Evaluation of the Supports for Student Learning Program

Key findings of Stream 1 – After-school and wrap around student supports

Canada has a high post-secondary education attainment rate compared to other developed countries. However, some communities in Canada face additional barriers, are underserved, or are underrepresented in post-secondary education. This has many consequences for students from these communities and for Canada.

Key findings of Stream 2 – Outbound student mobility supports

There are benefits for students who would like to participate in outbound student mobility opportunities. This also benefits Canada. Still, students face financial and non-financial barriers to studying and working abroad. Some students face more barriers, particularly:

• students who want to study or work in non-traditional countries (for instance countries other than the United-States, United Kingdom, Australia, and France), and
• underrepresented students (for instance students from low-income households, Indigenous students, and students with disabilities)

Funded post-secondary institutions contributed to developing lessons learned and promising practices. This includes research on reducing barriers and wraparound supports for students to partake in international opportunities.

In 2020 to 2021, approximately 13,600 Canadian students directly benefited from these activities. In addition, funded projects developed partnerships with post-secondary institutions in nearly 50 countries.

Recommendations

1. Continue to gather evidence to understand the characteristics, challenges, and promising practices and to address any emerging needs and better support underserved or under-represented students in post-secondary education
2. Explore ways to improve the sustainability of projects beyond the Program funding by supporting the development of partnerships and by increasing the Program’s role in generating and disseminating lessons learned and promising practices among all youth serving organizations
3. Continue to further improve and strengthen data collection strategy to inform results and support decision-making, including exploring ways to inform program impacts

Overall management response

Management accepts the recommendations outlined in the Evaluation of the Supports for Student Learning Program and will use the findings to inform the current work underway, and the policy recommendation on the future of the program post-2025. Due to the relative newness of the program, it is important to note that at the time of evaluation, dedicated work was underway to address many of the areas highlighted by the Evaluation report. Focused efforts include strengthening and standardizing data collection from funding recipients, refining the program’s understanding of barriers that students are facing and developing an impact measurement framework for the program.

The objectives of the formative evaluation were to examine the relevance, program design and the effectiveness of the Program in achieving its objectives and intended outcomes between April 2019 and March 2022. Evaluating the program during that period proved challenging because, as noted above, the program was new, and the various funded initiatives were at different stages of implementation. Further, while there was a large injection of new funds over a short time frame for the Program pilot, significant implementation challenges resulted in agreements being signed beyond the period scoped into the evaluation. A 2-year extension of the Pilot via 2022 Fall Economic Statement allowed the Department to shift its focus to many of the critical elements identified in the evaluation, namely knowledge dissemination and data collection, that have been less of a focus due to the need to prioritize program renewal because of the short funding cycles.

This evaluation builds on a 2019 Pathways evaluation, but it is the first evaluation of the Program umbrella program. Overall, making sure students have the supports they need in their education to help guide them towards their future success is a priority for the Program. As the Evaluation noted, although Canada performs well in terms of post-secondary education attainment compared to other similar countries, some students still need additional supports in or outside the school system to succeed. Given the adverse consequences for individuals and for society at large associated with school disengagement, there is a critical need for the Program as it offers tailored support outside of the school system, and along the student’s learning journey. With funding from the Program, a variety of national or regional or local organizations have been and continue to be well positioned to offer supports to students or to education organizations.

Recommendation #1

Continue to gather evidence to understand the characteristics, challenges, and promising practices and to address any emerging needs and better support underserved or under-represented students in post-secondary education

Recommendation #2

Explore ways to improve the sustainability of projects beyond the Program funding by supporting the development of partnerships and increasing the Program’s role in generating and disseminating lessons learned and promising practices among all youth-serving organizations.

Recommendation #3

Continue to improve and strengthen data collection strategy to inform results and support better decision-making, including exploring ways to inform program impacts.

2.1. Program objectives

The Supports for Student Learning Program funds a broad range of youth-serving organizations to provide a range of targeted non-financial and financial learning interventions. Two core funding streams support learners that are at risk of educational disengagement^{Footnote 1}.

Text description - Figure 1

The Supports for Student Learning Program is composed of 2 streams. First it includes the Stream 1: After-school and Wraparound Student Supports. This stream includes the following agreements:

• Pathways to Education Agreement
• Indspire Agreement, and
• Supports for Student Learning Program Agreements

Pathways and the Supports for Student Learning Program Agreements fund a broad range of organizations operating at the national, regional, local and grassroots levels providing learners with financial and non-financial supports needed to succeed in school, graduate from high school, transition to, and succeed in post-secondary education and to develop skills and experience needed to succeed in a changing labour market.

Indspire provides financial support for First Nations, Inuit and Métis students across Canada to assist them in completing their post-secondary education. In addition, it provides a supportive learning environment for Indigenous students, giving them the tools, they need to complete their education and successfully pursue the career of their dreams.

Global Skills Opportunity aims to promote study and work abroad opportunities for Canadian college and undergraduate university students. These opportunities are expected to help students gain skills, build international networks and develop intercultural competencies to help them succeed in the labour market.

Stream 1 – After-school and Wraparound Student Supports – provides funding for youth-serving organizations. These organizations provide various after-school and wraparound supports to support underserved students^{Footnote 2} succeed in school and graduate high school. The Program’s objective is to support learners to transition to post-secondary education and the labour market. Three main components compose this stream, namely:

• the Pathways to Education Canada (or Pathways) agreement
• Indspire Agreement, and
• the Support for Student Learning Agreements (including the established Goal Getters agreements).

Stream 2 – Outbound Student Mobility Supports (also branded as Global Skills Opportunity) - provides funding to Universities Canada, and Colleges and Institutes Canada. Both organizations work with Canadian post-secondary institutions to provide opportunities to students to study and work abroad. The stream’s focus is on reaching underrepresented learners^{Footnote 3} and students who seek to study or work in non-traditional countries^{Footnote 4}.

In addition, the Program supports collaboration with partners and stakeholders, including expert organizations to research, test and implement innovative solutions. The goal is to measure the direct impacts of the different funded initiatives. Therefore, the Program seeks to generate lessons learned and promising practices to use in improving their programming.

2.2. Program resources

From April 2019 to March 2024, the total actual and planned budget of the Program is $341.1M (consult table 1 and 2 for specific program expenditures).

