Evaluation of the Celebration and Commemoration Program 2011-12 – 2015-16

Period from April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2016
Evaluation Services Directorate
March 27, 2018

Cette publication est aussi disponible en français

©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2018.

Catalogue No. CH7-16/2018E-PDF
ISBN 978-0-660-26666-4

Table of contents

• List of maps, tables and charts
• List of figures
• List of acronyms and abbreviations
• Executive summary
• 1. Introduction
  • 1.1. Purpose
• 2. Program profile
  • 2.1. Background and context
  • 2.2. Objectives and outcomes
  • 2.3. Program overview
  • 2.4. Program activities
  • 2.5. Program management, governance, key stakeholders and delivery partners
  • 2.6. Program resources
• 3. Evaluation methodology
  • 3.1. Evaluation scope, timing, and quality control
  • 3.2. Evaluation questions
  • 3.3. Evaluation methods
  • 3.4. Methodological limitations
• 4. Findings – relevance
  • 4.1. Core issue 1: continued need for the program
  • 4.2. Core issue 2: alignment with government priorities
  • 4.3. Core issue 3: alignment with federal roles and responsibilities
• 5. Findings – performance
  • 5.1. Core issue 4: achievement of expected outcomes
  • 5.2. Core issue 5: demonstration of efficiency and economy
  • 5.3. Other evaluation questions
• 6. Conclusions
  • 6.1. Program relevance
  • 6.2. Performance – achieving expected outcomes
  • 6.3. Performance – efficiency and economy
  • 6.4. Other evaluation issues
  • 6.5. Looking forward
• 7. Recommendations and management response and action plan
• Appendix A: evaluation framework
• Appendix B: list of references
• Appendix C: National Commemoration Policy

List of maps, tables and charts

• Table 1: expected outcomes
• Table 2: budgeted and actual CCP expenditures 2011-12 to 2015-16 (in millions of $)
• Table 3: Celebrate Canada application trends
• Table 4: Celebrate Canada by funding method (G&C) and fiscal year.
• Table 5: level of awareness of commemorations by region
• Table 6: Commemoration Canada application trends
• Table 7: Commemoration Canada by funding method (G&C) and fiscal year
• Table 8: Celebrate Canada participants by event type and fiscal year
• Table 9: extent of High Impact of Celebrations
• Table 10: in your opinion, to what extent did your activity have an impact on the following attitudes among your audience?
• Table 11: CCP administrative costs (in millions of $)

List of figures

• Figure 1: Celebrate Canada funding profile
• Figure 2: Celebrate Canada distribution of funding
• Figure 3: distribution of Celebrate Canada funded projects by province and territory
• Figure 4: Canadians awareness of Celebrate Canada activities in the past five years
• Figure 5: participation rate among Canadians aware of Celebrate Canada activities in the past five years
• Figure 6: distribution of Commemoration Canada funded projects by province and territory
• Figure 7: Canadians awareness of Commemorate Canada activities in the past five years
• Figure 8: participation rate among Canadians aware of Commemorate Canada activities in the past five years
• Figure 9: compliance with Celebrate Canada standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – acknowledgment of receipt
• Figure 10: compliance with Celebrate Canada Services standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – funding decision
• Figure 11: compliance with Commemorate Canada Services standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – acknowledgment of receipt
• Figure 12: compliance with Commemorate Canada Service Standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – funding decisions

List of acronyms and abbreviations

ADM

Assistant Deputy Minister

CCP

Celebration and Commemoration Program

ESD

Evaluation Services Directorate

GCIMS

Grants and Contributions Information Management System

GCMI

Grants and Contributions Modernization Initiative

GCMP

Grants and Contributions Modernization Project

Gs&Cs

Grants and Contributions

HSMBC

Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada

ICC

Interdepartmental Commemoration Committee

O&M

Operating and Maintenance Costs

PCH

Department of Canadian Heritage

PMERS

Performance Measurement, Evaluation and Risk Strategy

PRG

Policy Research Group

TBS

Treasury Board Secretariat

Executive summary

Overview

The Major Events and Celebrations Branch delivers the Celebration and Commemoration Program (CCP), a grants and contributions program with two main components: Celebrate Canada and Commemorate Canada.

Although Canadians have celebrated civic holidays since the 19^th century, the Celebration and Commemoration program dates to 1981, when a permanent program was created to fund the celebration of Canada Day across the country. In 1996, the program was expanded to cover activities and events for the period June 21st to July 1st to celebrate and promote National Aboriginal Day (June 21)^{Footnote 1} and Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day (June 24). Canadian Multiculturalism Day (June 27) was added in 2002.

Celebrate Canada is coordinated nationally and delivered regionally and provides grants of up to $50,000 for eligible low-risk projects, or contributions exceeding $50,000 for those considered moderate to high-risk. The grants and contributions are provided to non-governmental and community organizations for community-based celebrations to be held National Aboriginal Day (June 21), Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day (June 24), Canadian Multiculturalism Day (June 27) and/or Canada Day (July 1). Funding can represent up to 100% of eligible expenses.

Canadian Heritage is the department responsible for the National Commemoration Policy (2002). This Policy is designed to support, coordinate, and bridge the areas between existing federal commemoration policies and programs, without displacing existing individual department and agency mandates, through the mechanism of the Interdepartmental Commemoration Committee (ICC). The Committee must annually review a five-year plan of potential commemorations to advise the Minister of Canadian Heritage. In 2008, Commemorate Canada was formalized as a distinct component, to enhance the program’s adherence with the Policy.

Commemorate Canada provides grants or contributions to projects that commemorate and celebrate nationally significant historical figures, places, events and accomplishments. Funding can represent up to 100% of eligible expenses. Projects must:

• Recognize Canada’s diverse and exceptional figures, places and accomplishments;
• Enhance knowledge of the history and diversity of Canada; and
• Encourage Canadians to participate in commemorative activities and celebrations.

Context and purpose

The evaluation covers the period from April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2016 and provides information on the effectiveness and efficiency of the program, evolving needs and necessary policy and program areas for improvement. It will support the renewal of the CCP Terms and Conditions in 2018 and complies with the requirements of the Financial Administration Act and Treasury Board Policy on Results.

Findings

Relevance

CCP program is considered relevant and addresses a demonstrable need. The program is aligned with government and the Department of Canadian Heritage (PCH) priorities.

