,880,228	2%
	Existing funding	376,045	376,045	376,045	376,045	376,045	1,880,228
ESDC Vote 1	Existing funding	285,022	453,477	453,477	0	0	1,191,976	11,191,976	11%
ESDC Vote 5	Existing funding	500,000	5,500,000	4,000,000	0	0	10,000,000
TOTAL							103,670,411	103,670,411	100%

Source: NRCan File

Note: Vote 1 totals include PWGSC allocations

Appendix 4: Financial information - Planned and actuals

Financial information- planned and actuals

In ‘000$
			Planned	Actual	Planned	Actual	Planned	Actual	Planned	Actual
Department	Total (Planned)	Total (Actual)	2014-2015	2014-2015	2015-2016	2015-2016	2016-2017	2016-2017	2017-2018	2017-2018
WCEI (Horizontal initiative)Footnote 13	$96,215	$64,314	$22,440	$12,739	$32,180	$20,733	$26,610	$18,643	$14,985	$12,199
Expenditures as percentage of budget		66.8%		56.8%		64.4%		70.1%		81.4%
IPO-West (NRCAN)Footnote 14	$11,598	$7,782	$2,192	$970	$2,985	$1,665	$3,238	$2,474	$3,183	$2,673
Expenditures as percentage of budget		67.1%		44.3%		55.8%		76.4%		84.0%
SPI-WCE (ISC/CIRNAC)Footnote 15	$66,989	$52,595	$16,689	$10,994	$19,579	$16,587	$18,919	$15,488	$11,802	$9,526
Expenditures as percentage of budget		78.5%		65.9%		84.7%		81.9%		80.7%
SPF-WCE (ESDC)Footnote 16	$11,191	$1,233	$785	$48	$5,953	$504	$4,453	$681
Expenditures as percentage of budget		11.0%		6.1%		8.5%		15.3%
CEMI (ECCC)Footnote 17	$6,437	$2,704	$2,774	$727	$3,663	$1,977
Expenditures as percentage of budget		42.0%		26.2%		54.0%

Note: includes Gs&Cs and O&M

Source: WCEI Departmental Internal Document and files Review

Appendix 5: WCEI Results achievement

The evaluation team assessed the achievement of the expected outcomes as follows:

Achieved: All WCEI targeted components have completely achieved the expected outcome

Partly Achieved: While some of the WCEI targeted components have completely achieved the expected outcome or have made progress to its achievement, no evidence was gathered from other targeted components to indicate their contribution.

Too early to evaluate: External factors out of program control did not allow the evaluation team to assess the expected ultimate outcome, this depending on energy projects which did not occur.

The evaluation team assessed the achievement of the expected outcomes

Logic model Element	Targeted Components	Achievements
Immediate outcomes
Positive relationships are developed with Indigenous communities	IPO-W, SPI-WCE, SPF-WCE, CEMI	Partly achieved. IPO-West has contributed to building trust and good relationships with Indigenous stakeholders, even with communities that may be strongly opposed to energy development projects. Evidence indicates that positive relationships have been developed through SPI-WCE and SPF-WCE.
Indigenous communication of, and federal response to, non-regulatory issues of concern to communities that could be impacted by energy development	IPO-W, SPI-WCE	Partly achieved: The engagement activities undertaken by IPO-West allowed the office to identify a wide range of needs, issues and priorities expressed by Indigenous communities. According to SPI-WCE evaluation findings, progress toward this outcome shows room for improvement.
Improved understanding across government of Indigenous issues, needs and concerns related to energy development	IPO-W, SPI-WCE	Achieved: IPO-West activities have increased government stakeholders’ understanding of Indigenous concerns and issues
Flexible and innovative interdepartmental engagement, collaboration and partnerships with Indigenous communities	IPO-W, SPI-WCE, SPF-WCE, CEMI	Achieved: Efforts were successfully deployed by the IPO-West Office to engage with other involved departments and directly with Indigenous communities, in respectful and innovative ways (e.g., co-development of terms of reference for the IAMCs).
Federal investments and actions are coordinated with Indigenous, provincial and other partners	IPO-W, SPI-WCE	Achieved: IPO-West contributed to a coordinated approach to project funding with the BC provincial government. SPI-WCE contributed to improved partnerships with other stakeholders.
Support and facilitation of Indigenous participation and leadership on addressing environmental concerns	CEMI, SPI-WCE	Partly achieved. CEMI pilot projects did not go ahead. SPI-WCE and DFO projects supporting research and monitoring projects were successful.
Regional CEMI pilot projects that bring together multiple First Nations and scientific expertise	CEMI	Partly achieved. While the engagement phase for CEMI was successful, the pilot projects did not proceed.
Intermediate outcomes
Contribute to a renewed federal relationship with Indigenous communities	IPO-W, SPI-WCE, SPF-WCE, CEMI	Partly achieved. IPO-West has conducted engagement activities with most Indigenous communities through direct contact with stakeholders
Identified issues are effectively addressed in collaboration with Indigenous communities and other partners, supporting (for example): Environment and habitat Jobs, training, business and economic development Community capacity	IPO-W, SPI-WCE, SPF-WCE, CEMI	Partly achieved. There is evidence that IPO-West activities have increased government stakeholders’ understanding of Indigenous concerns and issues. Some communities expressed concerns in the area of environment, including risks and how they are managed/researched, and these concerns were only partly addressed.
Whole-of-government response to issues identified by Indigenous communities	IPO-W, SPI-WCE, SPF-WCE, CEMI	Partly achieved. Cooperation and collaboration among federal departments around West Coast energy issues has increased. Potential improvements remain to ensure a whole-of-government and single-window approach.
Increased involvement of Indigenous communities in assessing and addressing potential environmental impacts of energy infrastructure development	SPI-WCE, CEMI	Partly achieved. CEMI pilot projects did not go ahead. SPI-WCE and DFO projects supporting research and monitoring projects were successful.
Greater certainty for Indigenous communities on how cumulative effects are being tracked	SPI-WCE, CEMI	Partly achieved. CEMI pilot projects did not go ahead. SPI-WCE and DFO projects supporting research and monitoring projects were successful.
Ultimate Outcomes
Indigenous communities have improved capacity to make informed decisions on West Coast energy infrastructure	IPO-W, SPI-WCE, SPF-WCE, CEMI	Partly achieved. There is improved capacity of the communities to make informed decisions as a result of various engagement and funded activities, including workshops and projects that increased the community’s knowledge and awareness of various issues and opportunities. Although CEMI pilot projects were cancelled, SPI-WCE projects allowed many communities to engage in monitoring activities, although not in a single-widow approach.
Increased Indigenous participation in energy infrastructure projects in BC	IPO-W, SPI-WCE, SPF-WCE	Too early to evaluate. Delays in the energy projects have generally delayed the developmental activities to help communities directly participate in the energy projects. Projects supported by SPF-WCE, while ongoing, have shown early positive results in terms of skills development and employment.