• Source: Program Administrative data.
• Notes: Indspire received $8,817,000 from Indigenous Services Canada in the fiscal year 2019 to 2020 before all Government of Canada funding to Indspire was consolidated under ESDC.As part of Goal Getters, the Program re-profiled $3M from the fiscal year 2019 to 2020 to the fiscal year 2020 to 2021, and $2M from the fiscal year 2020 to 2021 to the fiscal year 2021 to 2022. The Budget 2021 provided funding to conduct a 2-year pilot expansion of the Program. These funds would support national and local after-school organizations who work to ensure that vulnerable children and youth can graduate high school, and do not become further marginalized because of the pandemic. In addition, in September 2022, the Fall Economic Statement announced funding for a 2-year extension of the Program at reduced levels. This represented funding of $10M in the fiscal year 2023 to 2024 and of $20M in 2024 to 2025. In addition, it included 1-year of renewed funding for Pathways and Indspire at existing levels ($9.5M and $8M in 2023 to 2024, respectively).

2.3. Program components

3.1. Previous program evaluation

While ESDC evaluates this umbrella Program for the first time, this study builds on the ‘Evaluation of Pathways to Education’ (ESDC, 2019). The objective of this evaluation was to examine the extent of the program’s relevance and achievement of its outcomes. It also measured the incremental impact it had on its eligible students. The evaluation found that:

• Pathways programming addressed a demonstrable need by supporting disadvantaged youth in:
  • completing their education
  • transition to a successful future, and
  • reaching their potential
• Pathways contributed to increased enrollment to post-secondary education among participants. For instance, high school graduation rates were 10-19% higher for Pathways participants than for comparison groups of non-participants
• adapted programming provided by the Winnipeg site, of which 72% of Pathways students are Indigenous, positively affected Indigenous youth
• participation in Pathways was positively correlated with high school graduation rates, enrollment to post-secondary education and educational attainment, and
• the Program positively affected eligible participants’ labour market outcomes. For instance, a study by Lavecchia et al. (2018) matched school records to income tax data. This allowed to assess the employment outcomes of youth in the Pathways catchment area for the Regent Park site. It found that participation in Pathways increased adult earnings by 19%, employment by 14%. It also reduced welfare receipt by more than 30% relative to a comparison group^{Footnote 6} (Lavecchia et al., 2018)

In addition, a cost-benefit analysis concluded that the individual net benefit for participating students was almost $5,500 over 25 years. The total net social benefit to society of an eligible student participating in Pathways over 25 years was $7,490 compared to a non-eligible student. This represented a total social rate of return of 50.1% over 25 years, or an average annual growth rate of 1.6%.

3.2. The 2022 program evaluation

This evaluation builds on the 2019 Pathways evaluation and on the funding increase since its publication. It includes findings from multiple lines of evidence to assess the impact of the Program between the fiscal years 2019 to 2020 and 2021 to 2022^{Footnote 7}. In addition, it examines recent modifications made to the application process (in the 2021 call for proposals).

The main lines of evidence comprise this evaluation:

• document and literature review^{Footnote 8}
• internal key informant interviews with Government of Canada officials
• external key informant interviews with established recipient organizations (under the Pathways, Indspire, Goal Getters and Global Skills Opportunity agreements)
• external key informant interviews with organizations solicited by the Program as part of the 2021 Call for Proposals, and
• survey of officials of youth-serving organizations (Stream 1), and
• survey post-secondary institutions (Stream 2) that have a partnership with Support for Student Learning Program agreement holder

The survey includes officials involved in delivering direct support to students, the management and coordination of the project, advertising the project or evaluating or conducting research activities.

A detailed methodology report is available in Appendix C.

Key limitations from this evaluation include the lack of direct engagement with students (end users) who participated in the projects. In addition, the Program has limited data available on the outcomes of participants for less mature projects and for projects impacted by COVID-19.

Also, the current evaluation could not include an l impact analysis. However, the Program is working with Pathways to Education Canada, researchers, and Statistics Canada to explore Pathways’ impact on health and crime. At the time of this evaluation, this research is still ongoing.

In addition, for Stream 2, this evaluation does not include performance information to inform the impact of the work and study abroad opportunities. This evaluation only presents findings about projects funded as part of the Innovation Fund.

4.1. Ongoing need for the Program

According to Statistics Canada, in 2019, the high school graduation rate (84.3%) was above the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average (80.3%) (Statistics Canada, 2022d).

While Canada is ahead of many other countries in terms of post-secondary education attainment levels, sub-populations of students face unique barriers to education.

A recent fact sheet from Statistics Canada (2022e) shows that high school graduation rates vary across gender as well as provinces and territories. A higher proportion of young women (87%) completed high school on time than young men (81%). Statistics Canada observed this trend in all provinces and territories. Statistics Canada notes that comparisons of high school graduation rates between provinces and territories require a nuanced interpretation. Academic pathways, pass marks, subject requirements, and the groups of students under consideration may differ between provinces and territories. Still, high school graduation rates in 2019 to 2020 vary between 94% in Newfoundland and Labrador and 79% in Quebec. High school graduation rates are lower in the Territories (for example, 46% in 2019 to 2020 in Northwest Territories).

The literature also points to other intersectionality factors affecting students’ ability to graduate from high school (but not limited to):

• students from low-income households
• Indigenous students
• students with disabilities
• racialized students
• immigrants (including newcomers and established immigrants)
• students identifying as 2SLGBTQI+
• students who have previously experienced or who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness, and
• students in or aging out of care

As noted in 2019 evaluation of Pathways to Education, dropping out of high school has many consequences for individuals and for Canada (consult Figure 2).

• Source: Employment and Social Development Canada (2019) Evaluation of Pathways to Education.

Text description – Figure 2

Dropping out of high school potentially leads to Increased incidence of marital instability, Reduced lifetime earnings and Increased unemployment. It also potentially leads to Early childbearing, Delinquency and Substance abuse. As well, dropping out of high school could lead to a Reduced quality of life, Poor health, Crime, and Economic dependency.

According to representatives of funded youth-serving organizations, more than three quarters of respondents (81%) identified the lack of personal motivation as one of the main challenges preventing youth from achieving their educational outcomes.

The second and third most frequently identified challenges are:

• the lack of money for basic needs, and
• concerns with mental health and addiction (consult Figure 3)

These results reflect the main challenges noted by Statistics Canada (2002) as part of the Youth in Transition Survey.

• Source: Survey of youth-serving organization representatives (118 respondents).

Text description – Figure 3

Main challenges that youth face in achieving their educational objectives

Challenges	Percentage
Lack of personal motivation to advance in school or in the labour market	81%
Lack of money for basic needs (for example, food or clothing)	76%
Mental health and addictions	76%
Lack of support from student's family	73%
Lack of access to technology	64%
Negative influence from their peers	62%
Lack of opportunities outside school to develop new skills	61%
Lack of support from a teacher/school	59%
Lack of financial support or assistance to apply or participate in studies	56%
Concerns with bullying or harassment	56%
Problems with transportation to school	55%
Lack of time to study	51%
Challenges with secure housing	47%
Inadequate proficiency in the language	34%
Lack of official recognition (for example, certificate, bursary	19%
Other(s)	8%
Don't know	1%
Total	100%

For low-income students, the lack of money for basic needs such as food, shelter and clothing are the most frequently identified barrier. In fact, 85% of service providers surveyed noted it as one of the main challenges. The lack of official recognition, lack of personal motivation, and lack of support from the student’s family were following (consult figure 4).