Regarding the Celebrate Canada component, public opinion research indicates that the majority of Canadians agree that there is a need for the federal government to fund or support celebrations, and there has been sustained demand for funding over the period of the evaluation.

Commemorate Canada is aligned to an identified need, evidenced by both public support and demand demonstrated through applications for funding. The Policy and the Interdepartmental Commemoration Committee (ICC) are found to be partially responsive to government and departmental priorities since November 2015. It was noted that in order to keep the programs and suggested themes in step with government priorities and the issues of interest to Canadians, the National Commemoration Policy needs to be updated and strengthened. The ICC was deemed effective particularly in fostering inter-departmental cooperation through communication, although effectiveness will be limited by its scope of authority.

Performance: achievement of expected outcomes

The Celebrate Canada component of CCP was effective in meeting the short-term result of creating opportunities to participate in community events open to the public and free of charge.

Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, over 8,400 Celebrate Canada projects were funded across the country. Celebrate Canada’s most popular event, Canada Day, achieved CCP’s expected intermediate and long-term results. Annual participation estimates for the Celebrate Canada component are in the 6 to 8 million persons range, with 88% of participants attending at least one Canada Day event in the past five years.

The Commemorate Canada component reached its short-term result of creating opportunities to commemorate and celebrate historic figures, places, events, and accomplishments. There have been significant increases in the number of Commemorate Canada projects funded. Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, a total of 232 Commemorate Canada projects were funded across Canada. Data from the sample of Commemorate Canada projects who reported on attendance suggests that over 6.2 million participants took part in these projects between 2011-12 and 2015-16, representing an average of 145,000 per commemoration event. Public opinion research suggests that those participating in commemorations often reported an impact on national pride, knowledge of history, or belonging.

Performance: efficiency and economy

Program expenditures and operational costs fluctuated between 2011-12 and 2015-16. The average cost for Celebration activities appears to be less than $1.00 per participant for these projects.

Over these same years, the program had service standards for acknowledgement of receipt of application, and for notification of the funding decision. The Commemorate Canada component was in compliance with the standard for acknowledgement of receipt of application while Celebrate Canada did not meet its service standard in the first two years. Both components were in compliance with the standard for acknowledgement of funding decision for two out of the five years.

Performance: other issues

The design of the Celebrate and Commemorate components were found to be effective with some suggestions to improve delivery brought forward. Official language requirements were largely met but some consistency among regions could help implementation.

The evaluation found that performance measurement and monitoring could be improved to measure intermediate and ultimate outcomes, and monitor high value/risk projects. Data collection, monitoring and analysis should be strengthened to improve management, monitoring of high-risk, high-value projects, and to provide a stronger evidence base for the CCP’s contribution to its intermediate and long-term outcomes.

Recommendations

As a result of the evaluation, the following two recommendations have been addressed to the Assistant Deputy Minister (ADM) of Sport, Major Events and Commemorations Sector.

1. Update the National Commemoration Policy to include:

   1. guiding principles that promote a broad and inclusive vision for commemoration, to be better aligned with government priorities;
   2. definitions including a statement that persons or events are “nationally significant” as determined by the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada (HSMBC) (while retaining the current right to mount commemorations that have not been recognized by the Board), and a definition of “national reach”;
   3. clarity on the role of all member Departments in the ICC in leading commemorations and making evidence-based recommendations to the Five-year Plan in their area of expertise/mandate;
   4. remove all non-essential barriers to applications for commemoration funding such as requirements for: a positive story, or participation in existing institutions, or national pride; and
   5. development of a consultation mechanisms to be used to identify or confirm which potential commemoration themes might be relevant to Canadians.

2. Strengthen data used to inform and enhance CCP by:

   1. Implementing a systematic monitoring of high value/risk projects;
   2. Including an estimate of attendance in the site visit reports from the periodic monitoring of Celebrate events by Regional staff in order to verify trends in attendance; and
   3. Develop a measure of the geographic reach “across Canada” to complement the CCP medium-term result for Celebrate of “Canadians across Canada have opportunities to participate in community events that are open to the public and free of charge”.

1. Introduction

This is the final report on the evaluation of the Celebration and Commemoration Program (CCP) covering the period of 2011-12 to 2015-16. The evaluation responds to the requirement for full evaluation coverage of all ongoing programs of grants and contributions, as per the Financial Administration Act and the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) Policy on Evaluation (in force until 30 June 2016) and the Policy on Results as of July 1, 2016. This evaluation of the CCP was included in the Departmental Evaluation Plan 2016-17 to 2020-21.

The report is divided into six sections, including this introduction. Section 2 provides a summary of the CCP and the context of this evaluation. Section 3 briefly describes the evaluation design and the methods used, including the methodological limitations and challenges encountered. Section 4 presents the main findings of the evaluation related to relevance. Section 5 presents the main findings related to performance; including the achievements of expected outcomes, efficiency, design and delivery, and other findings. Section 6 presents the conclusions, a looking forward section, and recommendations.

1.1. Purpose

This evaluation is intended for performance monitoring and measurement purposes, as well as to inform policy and program improvements and future modifications to the program’s terms and conditions.

2. Program profile

2.1. Background and context

Canadians have gathered in their communities during the summer months to celebrate important civic dates with a picnic, and sometimes fireworks, since the nineteenth century. July 1 (then Dominion Day) became a statutory holiday in 1879.

Annual July 1 celebrations on Parliament Hill were inaugurated, and first broadcast, in 1958. In 1963 a policy decision was made to always feature Indigenous, Francophone and Anglophone groups and a variety of multi-cultural performances^{Footnote 2}. Since the mid-1980s, Canada Day festivities in Ottawa have included the formal ceremonies at noon on Parliament Hill which include speeches by dignitaries. In January 1980, consultation with the provinces led to funding for community-level July 1 celebrations. In the context of the Quebec referendum of 1980 and a push for national unity, July 1 was officially re-named Canada Day in 1982, which also saw the provision of flags, pins and stickers to community celebrations by the new Canada Day Secretariat, precursor to the Celebration and Commemoration program.

In 1996, the program was expanded to cover activities and events for the period June 21st to July 1st to celebrate and promote the following:

• National Aboriginal Day (June 21);^{Footnote 3}
• Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day (June 24);
• Canadian Multiculturalism Day (June 27), added in 2002; and
• Canada Day (July 1).

