Veterans Affairs Canada's website is undergoing maintenance. If you are experiencing any issues, please contact us. We apologize for the inconvenience this may cause.

Appendix A – Evaluation matrix

Appendix A – Evaluation matrix
Issues/questions Funeral and Burial Cemetery and GM Indicators Collection methods Data sources
Relevance (Continued need for the program): Assessment of the extent to which the program continues to address a demonstrable need and is responsive to the needs of recipients.
  1. To what extent does the Program continue to address a demonstrable need, now and in the future?
 
  • Number of applicants and funded recipients.
  • Number of denied applicants and reasons for denial.
  • Forecast of population indicates future demand for the program.
  • Key informant interviews indicate ongoing need for program
  • Statistical Analysis
  • Interviews
  • Statistics/ Forecasting documents
  • Research Directorate
  • Private Contractor
 
  • Number of graves requiring maintenance
  • Grave inventory is static or increasing
  • Public enquires/requests for grave marker maintenance.
  • Unmarked graves estimates
  • Statistical Analysis
  • Interviews
  • Documentation review
  • Statistics/ Forecasting documents
  • HO staff and private contractor
  • Contractor/HO enquiries
  1. To what extent is the Program responsive to the needs of recipients and target audiences?
 
  • Program rates allow for a dignified burial.
  • Veterans with a financial need are receiving a dignified burial
  • Veterans are receiving funeral and burial benefits through Matter of Right decisions.
  • Document review
  • Interviews
  • Statistical Analysis
  • File review
  • Program documents (historical documents, central agency documents, definition dignified burial etc.).
  • Administrative data
  • Surveys (Attitudes Towards Remembrance, POR)
  • HO staff and private contractor
  • Statistics
 
  • Veteran graves are being maintained consistently
  • Inventory of grave marker repairs is being addressed
  • Measures are in place to prevent future inventory.
  • Interviews
  • Document review
  • Statistical Analysis
  • Observation
  • HO staff and external Government departments
  • Program documents
  • Statistics/forecasting documents
  • Cemeteries (observation)
Relevance (alignment with government and departmental priorities): Assessment of the linkages among program objectives and (i) federal priorities and (ii) departmental outcomes.
  1. To what extent is the Program aligned with federal government priorities and departmental strategic outcomes?
  • Extent to which the Program is aligned with departmental priorities.
  • Extent to which the Program is aligned with federal priorities.
  • Document review
  • Interviews
  • Departmental Plan
  • DRR
  • Federal budget
  • Mandate letter
  • Speech from Throne
  • Central agency documents
  • HO Staff
  • Previous AED evaluations (where applicable)
Relevance (Alignment with federal and department roles and responsibilities): Assessment of the federal government’s role and responsibilities in delivering the program.
  1. To what extent is the Program aligned with federal roles and responsibilities?
  • Evidence of a federal role and responsibility in the program area.
  • Document review
  • Interviews
  • Legislation
  • Regulations
  • Speech from Throne
  • Central agency documents
  • Order in Council
  • Previous AED evaluations
Performance (Effectiveness/Success): Assessment of the progress towards expected outcomes, with reference to performance targets, program reach, and program design, including the linkage and contribution of outputs to results.
  1. Have appropriate outcomes been identified and measured to determine program success? (Performance).
  • A program information profile (PIP) has been developed
  • Program outcomes are relevant
  • Evidence that the PIP is being utilized to support the program
  • Document review
  • Interviews
  • Interviews with HO staff and private contractor
  • Private contractor financial information, POR
  • Program documents
  • PIPS
  1. What, if any, unintended outcomes has the Program had?
  • Extent to which other outcomes were identified
  • Document review
  • Interviews
  • Observation
  • Statistical Analysis
  • File Review
  • Program documents
  • Internet
  • Recipient feedback
  • HO staff and Private contractors
  • Statistics
  1. Does VAC have processes in place to ensure the program is administered as intended?
  • Quality assurance is being performed.
  • Policies, procedures, and processes are in place and up to date
  • Processes allow for VAC to identify potential F&B clients 
  • File Review
  • Document review
  • Interview
  • Program documents
  • Private contractor documents
Performance (Efficiency and Economy): Assessment of resource utilization in relation to the production of outputs and progress toward expected outcomes.
  1. To what extent were resources used efficiently and economically?
  • Administrative cost ratio is tracked
  • Administrative cost ratio compared to previous years.
  • Administrative data analysis
  • Interviews
  • Administrative data
  • Interviews with HO staff, Field Staff and Private Contractor
  1. Can efficiencies be made in processing applications?
 
  • Applications are processed in a timely manner.
  • Logical handoffs occur throughout the process.
  • Tools in place are adequate and appropriate.
  • Document review
  • Observations
  • Interviews
  • Statistical Analysis
  • File Review
  • Program documents
  • HO staff and Private Contractor
  • Statistics
  • Business Process