• Source: Survey of youth-serving organization representatives (34 respondents).

Text description – Figure 4

The main challenges for students from low-income households in your project to achieve their educational objectives

Challenges	Percentage
Lack of money for basic needs (for example, food or clothing)	85%
Lack of official recognition (for example, certificate or bursary)	76%
Lack of personal motivation to advance in school or in the labour market	76%
Lack of support from student's family	74%
Lack of access to technology	71%
Lack of financial support or assistance to apply or participate in studies	68%
Lack of time to study	65%
Lack of opportunities outside school to develop new skills	59%
Concerns with bullying or harassment	53%
Negative influence from their peers	53%
Problems with transportation to school	50%
Lack of support from a teacher/school	50%
Challenges with secure housing	41%
Inadequate proficiency in the language	29%
Mental health and addictions	15%
Total	100%

4.2. Indigenous students participation in post-secondary education in Canada

Canadian Census data (consult figure 5) shows persistent lower post-secondary education attainment rates among Indigenous populations than non-Indigenous. The gap has consistently remained above 16 percentage points and widened to over 18 percentage points in 2021.

In addition, post-secondary diploma attainment also varies across Indigenous distinction groups. According to the 2021 Census, more than half (56.3%) of Métis individuals aged between 25 and 64 years had some post-secondary diploma. This proportion was less than half (45.3%) for First Nations population, and about one third (33.6%) for the Inuit populations (Statistics Canada, 2022).

• Source: Statistics Canada (2006, 2011, 2016, 2022b).

Text description – Figure 5

Proportion of population aged between 25 and 64 years with post-secondary certificate, diploma, or degree, by Indigenous status

Census Year	Percentage of Indigenous	Percentage of non-Indigenous
2006	44.5%	61.2%
2011	48.4%	64.7%
2016	49.3%	65.5%
2021	49.2%	68.0%

Therefore, even though levels of post-secondary education attainment significantly improved, the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations remains. In addition, according to the 2021 Census, Indigenous aged from 15 to 19 have a school attendance rate of 78.4% on average. This proportion was lower than for non-Indigenous students (87%). Statistics Canada (2022b) notes that attending school can predict lower post-secondary attainment in the future.

According to the document review^{Footnote 8}, youth-serving organization officials surveyed, and funded organization representatives interviewed, Indigenous students face unique barriers, including the barriers noted below.

4.3. Students with disabilities Participation in post-secondary education in Canada

According to the 2017 Canadian Survey on Disability, 56% of persons with disabilities aged between 25 and 64 completed some sort of post-secondary education. As a comparison this proportion is 67% for persons without disabilities. Over 540,000 youths aged 15 to 24 years (13%) had 1 or more disabilities, per the 2017 Canadian Survey on Disability. Among youth, mental health-related disability (8%) was the most common type of disability, followed by learning (6%), and pain-related disabilities (4%) (Statistics Canada 2017).

In addition, the severity of disability negatively impacts post-secondary education completion. As shown in figure 6, 45% of persons of aged 25 to 64 with a very severe disability completed some post-secondary diploma. As a comparison this proportion is 63% for persons with a mild disability^{Footnote 9}.

• Source: Statistics Canada (2017) Canadian Survey on Disability.

Text description – Figure 6

Proportion of persons with disabilities aged between 25 and 64 years with post-secondary certificate, diploma, or degree by severity (in 2017)

Severity of disability	Percentage of individuals with post-secondary certificate, diploma
No disability	67.4%
Mild	62.7%
Moderate	58.5%
Severe	51.4%
Very severe	45.3%
Persons with disability (Overall) (Important)	56.1%

Document review^{Footnote 8}, surveys of youth-serving organizations, and interviews with funded organizations’ representatives found that students with disabilities encounter unique barriers, as listed below.

4.4. Immigrant, newcomer, and racialized students participation in post-secondary education

According to the 2021 census (consult figure 7), a higher percentage of immigrants and non-permanent residents aged 25 to 64 have a post-secondary education diploma compared to non-immigrants. One of the main causes is that Canada is leveraging the talents of highly educated immigrants to meet labour market needs. This is an important selection criterion for immigration. As noted by Statistics Canada (2022a), it positively impacts the overall proportion of Canadians with some form of post-secondary education.

• Source: Statistics Canada (2022b) Census of population.

Text description – Figure 7

Proportion of population aged between 25 and 64 years with post-secondary certificate, diploma, or degree by immigration status, in 2021

Immigration status	Percentage of individuals with post-secondary certificate, diploma
Non-immigrant	64.9%
Immigrant	71.2%
Non-permanent resident	80.9%

In addition, according to the 2021 Census, 72.2% of visible minority population aged between 25 and 64 years old completed post-secondary education. In comparison, 65.2% of the population that is not a visible minority completed post-secondary education (consult figure 8). However, this is due to the ethnic origin and to the immigration generation status. As shown in the graph below, the Southeast Asian group has a post-secondary education attainment of 54.9%. This proportion is below the non-visible minority demographic (consult figure 8).

• Source: Statistics Canada (2022b) Census of population 2021.

Text description – Figure 8

Ethnic origin	percentage of individuals with post-secondary certificate, diploma
Korean	82.9%
Japanese	79.5%
Black	67.7%
Latin American	67.7%
Other visible minority	60.6%
Southeast Asian	54.9%
Not a visible minority (Important)	65.2%

In addition, the immigration generation status significantly affects the attainment of a post-secondary certificate, diploma, or degree among various visible minority populations. Among visible minorities, about 71.6% of first-generation immigrants and 77.3% of second-generation immigrants have some post-secondary education. In comparison, this proportion is only two thirds (60.2%) for others, including third generation or more (consult figure 9).

• Source: Statistics Canada (2022b) Census of population 2021.

Text description – Figure 9

Proportion of visible minority and non-visible minority population aged between 25 and 64 years with post-secondary certificate, diploma, or degree by immigration status, in 2021

Immigration status	Percentage of the visible minority population	Percentage of the non visible minority population
First-Generation	71.6%	73.2%
Second-Generation	77.3%	71.3%
Others (Third-Generation or more)	60.2%	63.3%

Compared to other populations, there was a greater difference in post-secondary attainment between immigrants and third generation or more immigrants. For Black population, more than two thirds (68.6%) of first-generation immigrants had a post-secondary degree. In comparison, this proportion was less than half (49.8%) of the third generation (or more). Similarly, the first-generation Latin American population had a higher degree of post-secondary attainment of 67.7% compared to 45.6% of the third generation (or more).