Different governments have emphasized different messages over the years, depending, according to Mathew Hayday, on “the type of national identity and culture that it wanted to support,^{Footnote 4}” however the structure of Canada Day celebrations has remained remarkably consistent over the years.

In order to establish roles and responsibilities among the federal players in heritage, particularly the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada (HSMBC) and the Department of Canadian Heritage (PCH), in 2002 the Government of Canada approved a National Commemoration Policy (the Policy). PCH was designated as the department responsible for this policy. In June 2008, Commemorate Canada was formalized as a distinct component, to enhance the program’s adherence with the Policy. A minor update to the Policy was undertaken in 2013.

2.2. Objectives and outcomes

The objectives of the CCP changed somewhat during the period under evaluation. As illustrated in Table 1, the program’s Terms and Conditions and associated outcomes, as well as the PCH Strategic Objective, were modified. The program’s expected results were articulated in the Terms and Conditions of 2008 and 2013; and in the Performance Measurement, Evaluation and Risk Strategy (PMERS) of 2014.^{Footnote 5}

Table 1: expected outcomes^{Footnote 6}
Expected results 2011-12 to 2015-16

	2008 terms and conditions and 2008 RMAF	Terms and conditions (2013) and 2014 PMERS
Immediate outcomes/results	Celebrations and commemorations are held across Canada Availability and use of communication products and promotional materials Visibility and media coverage across Canada Increased awareness of celebrations and commemorations Establishment of strategic (community and inter-departmental) partnerships Broadened outreach and scope of celebrations and commemorations	Canadians across Canada have opportunities to participate in community events that are open to the public and free of charge Canadians have opportunities to participate in commemorative and celebratory activities/events of national significance Canadians know about celebration and commemorative events/activities
Intermediate outcomes/results	Canadians participate in community celebrations [celebrate] and in commemorations and celebrations of national significance [commemorate] Increased participation of target groups Coordinated federal approach to celebrations and commemorations	Canadians participate in commemorations and celebrations of national significance
Ultimate outcomes/results	Increased awareness by Canadians of Canadian history and diversity Increased sense of pride and belonging to Canada	Canadians have shared experiences that promote attachment to Canada Canadians are aware of Canada’s historic figures, places, events and accomplishments [specific to the Commemorate Canada component]
PCH strategic objective	Canada is an inclusive society built on inter-cultural understanding and citizen participation	Canadians share, express and appreciate their Canadian identity

2.3. Program overview

The Major Events and Celebrations Branch delivers the CCP, a grants and contributions program (Gs&Cs) with two main components: Celebrate Canada and Commemorate Canada.

2.3.1.   Celebrate Canada component

Celebrate Canada is coordinated nationally and delivered regionally and provides grants of up to $50,000 for eligible low-risk projects, or contributions exceeding $50,000 for those considered moderate to high-risk. The grants and contributions are provided to non-governmental and community organizations for community-based celebrations to be held National Aboriginal Day (June 21), Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day (June 24), Canadian Multiculturalism Day (June 27) and/or Canada Day (July 1). Funding can represent up to 100% of eligible expenses. Celebrate Canada program also included:

• Canada Day Challenge (youth awareness initiative), an annual contest funded entirely through operating funds that invited Canadian youth between 8 and 18 years old to express what Canada meant to them by submitting an original poster design, a digital photograph, or a piece of creative writing. The program underwent changes during the evaluation period. Formerly the Canada Day Poster Challenge, the Canada Day Challenge added photography and creative writing as eligible entries in 2013 and also eliminated the 5 to 7 age group.
• Canada Day Noon Show delivered on Parliament Hill by the National Capital Commission by agreement with State Ceremonial and Protocol (until October 2013), and by the Major Events, Commemorations and Capital Experience Branch since then.

2.3.2.   Commemorate Canada component

The planned outcomes of the National Commemoration Policy (updated in 2009)are: increased opportunities for Canadians to celebrate their people, stories and key events; and increased knowledge, and understanding of Canadians’ shared history, values and interests. It also aims to increase the sense of shared citizenship, pride and belonging to Canada. “The Policy set up a mechanism, the Interdepartmental Commemoration Committee (ICC) for improving lateral communication and learning across the federal level, coordinating interdepartmental activities, and addressing requests for commemoration that do not fall under the purview of other federal departments. PCH maintains primary responsibility for “fall-through-the-gap commemoration projects.”^{Footnote 7}

The Committee annually reviews a five-year plan of potential commemorations drafted by CCP to advise the Minister of Canadian Heritage, who is responsible for the Policy. The Five-year Plan provides a list of nationally significant milestones that merit consideration in managing the federal government’s commemoration priorities. CCP provides coordination, planning and organizational services to the ICC.

Commemorate Canada provides grants of up to $50,000 to projects considered low risk, or contributions to projects that exceed $50,000 that are considered moderate to high-risk. The projects must commemorate and celebrate nationally significant figures, places, events, and accomplishments. Funding can represent up to 100% of eligible expenses.

Commemorate Canada provides funding to commemorations to foster a sense of pride and belonging in Canadians by:

• Recognizing Canada’s diverse and exceptional figures, places, and accomplishments;
• Enhancing knowledge of the history and diversity of Canada; and
• Encouraging Canadians to participate in commemorative activities and celebrations.

Normally, in the case of places and achievements, proposals are only considered 25, 50, 75 or 100 years (and subsequent increments of 25 years) after the event. For individuals to be considered for commemoration, they must have been active in Canada and ten years must have passed since their death.

2.4. Program activities

According to the program logic model (Appendix C); the CCP consists of four main activities:

• Managing grants and contributions;
• Managing major events;
• Outreach and awareness; and
• Coordinating federal commemorations through the ICC.

2.5. Program management, governance, key stakeholders and delivery partners

Program delivery is managed differently for each component of the program. Celebrate Canada is coordinated nationally and delivered regionally. Regional offices are responsible for the delivery of Celebrate grants and contributions, including assessment, monitoring, and payments. National Office is responsible for establishing program guidelines and procedures and the monitoring and reporting on the use of funds. Funding applications from community groups and Canada Day Poster Challenge submissions are sent to the regional offices for processing.

Projects receiving less than $10,000 in funding (until 2009, the threshold was $3,000) are approved by the PCH regional offices, and projects receiving over $10,000 (until 2009, the threshold was $3,000), are approved by the National Office. In December 2015, authority to approve CCP grants and contributions under $75,000 was delegated to the Deputy Director General, Major Events, Commemorations & Capital Experience and the Regional Directors General.

