Formative Evaluation of the Eastern Ontario Economic Development Fund (EODF)

Final Report

Audit and Evaluation Branch
Industry Canada

November 2005

Tabled and approved by DAEC on April 13, 2006 with the exception of Recommendation No. 1.
Recommendation No. 1 was not supported by DAEC members since evaluation findings were deemed to be insufficient to support this recommendation.

---

Table of Contents

• Executive Summary
• 1.0 Introduction
  • 1.1 Introduction to the Study
  • 1.2 Profile
  • 1.3 Report Structure
• 2.0 Methodology / Approach
  • 2.1 Evaluation Issues
  • 2.2 Methodology
    • 2.2.1 Document and Database Review
    • 2.2.2 Key Informant Interviews
    • 2.2.3 Survey of Secondary Recipients
    • 2.2.4 Case Studies
  • 2.3 Strengths and Limitations
• 3.0 Findings
  • 3.1 Issues–Relevance
    • 3.1.1 Is EODF programming relevant to the community? Are EODF priorities relevant?
    • 3.1.2 Are there any overlaps with other government programs? Is FedNor collaborating with other departments and governments to reduce overlaps?
    • 3.1.3 Conclusions–Relevance
  • 3.2 Issues–Design and Delivery
    • 3.2.1 Is the FedNor service delivery model appropriate (CFDCs as only recipients)?
    • 3.2.2 Is the EODF well promoted? Well known?
    • 3.2.3 Is the EODF project selection process effective? Are the selection criteria appropriate?
    • 3.2.4 Are EODF projects relevant? Do they meet the program criteria?
    • 3.2.5 Are project clients satisfied with counselling, advice, training or workshops provided?
    • 3.2.6 Is FedNor playing an appropriate role in support of the projects?
    • 3.2.7 Conclusions–Design and Delivery
  • 3.3 Issues–Success
    • 3.3.1 To what degree has the EODF contributed to the development and retention of new and existing businesses? To what degree had the EODF improved competitiveness of rural Eastern Ontario firms?
    • 3.3.2 To what degree has the EODF helped attract, retain and develop human capital, including special client groups? (e.g., women, Francophones, First Nations and other Aboriginals, youth)
    • 3.3.3 To what degree has EODF contributed to the economic development of rural Eastern Ontario communities?
    • 3.3.4 To what degree has EODF helped develop business and trade skills?
    • 3.3.5 To what degree has EODF helped develop external markets for rural Eastern Ontario firms?
    • 3.3.6 To what degree has EODF increased the use of technology? Has contributed to the development of innovation?
    • 3.3.7 What is the incremental impact of EODF projects?
    • 3.3.8 Conclusions–Success
  • 3.4 Issues–Monitoring and Accountability
    • 3.4.1 Is reporting timely, reliable and complete? Are reports providing FedNor useful information for management purposes?
    • 3.4.2 Is the reporting system allowing FedNor to meet accountability requirements?
    • 3.4.3 Conclusions–Monitoring and Accountability
  • 3.5 Issues–Alternatives and Cost-Effectiveness
    • 3.5.1 Are there alternative service delivery approaches? Are there alternatives to increase the cost-effectiveness of EODF programming?
    • 3.5.2 Conclusions–Alternatives and Cost-Effectiveness
  • 3.6 Issues–Lessons Learned
    • 3.6.1 What lessons have been learned from EODF programming for the future?
    • 3.6.2 What factors have facilitated and / or impeded implementation of EODF?
    • 3.6.3 Conclusions – Lessons Learned
• 4.0 Conclusions and Recommendations
  • 4.1 Relevance
  • 4.2 Design and Delivery
  • 4.3 Success
  • 4.4 Monitoring and Accountability
  • 4.5 Alternatives and Cost-Effectiveness
  • 4.6 Lessons Learned
• Management Response to Conclusions and Recommended Areas for Follow-up or
  PDF version (18 KB, 5 pages)

---

List of Acronyms

CFDC–Community Futures Development Corporation

EODF–Eastern Ontario Development Fund

FedNor–Federal Economic Development Initiative for Northern Ontario

RBAF–Risk Based Audit Framework

RMAF–Results-based Management and Accountability Framework