The document review^{Footnote 8}, survey, and key informants revealed that visible minority students, newcomer students, and second-generation immigrants face unique barriers to achieving their academic aspirations.

4.5. 2SLGBTQI+ Participation in post-secondary education in Canada

According to Statistics Canada (2021b), 76.2% of Canadian lesbians aged 25 to 64 had completed post-secondary education, a percentage like that of heterosexual women, which was 74.1%. This is higher than the proportion for the:

• gay population (67.0%)
• male heterosexual population (69.8%)
• male bisexual population (68.9%), and
• female bisexual population (67.7%).

• Source: Statistics Canada (2022c) Educational participation and attainment of lesbian, gay and bisexual people in Canada.

Text description – Figure 10

Proportion of post-secondary certificate, diploma, or degree between 2015 and 2018 by gender identity for students aged 25 to 64

Sexual orientation	Male+	Female+
Heterosexual	69.8%	74.1%
Gay/Lesbian	67.0%	76.2%
Bisexual	68.9%	67.7%

In 2018, according to a Statistics Canada (2021b), Canada was home to approximately 1 million people who were LGBTQ2+. This population accounted for 4% of the total population aged 15 and older. The LGBTQ2+ population is relatively young. Youth aged 15 to 24 made up 30% of the LGBTQ2+ population compared with 14% of the non-LGBTQ2+ population.

The document review^{Footnote 8} found that 2SLGBTQI+ students face unique barriers to achieve their academic goals.

4.6. Impact of COVID-19 on underserved students

Representatives of youth-serving organizations surveyed as part of this evaluation^{Footnote 10} reported that the pandemic had significant and lasting impacts on students. For instance, more than three quarters (83%) agreed or strongly agreed that the pandemic intensified challenges already faced by underserved population. Of those who agreed that COVID-19 exacerbated difficulties for marginalized students, 88% believed that these issues could persist and affect students in the future, according to the survey. COVID-19 related challenges identified by key informants, surveyed officials from youth-serving organizations, but also identified as part of the documents review^{Footnote 8} include the following.

5.1. Flexible funding agreements and program design support targeted outcomes for students facing different barriers

The Program design under Stream 1 allows funded organizations to identify the needs of the population they serve. In addition, they can provide case-by-case supports to each group of students. Funding agreements are flexible and allow funded organizations to provide tailored supports for all types of underserved students.

Both internal and external key informants noted that the Program’s design was flexible. They also noted that it allowed funded organizations to provide diverse types of supports tailored to individual student needs. Therefore, the Program’s design allows them to support diverse types of students identified as underserved or underrepresented.

Among all 14 organizations funded through the Program^{Footnote 11}, organizations targeted the following learners:

• Indigenous students (12 organizations)
• students from low-income households(9 organizations)
• Black and racialized students (8 organizations)
• students living in rural, remote, or Northern areas (7 organizations)
• students who self-identify with a disability (7 organizations)
• students identifying as 2-spirited, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning (2SLGBTQI+) (5 organizations)
• students from Official Language Minority Communities (3 organizations)
• students who are newcomers to Canada of less than 5 years (3 organizations)
• students experiencing or at-risk of homelessness (2 organizations), and
• students who are or would be the first in their family to attend post-secondary education (2 organizations)

From the fiscal year 2019 to 2020 to the fiscal year 2021 to 2022, no projects targeted students aging in or out of care^{Footnote 12}. In addition, the Program did not collect data on the number of projects who were specifically targeting refugees or immigrants (more than 5 years).

The flexibility of the agreements also allows funded organizations to offer various after-school and Wraparound supports for students. According to the document review, organizations funded by the Program draw upon the set of promising practices mentioned in section 4.

Among the 14 funded organizations (excluding Global Skills Opportunity and funded organizations under the 2021 call for proposals):

• 11 provide academic persistence and preparedness related supports. These include tutoring and coaching, support in planning for and transitioning to post-secondary education, educational skills programming, training (for example, science, technology, engineering, arts, or mathematics), and mentorship (such as peer support). In addition, funded organizations offer a variety of wraparound supports to students to help them address challenges (as described in Section 4) that may impede their efforts in achieving their academic objectives
• 10 provide various support for mental health, addictions, and well-being. This includes extracurricular activities (for example traditional or cultural, sports, arts, nutrition, nature), general supports (such as peer support), evidence-based mental health programming, therapy, and addictions-focused prevention and intervention
• 10 provide online support or improving connectivity of students, including digital literacy and skills training, providing, or funding technology (for example, access to software and hardware), and developing partnerships as well as supporting local capacity to access internet services and study spaces
• 9 offer activities related to career development including mentorship, internships, career skills preparation (for example communication, self-regulation, interviews, career and CV workshops and support in securing employment)
• 8 work with the staff to improve their ability to better support students
• 6 support students to help them developing soft skills
• 5 offer direct financial support to students to help cover various costs related to secondary and post-secondary school participation (for example, tuition, cost of application to post-secondary institutions, cost of transportation to school, cost of student’s lunch, costs related to accommodations)
• 4 support students’ families, parents’ skill development (parenting, financial literacy, pregnancy and prenatal courses), and navigation advocacy support (for example to secure housing, accessing resources, reduce barriers to participation, reuniting youth with their children, links to childcare benefits and income supports)

Actual examples of Stream 1 projects are available in Annexe D.

5.2. Solicited competitive call for proposals for Supports for Student Learning Program Agreements

Funding agreements signed in 2022 to 2023^{Footnote 13} align with the Program’s objectives. However, many of these organizations raised some concerns related to the stability of the projects. Indeed, as mentioned during the interviews, they try to address systemic and long-term challenges with short-term and unpredictable funding.

The evaluation found that 2022 to 2023 agreement holders rely on effective practices to support various subgroup populations of students. In addition, they offer programming that aligns with the objectives of the Stream 1 of the Program. Funded projects also support students from underserved groups identified by the program. They also have the potential to generate and disseminate innovative practices to support students.

However, most interviewed representatives from these organizations had concerns about the stability of the projects for 2 main reasons. Indeed, 1-year agreements made planning and addressing complex systemic barriers difficult for organizations. These barriers include poverty, homelessness, lack of support from parents, discrimination, accessibility for students with disabilities, lack of access to internet and technologies. Furthermore, as part of the call for proposals process, key informants noted delays in announcing successful proposals. This, in turn, delayed allocation of funds to organizations and supports to students.