For Commemorate Canada, the National Office manages all aspects of program delivery which includes determining commemoration milestones, intake and assessment of applications, developing materials, establishing collaborative arrangements with other federal departments, drafting reports, and carrying out various related tasks. Regional offices were also involved in the delivery of some special initiatives (World Wars and Queen’s Diamond Jubilee), in particular the assessment, monitoring, and payment to recipients.

Eligible funding recipients for both components are:

• Non-profit Canadian organizations which includes corporations, trusts, cooperatives, and unincorporated associations;
• Canadian corporations whose projects are non-commercial;
• Canadian educational institutions and municipal administrations, and other municipal, provincial and territorial institutions; and
• Provincial/territorial governments (for Commemorate Canada funding only).

2.6. Program resources

For the period covered by the evaluation (2011-12 to 2015-16), the total direct expenditures of the CCP were $166.1 million. The total direct expenditures of the CCP include operating and maintenance costs (O&M) and Gs&Cs expenditures. O&M costs include the costs of employee salaries, the costs of employee benefit plans and operating and maintenance expenses.

Table 2: budgeted and actual CCP expenditures 2011-12 to 2015-16 (in millions of $)^{Footnote 8}

	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16	Total
Gs&Cs
BudgetedFootnote 9	10.5	15.5	14.5	10.5	28.5	79.5
Actual	13.9	21.5	16.5	22.7	35.8	110.4
O&MFootnote 10
Budgeted	3.9	3.9	3.9	6.4	14.0	32.2
Actual	9.6	8.6	11.5	14.0	12.0	55.8
Total
Budgeted	14.4	19.4	18.4	16.9	42.5	111.7
Actual	23.5	30.0	28.0	36.7	47.8	166.1

Source: finance Data

3. Evaluation methodology

3.1. Evaluation scope, timing, and quality control

The evaluation of CCP was conducted by the Evaluation Services Directorate (ESD) with components contributed by the Policy Research Group (PRG) and an outside contractor. It covered the period from 2011-12 through 2015-16 and addressed the five core evaluation issues, in accordance with the TBS Directive on the Evaluation Function (in effect until June 30, 2016) and the Policy on Results as of July 1, 2016. The evaluation also looked at the program’s design and delivery, areas for improvement, and performance measurement.

3.2. Evaluation questions

An evaluation framework, organized by evaluation issue, with a listing of the methodologies to be used to address each issue, was developed to support the evaluation (Appendix A).

3.3. Evaluation methods

Multiple lines of evidence were used to increase the reliability of the findings. Lines of evidence included both primary and secondary data sources. The findings, conclusions and recommendations of the report are based on more than one line of evidence, unless otherwise stated. The evaluation included the following data sources:

• Literature review: PRG provided a review of pertinent literature on behalf of the Directorate and a scan of similar programs in other jurisdictions. The evaluation team augmented PRG’s review and incorporated the results into its analysis.
• Review of program documents and administrative databases: documents reviewed included key governmental documents (e.g., Throne Speeches and federal Budget extracts), departmental documents (e.g., Department Performance Reports, Reports on Plans and Priorities), and program-related documents such as terms and conditions, application guidelines and forms, executive correspondence, and minutes of meetings between National Office and regions. This was combined with a review of two program databases: an extract from the Grants and Contributions Information Management System (GCIMS) which yielded financial, project and recipient-specific information; and a performance database which contained outcome data collected by the program from recipients’ final reports.
• Key informant interviews: interviews were conducted by ESD with 17 key informants. Staff were interviewed from four regions, and from five different federal departments/agencies that deliver commemorations and are members of the ICC.
• Case studies for Commemorate Canada projects: nine case studies were conducted on a stratified random sample of core^{Footnote 11} Commemorate Canada projects (50% other Commemoration, 25% of Road to 2017, and 25% World Wars). One case study was for a small project $0-$49,999; two were for projects $50,000-$99,999; four for projects $1million - $10 million; and two for projects over $10 million. The data sources used included interviews, administrative data reviews and online research.
• Surveys of Celebrate Canada recipients: ESD and PRG undertook online surveys of 2,288 Celebrate Canada recipients resulting in 678 completed responses with a 30.3% participation rate. The evaluation team conducted the analysis of the data compiled by PRG.
• Public opinion survey: ESD outsourced a public opinion survey. Its focus was the intended CCP outcomes. It was administered to a random sample of 1,500 Canadians 18 years and older. A subset of 300 of the 1,500 sample was conducted with Canadians who only own a mobile phone and not a landline to increase representation for younger adults. A 12% response rate was obtained. As a survey had been undertaken in 2007 for a previous evaluation, it was decided to repeat the 2007 questions, in order to have comparable data.

3.4. Methodological limitations

The following factors need to be considered when assessing the report’s findings, conclusions, and recommendations:

• Validity of self-reported attendance data in administrative data: the evaluation depended on estimates rather than exact measures and should be interpreted with caution.
• Validity of total project expenses: the evaluation depended on estimates provided in applications, including estimates of in-kind contributions that may not conform to Revenue Canada rules.
• Absence of collation of data from Commemoration recipients’ final reports: in order to obtain information from these reports, a data sample from approximately 30% of Commemorate Canada projects files was collected, examined and rolled-up. The sample focused more on commemoration core business than “special projects”^{Footnote 12}.
• Limited coverage of the Poster/Canada Day Challenge and the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee: findings are based on written program reports or reviews; the Canada Day Challenge Redesigned, the contracted review received by the program in September 2016, and the Report on Canada’s Celebration of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.
• Cost-efficiency analysis limitations: as PCH was unable to provide a clear breakdown of resources between program components, among programs using the same resources, or among regions and national headquarters, it limited the analysis of whether or not the CCP used its resources efficiently.
• Results (including awareness and outcomes) reported cannot be solely attributed to PCH: as recipient organizations received funding from a variety of sources, the achievement of results cannot be attributed exclusively to the funding received through the CCP program. However, in some commemoration case studies, PCH was the primary funder as funding can represent up to 100% of eligible expenses.
• Available data on Canada Day in Ottawa was not broken down by time period: the achievement of expected immediate and intermediate outcomes of the Canada Day Noon Show on Parliament Hill could not be verified.
• Several specific special initiatives managed, or partly managed by CCP, were or will be evaluated separately: Commemoration of the Bicentenary of the War of 1812; Toronto 2015 Pan and Parapan American Games Cultural Strategy; and Canada 150 Fund.

4. Findings – relevance

This section examines the continued need for CCP and the appropriateness of the federal government’s role in funding celebration and commemoration activities as a mechanism for citizen engagement. It also assesses the alignment of CCP with federal and PCH priorities and objectives, and identifies trends.

4.1. Core issue 1: continued need for the program

4.1.1.   Celebrate Canada component

This section discusses the relevance of the Celebration component of CCP, the degree of support for federal investments, and the stable and continued demand for federal funding.

There is consensus among Canadians that the Government of Canada should fund and support activities to mark celebrations and commemorations of national significance.^{Footnote 13} Public opinion research (2017) indicates that a majority of Canadians are in agreement that there is a need for federal funding. The research showed:

• 84% agreement to supporting Canada Day;
• 72% agreement to supporting Multiculturalism Day;
• 70% agreement to supporting National Aboriginal Day; and
• 69% agreement to supporting Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day.^{Footnote 14}

Compared with findings from 2007, the perceived need to fund and support celebrations and commemorations has risen across the four national celebrations, particularly for Saint-Jean-Baptiste (from 60% to 69%), followed by Multiculturalism (from 65% to 72%) and National Aboriginal Day (from 63% to 70%).^{Footnote 15}

Celebration days are similarly viewed as relevant by key informants, particularly Canada Day, Multiculturalism Day, and National Aboriginal Day. Celebrations and commemorations are perceived as being good ways to increase pride and belonging to Canada (83%), and are good ways to increase awareness of Canadian history (79%), according to public opinion research. In response to an open-ended question posed to funded recipients about any additional significant impacts of the program, 83% of the 206 replies provided positive comments. Pride in community or belonging to community were the most frequent additional benefits mentioned.

Evidence of the relevance for federally funded celebrations are supported by the stable and continued demand for Celebration funding between 2011-12 and 2015-16. Table 3, below, provides an overview of Celebrate Canada application trends as detailed in administrative records. The program received a total of 9,478 applications over 5 years (2011-12 to 2015-16), an average of 1,900 per fiscal year. An average of $17 million per year was requested by all applicants for a total of $86 million over the evaluation period. The requested amounts ranged from $15 million in 2012-13 to $18 million in 2014-15 and 2015-16.^{Footnote 16}

Table 3: Celebrate Canada application trends

Application Fiscal year	Total Applications (#)	Total Requested ($)	Successful applications (#)	Successful applications (%)	Requested ($) by successful applicants	Rejected applications (#)	Rejected applications (%)	Requested ($) by rejected applicants
2011-12	1,872	$17.1M	1,741	93.0%	$14.6M	131	7.0%	$2.5M
2012-13	1,865	$15.5M	1,691	90.7%	$14.0M	174	9.3%	$1.5M
2013-14	1,904	$16.7M	1,637	86.0%	$13.6M	267	14.0%	$3.1M
2014-15	1,941	$17.9M	1,658	85.4%	$14.4M	283	14.6%	$3.6M
2015-16	1,896	$18.4M	1,689	89.1%	$14.9M	207	10.9%	$3.5M
Total	9,478	$85.6M	8,416	88.8%	$71.3M	1,062	11.2%	$14.2M

Source: PCH’s Grants and Contributions Information Management System (GCIMS)

PCH continues to be responsive to the funding needs of organizations by funding almost all eligible applications who achieve the minimum required merit score. The percentage of approved applications is stable across fiscal years of application and ranged from 85.4% in 2014-15 to 93% in 2011-12, with an average of 88.8% applications being successful across all years of the evaluation.

CCP supports eligible organizations through Gs&Cs funding. Based on GCIMS data, between 2011-12 and 2015-16, organizations received approximately $35 million in Gs&Cs from the Celebrate Canada (Table 4). Almost all (98.3%) of Celebrate Canada applicants were funded through grants.

Table 4: Celebrate Canada by funding method (G&C) and fiscal year.

Application Fiscal Year	Total (#)	Total ($)	Grants (#)	Grants (%)	Grants ($)	Contributions (#)	Contributions (%)	Contributions ($)
2011-12	1,741	$7.0M	1,703	97.8%	$5.0M	38	2.2%	$2.0M
2012-13	1,691	$7.1M	1,661	98.2%	$5.3M	30	1.8%	$1.8M
2013-14	1,637	$7.0M	1,604	98.0%	$5.1M	33	2.0%	$1.8M
2014-15	1,658	$6.9M	1,632	98.4%	$5.3M	26	1.6%	$1.6M
2015-16	1,689	$7.0M	1,671	98.9%	$5.5M	18	1.1%	$1.4M
Total	8,416	$35.0M	8,271	98.3%	$26.3M	145	1.7%	$8.7M

Source: PCH’s Grants and Contributions Information Management System (GCIMS)

The average amount of funding provided to Celebrate recipients was $4,100, with little variation over the five years. Findings from a funding recipient survey reveal overall satisfaction with the Celebrations funding component, with 60.6% reporting that they were somewhat satisfied or very satisfied with the funding provided compared to the amount requested. However, 26.6% of the surveyed funding recipients reported that they were somewhat or very dissatisfied with the amount.

The high proportion of small value grants (less than $5,000) that cover approximately 19% of total expenses for celebrations may jeopardize the sustainability of delivering some free celebration events.^{Footnote 17}

4.1.2.   Commemorate Canada component

This section discusses the relevance of the Commemoration component of CCP to Canadians, using the proxies of: levels of interest, number of applications, awareness of events being commemorated and, in a small number of cases, financial need.

Application data and public opinion research demonstrate varying levels of interest among Canadians in the historic themes commemorated during the period covered by the evaluation. There is no doubt that Canadians approve of national commemorations in general: according to public opinion research from 2017, eight in ten (83%) Canadians agree that celebrations and commemorations are a good way to increase a sense of pride and belonging to Canada. Virtually eight in ten (79%) respondents agreed that national commemorations are a good way to increase awareness of Canadian history^{Footnote 18}.