The short agreement period combined with the delays in receiving funds resulted in additional challenges for organizations. This included from the most to the least important:

• difficulties in recruiting and retaining staff. This is due to the short period between the funding decision and the beginning of the activities. Also, it is due to the short term of employment
• delay of projects and cancellation of activities, and
• misalignment between the disbursement of the funding and the school calendar year

While the Program approved these funding agreements in March 2022, some organizations confirmed that they only received funding in August or September 2022. Consequently, they had to develop partnerships with youth-serving organizations and other partners over short timelines. Also, these organizations had to take on more financial risk by planning or carrying out activities without knowing if they would receive funding.

Activities for 1 cohort of students (usually spanning from September to June) straddle 2 fiscal years. The uncertainty associated with receiving funding over 2 consecutive fiscal years was challenging for organizations to fully support 1 cohort.

ESDC officials and representatives from funded organizations noted that multi-year agreements could help organizations alleviate the impacts of the barriers mentioned above. With multi-year agreements, funded organizations could:

• establish longer term partnerships
• support cohort of students for more than 1 year
• have longer-term impacts
• hire staff on a more permanent basis, and
• advertise programming more efficiently

In addition, multi-year agreements can alleviate the following:

• delays related to budget approvals and funding allocation, and
• the fiscal year and the school calendar year are misaligned

One organization representative mentioned that the first year of the contribution agreement helped to develop a reputation among the targeted community and good practices. Most organization representatives voiced concerns about the Program's short-term funding structure and the risk of not renewing funding or finding other financial partners.

According to the non-applicant organizations' representatives interviewed^{Footnote 14}, reasons for not applying included:

• difference between the Program’s objective and the organization’s activities
• lack of experience or understanding of the federal government application process
• limited resources or staff available to fill the application and expand the organization’s activities and,
• uncertainty whether the resources they put into applying would lead to funding

6.1. Pathways to Education Canada

Pathways to Education Canada positively affected the high school graduation rate of participants and contributed to increased enrollment in post-secondary education. It also had a positive effect on employment readiness and labour market outcomes for participants.

According to the document review, Pathways supported 6,386 students in 2019, 6,512 in 2020, and 6,209 in 2021. Pathways had a total of 31 sites in 2021 (compared to 27 in 2020 and 20 in 2019). In 2020 to 2021 school year, there were:

• 15 sites in Québec
• 9 in Ontario
• 2 in British-Colombia, and
• 1 in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, and Nova Scotia

Table 3 and table 4 provide additional information on the profile of participants over the period of 2012 to 2021, based on participants’ self-identification.

Pathways sites in British Columbia had more male than female participants. This is in contrast with other provinces that had more female than male participants. Ontario sites had the largest proportion of participants born outside of Canada (28%). This was followed by the site in New Brunswick with 22% of participants. On the other hand, the site in Manitoba had the largest proportion of participants who were Indigenous (52%). It was followed by the British Columbia sites with 16% of Indigenous participants. Quebec sites had the largest proportion of participants with a physical disability (4%).

• Source: Goss Gilroy (2021) Evaluation of the Pathways to Education Program.

• Source: Goss Gilroy (2021) Evaluation of the Pathways to Education Program.

6.2. Indspire

From 2019 to 2022, Indspire participants had higher post-secondary graduation rate and labour market outcomes than other Indigenous students. According to Indspire activity reports, the organization awarded close to $20 million through 6,240 bursaries and scholarships in 2020 to 2021. They provided over $23 million through 6,599 bursaries and scholarships in 2021 to 2022 to First Nations, Inuit, and Métis youth. Based on Indspire administrative data, between 2013 and 2020, 62.6% of recipients identified as Status First Nation. In addition, 31.4% identified as Métis, 3% identified as Inuit and 2.9% identified as Non-Status First Nation.

6.3. Other Support for Student Learning Program agreements

From 2019 to 2022, funded organizations by the other Supports for Student Learning Program Agreements supported students achieving their educational goals. However, since most of the projects are relatively new (2-3 years in operation) limited data is available on project outcomes for end users.

Overall, 34,648 students benefited from projects funded under the Goal Getters agreements and 16,505 students benefited from projects funded under the COVID-19 Emergency Measures^{Footnote 20}. However, it is not possible to provide aggregated data on participants by socio-demographic factors for many reasons including:

• variety of group served
• various levels of project maturity, and
• differences in the maturity levels of funded organizations

Also, due to the limited maturity of the project, the Program collects limited data to inform progress towards the intermediate and ultimate outcomes, including:

• graduation from high school
• access to post-secondary education, or
• transition to the labour market

Detailed projects outputs and outcomes are available in Annex D as well as other performance information.

Among to representatives from youth-serving organizations surveyed^{Footnote 21}:

• more than three quarters (84.4%) was of the view that their project was providing students the opportunity to develop new skills
• more than three quarters (78.9%) indicated that the projects supported students gain personal motivation, confidence or self-esteem
• more than two-third (71.6%) of officials felt that their projects helped students overcome the negative influence from peers

• Source: Survey of Support for Student Learning Youth-Serving Organization Representatives (between 89 and 109 respondents).

Text description – Figure 11

Extent to which Supports for Student Learning Program project(s) support(s) students in overcoming various challenges

Challenges	To a full extent	To a good extent	To some extent	To a little extant	Not at all
Lack of opportunities outside school to develop new skills (n = 109)	25%	60%	12%	4%	0%
Lack of personal motivation to advance in school or in the labour market (n = 109)	28%	51%	13%	6%	2%
Negative influence from their peers (n = 109)	19%	52%	21%	6%	2%
Lack of access to technology (n = 104)	24%	38%	27%	9%	3%
Lack of support from student's family (n = 106)	16%	45%	27%	8%	4%
Lack of support from a teacher/school (n = 107)	23%	35%	29%	8%	5%
Mental health and addictions (n = 102)	11%	46%	30%	12%	1%
Concerns with bullying or harassment (n= 107)	20%	36%	30%	12%	3%
Lack of support with education fees, applications, financial assistance, etc. (n = 107)	14%	37%	21%	14%	14%
Lack of money for basic needs (for example, food, clothing) (n = 109)	12%	37%	28%	13%	10%
Problems with transportation to school (n = 108)	12%	32%	19%	11%	25%
Lack of time to study (n= 104)	16%	19%	36%	14%	14%
Lack of official recognition (for example, certificate, bursary) (n = 89)	4%	25%	31%	17%	22%
Inadequate proficiency in the language (n = 100)	5%	24%	30%	25%	16%
Challenges with secure housing (n = 105)	4%	17%	26%	21%	32%

6.4. Innovation, lessons learned and promising practices

To some extent, funded organizations under Stream 1 of the Program and their partners are identifying innovative practices to support underserved students. They also generate promising practices and lessons learned and share their findings via various dissemination tools or events.