Public opinion research from 2011 shows a consensus among Canadians that the two World Wars as well as the sacrifices of our veterans should be commemorated.^{Footnote 19} Public opinion research in 2017 demonstrates that the highest level of awareness is of the 100th anniversary of World War I and the 75^th anniversary of World War II held in 2014-2015. Two-thirds of Canadians (66%) report that they are aware of these events. With the exception of Quebec, there is little variation across Canada in awareness of the World War anniversaries.

Among the key informants, ICC members representing two other government departments highly involved in commemoration separately noted that the best chance of success for a commemoration was if the original historical event remains popular and meaningful to Canadians. Important regional variations are found in Canadians’ awareness of the next five commemoration themes, as noted in the table below. In essence, Canadians in the region in which a historic event took place are most aware of it: for example, women first gained the vote in Manitoba in 1916 (but not in Quebec till 1940); Sir John A. Macdonald lived his whole adult life in Ontario, the Charlottetown Conference took place in Atlantic Canada.

Table 5: level of awareness of commemorations by region

Commemoration	British Columbia	Prairies	Ontario	Quebec	Atlantic
Anniversaries of Two World Wars (100th Anniversary of First World War and 75th Anniversary of the Second World War)	67%	70%	71%	57%	64%
100th Anniversary of Women’s Right to Vote	48%	53%	47%	43%	46%
100th Anniversary of the Grey Cup	38%	50%	43%	35%	31%
150th Anniversary of the Charlottetown Conference	22%	21%	31%	28%	34%
200th Anniversary of the Birth of Sir John A. Macdonald	23%	30%	33%	19%	21%

Source: public opinion survey related to the Celebration and Commemoration Program, March 2017

Another proxy for relevance is the number of applications made to a program or theme. The number of applications mirrors the public opinion research findings as 80% of the total number of commemoration component applications were for World Wars commemoration initiatives. The Queen’s Diamond Jubilee was also very popular (321 projects approved across Canada). Also of note, in both these special commemorative projects, there was high interest demonstrated by Indigenous Canadians. Some 61% of all approved Indigenous commemorative projects during this period were for the Diamond Jubilee. The 2007-08 Canadians and their Pasts survey shows that Indigenous Canadians are more interested in Canada’s past (including national history) than other Canadians.

One commemorative theme, the Fenian Raids, received only one application and so can be considered less relevant to Canadians. In the case of the remaining commemorations covered by this evaluation, it is not possible to infer relevance from the number of applications to themes identified as high government priorities. The nine case studies illustrate that, in a number of cases, decisions were made, (in one case in Federal Budget 2012), to provide considerable commemorative funding to a single (or few) organizations in order to ensure commemoration of a high-priority theme.^{Footnote 20}

Overall, the Commemoration component of CCP received 432 applications between 2011-12 and 2015-16. The number of Commemoration applications increased by 920% from 29 applications in 2013-14 to 296 in 2015-16. The increase may be explained by the significant influx of funding applications in 2014-15 and 2015-16 for two special initiatives: World Wars Commemoration and Road to 2017. The amount requested for Commemoration projects varied across the years, ranging from a low of $7 million in 2012-13 to a high of $37 million in 2014-15.

Table 6: Commemoration Canada application trends

Application fiscal year	Total applications (#)	Total requested ($)	Successful applications (#)	Successful applications (%)	Requested ($) by successful applicants	Rejected applications (#)	Rejected applications (%)	Requested ($) by rejected applicants
2011-12	8	$13.7M	6	75.0%	$7.6M	2	25.0%	$6.1M
2012-13	10	$6.8M	9	90.0%	$6.6M	1	10.0%	$0.3M
2013-14	29	$26.9M	22	75.9%	$16.3M	7	24.1%	$10.6M
2014-15	89	$36.9M	59	66.3%	$16.4M	30	33.7%	$20.4M
2015-16	296	$22.9M	136	45.9%	$11.8M	160	54.1%	$11.1M
Total	432	$107.2M	232	53.7%	$58.6M	200	46.3%	$48.6M

Source: PCH’s Grants and Contributions Information Management System (GCIMS)

CCP supports eligible organizations through Grants and Contributions funding. Based on GCIMS data, between 2011-12 and 2015-16, organizations received approximately $48 million in grants and contributions from the Commemoration Canada (Table 7). A minority of applications were funded by grants (39.7%) while 60.3% were funded by contributions. However, the majority of all funds distributed were through contributions ($46 million of a total of $48 million).

Table 7: Commemoration Canada by funding method (G&C) and fiscal year

Application fiscal year	Total (#)	Total ($)	Grants (#)	Grants (%)	Grants ($)	Contributions (#)	Contributions (%)	Contributions ($)
2011-12	6	$7.0M	1	16.7%	$0.05M	5	83.3%	$6.9M
2012-13	9	$4.4M	2	22.2%	$0.1M	7	77.8%	$4.3M
2013-14	22	$14.0M	3	13.6%	$0.1M	19	86.4%	$13.9M
2014-15	59	$12.9M	21	35.6%	$0.6M	38	64.4%	$12.3M
2015-16	136	$9.8M	65	47.8%	$1.2M	71	52.2%	$8.6M
Total	232	$47.9M	92	39.7%	$2.0M	140	60.3%	$45.9M

Source: PCH’s Grants and Contributions Information Management System (GCIMS)

Relevance is sometimes deduced from need. On average, amounts awarded to organizations represented 28% of their total project expenses.^{Footnote 21} Another insight from the nine cases studies is that although (as is common among PCH recipients) the commemorative events mounted by the smallest non-profits would not have taken place without CCP funding, the larger non-profits with paid staff were more likely to say that, in the absence of CCP funding, the event would have taken place on a smaller scale, but that the funding allowed them to make their event national in scope.^{Footnote 22} One key informant also recommended more funding to allow larger funding recipients to expand the reach of their commemoration audience to multiple provinces and territories. In cases where (as suggested by the public opinion research) the natural audience for a commemoration may be regional or otherwise segmented, there appears to be a need for funding to make an event national in reach.

Finally, some ICC and staff members suggested that CCP would benefit from having professional historical expertise to help them in the development of the draft Five-Year Plan.

4.2. Core issue 2: alignment with government priorities

4.2.1.   Celebration and Commemoration Program

According to documents reviewed during the period covered by the evaluation, CCP objectives were aligned with the second strategic outcome “Canadians share, express and appreciate their Canadian identity”. This strategic outcome supports PCH’s mandate of “fostering a stronger Canadian identity through active, engaged, inclusive citizenship, and the recognition of the importance of both linguistic duality and a shared civic identity.”