According to the document review and key informants, many projects are generating promising practices and lessons learned through various approaches including research and evaluation. However, the ability of identifying lessons learned and promising practices depends on:

• the maturity of the projects
• the goals of the funded organizations, and
• the impact of COVID on the project and on the community served

According to key informant interviews, 2 groups of organizations were more likely to develop and disseminate lessons learned and promising practices:

• more mature projects or funded organizations, and
• projects or organizations that had the objective to develop and disseminate lessons learned and promising practices

Funded organizations are also sharing promising practices and lessons learned through:

• their websites (with quantitative and qualitative research reports)
• newsletter to partners and experts in the field
• hosting presentations and conferences, and
• sharing knowledge with partners and expert committees.

However, from a sustainability perspective, it will be difficult to maintain and update online knowledge sharing platforms if or when the funding ends.

Funded organization partners are also exploring or testing innovative approaches that either address persistent challenges that students face or improve outcomes for students. Three quarters of representatives from youth-serving organizations surveyed (75%) noted that their organization was developing lessons learned and good practices. Most of them (60.9%) are carrying-out research and studies. Among that group, the majority are conducting pilot projects (82%) or surveys (64%). Others relied upon other research techniques including semi-structured interviews, impact analysis, cost-benefit analysis or gathering anecdotal evidence.

About a third of surveyed organization (37.9%) are partnering with researcher and evaluation experts (for example academic or research institution).

The majority of representatives from youth-serving organizations surveyed (52.9%) noted that their organization is sharing lessons learned and promising practices. They share lessons learned and promising practices in a variety of ways:

• publications and research reports
• presentations at conferences
• presentations to partner organizations
• presentations to staff
• newsletters
• webinars or web-based information sharing, and
• social media publications

External key informants noted that the Program should organize more virtual or in-person events to disseminate promising practices and lessons learned. This is done locally, regionally and at the national level. According to key informants, the Program could be used as a hub to generate and disseminate good practices.

This would have multiple benefits including to develop partnerships with other similar organizations or with organizations that provide complementary services. Many organizations funded by the Program are already collaborating to better support students.

In addition, the lessons learned, and promising practices could serve organizations that are not currently funded by the Program. According to the surveyed representatives of youth-serving organizations, areas where their organization would benefit from learning would include from most to least cited:

• barriers and effective practices for underrepresented students to attaining education outcomes (63.2%)
• barriers to and effective practices for attaining education outcomes (53.8%)
• partnership development (50,4%)
• promising practices to address emerging challenges and barriers (50,4%)
• improve awareness about the project among underrepresented students (48.7%)
• identifying or finding potential participants (39.3%)
• risk management (39.3%)
• promising practices for reporting results (32.4%), and
• developing research and promising practices (25.6%)

6.5. Partnerships

The Stream 1 of the Program also benefits youth-serving organizations partnered with Supports for Student Learning Program funded organizations. Via their partnership, they have access to additional financial and non-financial supports. Also, partnerships increase the credibility and stability of their programming and increase their reach of new students. In addition, benefits include having access to a pan-Canadian network of youth-serving organizations. They also have access to innovative practices to help them support students more efficiently.

According to surveyed officials, partnerships created as part of the Program were beneficial to both their organization and to Stream, I funded organizations.

More than three quarters of representatives of the surveyed service providers (85.6%) believed that funded organizations were helping them to set common goals. This included setting a common strategy for the service provider and the funded organization to support students. A similar proportion (80.5%) believed that the partnership helped increase their capacity to support students. It also increased the credibility of their organization in the community (82.2%). Survey participants also noted that partnerships increased the reach of their organization (73.7%).

Finally, most youth-serving organization representatives surveyed believed that the partnerships were beneficial to:

• set common performance measurement or reporting strategy (72.0%)
• increase funded organization reach (70.5%)
• develop partnerships with other organizations (61.7%), and
• find or secure additional funding (54.2%) (consult figure 12)

Some organizations noted that the funded organizations provided equipment and supports that they could use outside the Program. This is particularly the case for organizations that served students who do not have access to technology.

In addition, representatives of youth-serving organization surveyed noted that they were benefiting from the network provided by their Stream 1 funded organization. Partner organizations now develop partnerships across the country. Stream 1 funded organizations share various learning materials and organize conferences, where partner organizations can exchange good practices and lessons learned.

• Source: Survey of Support for Student Learning Youth-Serving Organization Representatives (between 88 and 114 respondents).

Text description – Figure 12

Benefits of partnerships with Supports for Student Learning Program funded organizations

Benefits	To a full extent	To a good extent	To some extent	To a little extant	Not at all
Setting common goals/strategy to support students (n = 113)	43.1%	42.5%	10.6%	1.8%	1.8%
Increasing the credibility of your organization (n =107)	33.6%	48.6%	8.4%	5.6%	3.7%
Increasing the capacity of your organization to support students in your community (n = 113)	28.3%	52.2%	11.5%	4.4%	3.5%
Learning innovative ways to support student learning (n = 109)	26.6%	50.5%	19.3%	2.8%	0.9%
Increasing the reach of your organization (n = 114)	27.2%	46.5%	17.5%	6.1%	2.6%
Setting common performance measurement/reporting strategy (n = 107)	31.8%	40.2%	19.6%	6.5%	1.9%
Increasing the reach of the organization funded by the Program (n = 88)	22.7%	47.7%	25.0%	3.4%	1.1%
Developing partnerships with similar organizations (n = 107)	20.6%	41.1%	25.2%	8.4%	4.7%
Finding or securing other financial partners (n = 96)	15.6%	38.5%	28.1%	7.3%	10.4%

7.1. Benefits of study and work abroad opportunities for students

According to the literature, 11% of Canadian students choose to study or work abroad. This is lower than students from France (33%), Germany (29%), Australia (19%), and the United States (16%). (Global Affairs Canada, 2019).

The document review and key informant interviews show that supporting study and work abroad opportunities benefits students and Canada. This includes the following benefits for students:

• developing soft skills (such as problem-solving, communication and teamwork skills)
• developing skills and competencies aligned with the skills required in the workplace
• refining academic and career direction
• increasing graduation rate and employment outcomes
• developing an international network, including with potential employers, and
• increasing understanding of economic regions of importance to Canada

It also includes the following benefits for Canada:

• adapting to the shifting global reality. Canadians must develop knowledge on increasingly important emerging countries and build an international network
• adapting to the changing nature of work
• strengthening values of openness. Global learning reinforces intercultural understanding and appreciating diverse societies, and
• remaining competitive among OECD partners. Other OECD countries have programs to support students travelling in non-traditional countries

7.2. Barriers for underrepresented students to study or work abroad

Limited data is available on the number of underrepresented students who participate in the study and work abroad opportunities. Based on evidence gathered as part of this evaluation, underrepresented students face specific barriers to work or study abroad. This includes students with disabilities, Indigenous students, and students from low-income families.