The Canada Day Noon Show on Parliament Hill broadcast across the country is a platform to re-affirm, through protocol, Canadian pride and identity.^{Footnote 23} The Canada Day Challenge is aligned with mechanisms to reach youth and Government of Canada priority on Youth, Innovation and New Digital Technology.

4.2.2.   ICC, National Commemoration Policy and Commemoration component

The majority of the period under review, until November 2015, was characterized by the announcement of specific government high-priority commemoration themes, often with considerable PCH Communications support, sometimes with extra Government funding attached. Particularly in the case of commemorations of military history, commemorations were mounted by several departments. The responsiveness of the ICC and Commemoration component to government priorities was clearly evident, and were expressed in the rolling Five-year Plan.

ICC

The ICC had become somewhat dormant prior to 2013, but was very active in planning the anniversaries of the World Wars, meeting and providing minutes 17 times in 2014, 2015 and 2016. ICC members unanimously agreed on the value of the round table exchange of updates on commemoration plans and projects at the end of each meeting, and several provided the names of concrete projects or collaborations that resulted from those exchanges.

The World Wars Working Group was particularly fruitful, producing an impressive website populated with historical content from several departments and including links to their commemorative events. A similar sub-committee, the Diamond Jubilee Advisory Committee chaired by the (PCH) Canadian Secretary to the Queen and comprised of 14 members was very successful at providing advice on national planning and coordination. This suggests that an event/theme-focused sub-committee is the best engine to assure inter-departmental communication and coordination on government commemoration priorities. Some key informants suggested that, in periods without a major commemorative theme to coordinate among departments, the ICC could meet less often.

Overall the ICC has been deemed effective, particularly in fostering inter-departmental cooperation through communication. Some ICC members acknowledged that, as is common with “such horizontal committees,” the ICC did not have the authority to truly co-ordinate activities. The World Wars Working Group was identified as a best practice.

Some of the themes commemorated were described by interviewees as “misguided choices” that were not supported by Canadians or historical experts, such as the Fenian Raids and the Tribute to Afghanistan, which received one application each.

National Commemoration Policy

Key informants, including all ICC members interviewed, mentioned the inadequacy of the Policy. The most frequent reservations were:

• the lack of national principles for national commemorations;
• the perceived lack of consultation with recipients, interested parties or professional historical expertise.

Three ICC members emphasized the importance of consultation (one stated outside central Canada, and two stated outside government) for additions to the list. Commemorative policies discussed in the literature review that incorporate a consultation with the public include: Canada Post, Geographic Names Board of Canada, and the Government of New Zealand, whose commemorate program appears based on the National Commemoration Policy.

Another source for consulting Canadians’ interest in potential themes (for which a list was not available to be consulted by ESD) is correspondence addressed to the program on this subject. According to one key informant, Commemorate Canada receives 50-60 suggestions a year for commemorations (including the establishment of statutory holidays); the most popular subjects are Terry Fox’s 1980 run across Canada to raise money for cancer research, and Vimy Ridge or other World War battles.

In the absence of a commemorative statement written with historical expertise, a “storyline” accompanied the material prepared for each high priority government theme.^{Footnote 24} Public opposition to the themes, in the case of the Bicentennial of Sir John A. Macdonald, and the World War commemorations, centered on some of the interpretations expressed in the storylines, which were viewed as self-serving and political (but did not dispute the importance of Sir John A. or the World Wars to Canada). The storyline for the 50th Anniversary of the Canadian Flag contained no historical information at all.

Other individual ICC member comments on the Policy included:

• More direction on the inclusion of OGD events in the evergreen list;
• Lack of gender-based analysis;
• Current requirement for 25 and 50 year time lapse requirement renders ineligible some commemorations undertaken by other federal department/agencies.

Commemorate Canada

The lack of goals for national commemorations or definitions in the Policy had an effect on the Commemorate Canada component. The 2002 founding document states that Commemorate Canada will provide funding to commemorations and celebrations of national significance as defined by the National Commemoration Policy, however the policy does not provide a definition. PCH staff expressed concern about how to apply or interpret “nationally significant” when evaluating applications. Program documents were not clear on whether the expression referred to the importance of the historic event being commemorated, or the size of the event being planned. No program documents examined made reference to the mandated role of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, to determine which events or persons are nationally significant on the basis of historical research (synthesized into an “importance” statement).

Given the lack of national goals in the Policy, projects were justified on the basis of PCH Strategic Outcome 2: Canadians share, express and appreciate their Canadian identity^{Footnote 25} or the goals shared with Celebration in the logic model. This can lead to a proliferation of goals for a single commemorative project.

This proliferation of goals is also reflected in the CCP assessment grid which required the rating by a program officer of an application to the commemoration component against each of the following:

“How well does the project promote:

• democratic values
• attachment to Canada
• participation in Canadian institutions
• pride and appreciation of Canada.”

Definitions of commemoration found in the literature contain a European concept of “devoir de mémoire”^{Footnote 26}. “Devoir de mémoire” is invoked by France and Belgium as they seek to build appropriate memorials and educate youth about the Holocaust. German municipalities have also led the way in laying commemorative cobblestones inscribed with the names of murdered Jews. In 2002, Argentina declared a “sitio de memoria” at the detention and torture centre operated by the last military dictatorship (1976-1983) in Rosario; at the request of survivors it was opened to the public in 2015.

Although CCP should be credited with funding a commemoration of Mennonite pacifism during the First World War, persistent references remain, in the CCP application form (and also in the Capital Experience Policy on Commemoration), to a requirement that the event or person must be a positive national story. The previous application states that: “The subject matter must have contributed in a positive and significant way to the development of Canadian society.” This would disqualify the histories included in the concept “devoir de mémoire”. Yet these types of commemorations are taking place in Canada. In 2013, the province of British Columbia admitted that the Chinese community had suffered from “prejudicial legislation” and “historical wrongs,” and the subsequent Chinese Historical Wrongs Consultation Final Report and Recommendations recommended commemorative plaques or monuments be erected in consultation with communities.

Applications to CCP may come increasingly to concern nationally significant persons and events, whose stories, while important to Canadians, might rate poorly on the assessment grid above. The most urgent examples are likely to be inspired by the Calls to Action of the Truth of the Reconciliation Commission (June 2015), which has a section specifically on commemoration. Canadians have begun commemorating the sites of Indian residential school cemeteries.