7.3. Barriers to study or work in non-traditional countries

According to a review of the documentation, Canadian students that study abroad choose traditional education destinations comprised of the United States (56.3%), the United Kingdom (11.8%), Australia (5.39%), and France (5.73%)^{Footnote 22}.

Few students decide to study in other countries, especially in emerging countries such as in Africa, Asia, or South America. However, as mentioned in section 7.1, studying abroad, especially in non-traditional countries benefits both the students and the country at large. This includes, among other things, developing strong partnerships and networks in emerging countries.

Many barriers exist for working and studying in non-traditional countries, as reported by officials from post-secondary institutions surveyed. Key informant interviewed also confirmed the existence of multiple barriers. While the Program focuses on non-traditional countries, most answered for barriers related to studying or working in emerging countries^{Footnote 4}.

7.4. The Innovation Fund

Due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions, the Global Skills Opportunity in-person study and work experiences were delayed. As a result, funded organizations allocated a portion of Global Skill Opportunity’s Innovation Fund to support innovative projects at post-secondary institutions. The original plan was to distribute the innovation funding to post-secondary institutions alongside the funding for in-person study and work experiences. However, due to COVID-19, the Program distributed 50% of the funding (which is $4.4 million) while travel restrictions were in place.

In 2020 to 2021, funded organizations contributed to carrying out a total of 130 innovative projects to identify lessons learned and promising practices. This included117 individual projects and 13 consortia projects. Among the 171 projects:

• 51 on research on reducing barriers
• 49 on wrap around support
• 36 on virtual mobility
• 17 focused on marketing and recruitment
• 11 on risk management, and
• 7 on partnership development

• Source: Colleges of Canada (2021) Innovation Fund Report, 2020 to 2021 and Universities of Canada (2021) Innovation Fund Report, 2020 to 2021.

From 2020 to 2021, 13,691 students directly participated in activities funded by the Innovation Fund. These projects included a high number of students from the targeted populations including:

• 1,348 Indigenous students (about 10%)
• 2,403 students with disabilities (about 18%), and
• 2,438 students in low-income family (about 18%)

Of note, these students did not participate in opportunities abroad due to travel restrictions. However, they participated in other opportunities in Canada (for example virtual mobility experiences). Also, as part of the Innovation Fund, post-secondary institutions funded by the programs developed partnerships with post-secondary institutions in 49 countries. This included 45 non-traditional countries (consult Figure 13). These partnerships will be beneficial for future opportunities offered abroad.

• Source: Colleges of Canada (2021) Innovation Fund Report, 2020 to 2021 and Universities of Canada (2021) Innovation Fund Report, 2020 to 2021.

Text description – Figure 13

Overall, as part of the Innovative projects, Colleges of Canada and Universities of Canada supported Post Secondary Institutions to developed partnerships in 50 countries, including traditional countries (for instance Australia, Canada. France, United-Kingdom and United-States), The 45 non-traditional countries include:

• Argentina
• Austria
• Bahamas
• Barbados
• Belgium
• Bolivia
• Brazil
• Burkina Faso
• China
• Colombia
• Costa Rica
• Czech Republic
• Denmark
• Dominica
• Ecuador
• Finland
• French Polynesia
• Germany
• Greenland
• Guadeloupe
• Guyana
• Ireland
• Italy
• Ivory Coast
• Jamaica
• Japan
• Kenya
• Malawi
• Martinique
• Mexico
• New Zealand
• Netherlands
• Palau
• Philippines
• Qatar
• Romania
• Russian Federation
• Senegal
• South Africa
• South Korea
• Spain
• Sweden
• Switzerland
• Uganda
• Vietnam

8.1. Indspire and Pathways agreements (Stream 1)

Pathways and Indspire have robust performance information to inform policy and evaluation. This includes high school completion, post-secondary education participation, post-secondary education completion and employment outcomes.

The incremental impacts and a cost-benefit analysis conducted in the last evaluation cycle was limited to 1 site in Canada. This research was done in collaboration with Lavecchia et al. (2018). These researchers are currently conducting additional analysis to inform the impact of Pathways on health and criminality. The data currently collected by the program does not allow ESDC to conduct an incremental impact analysis without collaborating with external partners. Also, because of the complexity of conducting such an analysis, no cost-benefit analysis was conducted as part of the current evaluation report.

In addition, the Program has limited data on the other agreements, including the Goal Getters, due to their recent launch. In particular, the data is not available on:

• intermediate outcomes (high school graduation) and
• ultimate outcomes (participation to post-secondary education or transition to the labour market)

Program officials indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated challenges around data collection. However, some data on the immediate outcome and outputs (targeted students receive supports to stay in school) is available.

8.2. Supports for Student Learning Program agreements (Stream 1)

All Goal Getters projects collect data on the overall number of participants from 2019 to 2020 to 2021 to 2022. However, ESDC has limited data on the number of participants by type of activities, by targeted population and by fiscal year.

In addition, ESDC has limited data to inform the effectiveness of the projects related to:

• high school attendance
• high school completion
• post-secondary education participation
• post-secondary education completion, and
• employment outcomes

According to the internal and external key informants, this is in part due to several factors including:

• projects’ maturity (time needed to have data on longer-term outcomes)
• limited or no access to data on education and labour market outcomes of participants
• the range of project delivery models (including the age range and education level of participants)
• types and nature of project activities, and
• project funding amounts

One of the key challenges for many projects is the limited access to school board and youth service organizations’ data. Many funded organizations have no or limited access to data on:

• high-school graduation rate.
• post-secondary education participation
• post-secondary education completion, and
• labour market outcomes

Many do not have partnerships with the education sector to collect such data.

ESDC officials stated that inconsistent data on outputs and outcomes across projects is a challenge. This is due to the Program's flexibility and to the lack of a systematic data collection strategy. However, many funded organization representatives mentioned that they had a data collection strategy in place to report on longer-term outcomes.

8.3. Global Skills Opportunity (Stream 2)

Global Skills Opportunity agreement holders Universities Canada and Colleges and Institutes Canada coordinate their performance measurement and data collection strategy. This helps aggregated results for the component.

However, due to COVID-19 travel restrictions, there was data available only for the Innovation Fund as part of the evaluation period. This evaluation could not fully assess the extent to which performance information collected under the Stream 2 of the Program are meeting availability, quality, validity, and reliability standards. However, this is due to circumstances outside the control of the program area.

The document review found that there is no data on the participation rate of underserved students in study abroad in Canada. This lack of data makes it hard to assess if Global Skills Opportunity's targeted students are underrepresented in study abroad. It is also difficult to identify other groups that may also face barriers to work or study in other countries. In addition, it makes it difficult to assess the net impact of the Global Skills Opportunity projects on the participation of these student populations.

Appendix A: Supports for Student Learning outcomes, outputs and activities

Ultimate outcome #1: Early Interventions: More program participants access post-secondary education and transition to the labour market.

Related Intermediate Outcome: More program participants graduate from high school.

Related Immediate Outcome: More students at risk of disengaging from their education receive supports to stay in school.

Related outputs:

• services designed to improve academic outcomes are in place
• more youth have been reached, and
• annual, ad hoc, and evaluation reports

Related activities:

• direct student supports
• expanding program reach
• data collection and reporting

Ultimate outcome # 2: Supports for Indigenous post-secondary education: More scholarship recipients’ transition to the labour market or pursue additional education or training.

Related intermediate outcome: more scholarship recipients graduate from post-secondary education.

Related immediate outcome: more Indigenous students have the financial means to access post-secondary education.

Related outputs:

• scholarships and non-financial supports are provided to students
• annual reports

Related activities:

• evaluate and approve student applications
• data collection and reporting

Ultimate outcome # 3: Outbound Student Mobility Pilot: Pilot participants transition to the labour market.

Related intermediate outcome: pilot participants, including underrepresented students, gain portable skills and intercultural competencies to equip them to participate in the labour market.

Related immediate outcome: more PSE students, including underrepresented students, participate in the pilot to study or work abroad as part of their studies at a Canadian post-secondary education institution.

Related outputs:

• funds are disbursed to PSIs, and financial and non-financial supports are provided to students, and
• semi-annual progress and evaluation reports

Related activities:

• evaluate and approve PSI project proposals, and
• data collection, oversight, monitoring and reporting

ESDC’s activities include negotiating agreements, Terms & Conditions, and reviewing projects. Related outputs include signing funding agreements and disbursing payments to agreement holders. In addition, ESDC is responsible for monitoring and oversight as well as researching and performing data analytics. Related outputs include program reports, performance data, audits, and evaluations.

Appendix B – Evaluation matrix

Evaluation question #1: What is the relevance of the program as part of the learning continuum?

Sub-questions:

• need for an after-school support to students from low-income families, including those underrepresented in post-secondary education, to access and participate in post-secondary education (Pathways and Goal Getters)
• continued need for financial support for Indigenous youth to succeed in post-secondary education and in the labour market (Indspire)
• need for financial support for youth who desire to study or work in countries other than the United States, United Kingdom, France, and Australia (Outbound Student Mobility)
• need for financial support for youth from low-income families, students with disabilities, and Indigenous students to study or work abroad (Outbound Student Mobility)
• need for the Program Covid-19 measures (Pathways, Goal Getters and Indspire)
• lines of evidence used as part of question 1 include:
• literature Review
• document review
• key informant interviews (internal and external), and
• surveys

Evaluation question #2: To what extent is the Supports for Student Learning Program achieving its objectives and intended outcomes (immediate and intermediate)?

Sub-questions:

• identification of knowledge needed to better support the development of projects to support students
• extent to which innovative approaches, lessons learned, or promising practices are generated by the funding organizations
• dissemination of promising practices and lessons learned
• factors affecting the implementation of the Program (Pathways, Goal Getters and Indspire)
• students at risk of becoming dropouts stay in school, by targeted groups, students from low-income families, Indigenous (Pathways, Goal Getters and Indspire)
• extent to which the Program Covid-19 Emergency measured responded to the needs of the organizations and students

Lines of evidence used as part of question 2 include:

• literature Review
• document review
• key informant interviews (internal and external), and
• surveys

Evaluation question #3: Is the Performance Measurement Strategy generating valid and reliable data that informs results achieved and supports future evaluations and policy development?

Sub-question:

• data collection and reporting systems in place to support the next evaluation cycle

Lines of evidence used as part of question 3 include:

• document review, and
• key informant interviews (internal)

Evaluation question #4: Were the Supports for Student Learning Program delivery organizations able to effectively adapt to implementation challenges they faced because of COVID-19?

Sub-question:

• implementation of the Program during Covid-19

Lines of evidence used as part of question 3 include:

• document review
• key informant interviews (internal and external), and
• surveys.

Appendix C – Methodology

Appendix D – Support for Student Learning Agreements (as part of Stream 1)

Appendix E – Bibliography

• Colleges of Canada (2021) Innovation Fund Report, 2020 to 2021
• Employment and Social Development Canada (2019) Evaluation of Pathways to Education
• Global Affairs Canada (2019) Building on Success: International Education Strategy 2019 to 2024
• Goss Gilroy (2021) Evaluation of the Pathways to Education Program
• Indspire (2021a) Annual activity report 2020 to 2021
• Indspire (2021b) Navigating Two Worlds: Paths to Indigenous Career Success
• Lavecchia, Adam M., Philip Oreopoulos et Robert Brown (2019) Long-term impacts of the Pathways to Education program
• Statistics Canada (2002) Early indicators of students at risk of dropping out of high school.
• Statistics Canada (2006) Census of population 2016
• Statistics Canada (2011) Census of population 2011
• Statistics Canada (2016) Census of population 2016
• Statistics Canada (2017) Canadian Survey on Disability. URL:
• Statistics Canada (2021a) Gendered impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the proportion of youth neither in employment nor education at the start of the school year.
• Statistics Canada (2021b) LGBTQ2+ communities in Canada: A demographic snapshot.
• Statistics Canada. (2022a). Canada leads the G7 for the most educated workforce, thanks to immigrants, young adults, and a strong college sector, but is experiencing significant losses in apprenticeship certificate holders in key trades.
• Statistics Canada. (2022b) Census of population 2021
• Statistics Canada (2022c) Educational participation and attainment of lesbian, gay and bisexual people in Canada.
• Statistics Canada. (2022d) High school graduation rate for students younger than 25 years of age, Organisation for Economic Co-operation, and Development (OECD) and partner countries in 2019.
• Statistics Canada (2022e) High school graduation rates in Canada, 2016/2017 to 2019/2020
• Statistics Canada (2022f) Percentage of 15-to 29-year-olds in education and not in education by labour force status, highest level of education attained, age group and sex.
• Universities of Canada (2021) Innovation Fund Report, 2020 to 2021