By incorporating guiding principles into the Policy, including the concept of “devoir de mémoire”, Commemorate Canada may, while remaining alert to any future government priorities, be able to identify historical anniversaries more likely to attract applications.

Finally, references to the Minister responsible for the HSMBC and the list of members of the ICC need to be updated in the Policy.

4.3. Core issue 3: alignment with federal roles and responsibilities

CCP is aligned with federal roles and responsibilities by “providing assistance to domestic projects and initiatives which recognize and celebrate the outstanding persons, places and events of our country that have national significance and promote and celebrate Canada, its culture and history.” The CCP is also consistent with the stated roles and responsibilities. Guided by various pieces of federal legislation and national policies and strategies, it is expected that federal investments in this area will contribute to ensuring that Canadian society remains cohesive despite its pluralistic nature.

While the federal government has a key role to play in raising Canadians’ awareness of their history, and in promoting Canadian identity, the literature review identifies complementary roles of provincial and territorial governments to reach CCP objectives.

5. Findings – performance

This following section presents the major evaluation findings related to the program’s effectiveness, efficiency and economy and other evaluation questions, including: design and delivery, performance measurement and official languages.

5.1. Core issue 4: achievement of expected outcomes

5.1.1.   Celebrate Canada component

Opportunities to participate

The evaluation findings illustrate that Celebrate Canada was effective in meeting the short-term results of creating opportunities for Canadians to participate in community events open to the public and free of charge, including the Canada Day Noon Show on Parliament Hill listed in their logic model. The effectiveness of the Poster/Canada Day Challenge has diminished.

Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, Celebrate Canada approved projects received half ($35 million) of the amount requested in their applications ($71 million). On average, the amount received from Celebrate Canada represented 19% of their total project expenses ($183.7 million).

Figure 1: Celebrate Canada funding profile

Celebrate Canada funded projects are small. They received an average $4,160. The minimum approved amount was $75 and the maximum $434,000. About 82% of funded Celebrate projects received less than $5,000 (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Celebrate Canada distribution of funding

Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, a total of 8,416 opportunities to participate in community celebration events were open to the public and free of charge.

Over three quarters of the opportunities in the past five years were Canada Day celebrations (n=6,724).

Less than a quarter of the opportunities to celebrate over the past five years were for National Aboriginal Day (n=656), multiple-Day projects during Celebrate Canada period (n=623), Multiculturalism Day (n=271), and St-Jean-Baptiste Day (n=142) combined.

The distribution of funded projects over the period of the evaluation is shown by province and territory in Figure 3. A quarter of all celebration opportunities occurred in Ontario (n=2,065), followed by British Columbia (n=1,170), and then Newfoundland and Labrador (n=852) and Alberta (n=821). Ontario received the largest amount of funding over the last five years ($9.9 million).^{Footnote 27} Although Quebec accounted for 619 funded celebrations, it received the second largest amount of funding ($8.2 million). British Columbia received $4.7 million, followed by Alberta and Manitoba with $2.7 million and $2 million respectively.

Figure 3: distribution of Celebrate Canada funded projects by province and territory

Opportunities to celebrate National Aboriginal Day were higher in British Columbia (n=174), Ontario (n=131) and Manitoba (n=75) compared to other provinces and territories during the evaluation period. While Ontario did not deliver the largest number of National Aboriginal Day opportunities in Canada, it did receive the largest amount of funding ($460,000), followed by British Columbia ($250,000) and Quebec ($240,000) respectively.

Opportunities to celebrate Multiculturalism Day across Canada were quite limited over the span of the evaluation period (3% of all celebration opportunities). Almost 40% of all Multiculturalism Day opportunities were in Ontario (n=105), followed by British Columbia (n=43) and Manitoba (n=42) during the evaluation period. Most provinces and territories delivered 16 or fewer Multiculturalism Day events throughout the evaluation period. Ontario received the largest amount of funding for Multicultural day ($280,000) followed by Manitoba ($120,000) and British Columbia ($50,000).

CCP funding supported Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day celebrations (2% of all celebration events) most frequently in minority francophone communities. Ontario, Saskatchewan and British Columbia delivered the largest number of opportunities to celebrate St-Jean-Baptiste celebrations with 59, 43, 15 celebration opportunities during the evaluation period.

One of the lowest number of CCP-funded opportunities to celebrate Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day in Canada were found in Quebec (only 2 of 29 applications were approved). However Quebecers could benefit from the 1,070 performances, 1,220 family activities, 500 meals and 313 firework displays in all regions of Quebec (2017 figures) listed on the promotional website for the Fête nationale celebrations (formerly St-Jean-Baptiste) subsidized by the province. Through Celebrate Ontario, that province funded three francophone events around June 24^th in 2017.

Atlantic provinces delivered one or two St-Jean-Baptiste celebrations each over the course of the five year evaluation period. Ontario received the most Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day funding ($170,000), followed by Saskatchewan ($40,000) and Alberta ($20,000).

Seven per cent of all funded celebration projects occur over several days during the Celebrate Canada period of June 21^st to July 1^st.^{Footnote 28} Regional trends reveal that approximately one in five Celebrate Canada multi-day projects were in Ontario and British Columbia, with significantly fewer combined events in the rest of Canada.

Awareness, participation and impacts

Public opinion research provides a general overview of awareness of activities over the last five years. Figure 4 demonstrates the level of awareness of each of the celebration events in the past five years. Findings demonstrate that the majority of Canadians were aware of Canada Day celebrations in the past five years.

• The celebration with the highest level of awareness is Canada Day with 96% of Canadians aware of the Canada Day celebrations and activities organized in communities across the country on July 1^st.
• While the CCP funded few Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day events across Canada, more than 60% of Canadians reported being aware of Saint-Jean Baptiste Day activities in the past five years (82% Quebecers and 88% of French-speaking Canadians).
• Almost half of Canadians reported being aware of National Aboriginal Day activities in the past five years (67% of Indigenous Canadians were aware of these activities).
• Less than one third of Canadians are aware of Canadian Multiculturalism Day activities, this level of awareness may be associated to the relatively recent addition of Multiculturalism Day to the CCP.^{Footnote 29}

Figure 4: Canadians’ awareness of Celebrate Canada activities in the past five years

The evaluation findings illustrate that Celebrate Canada achieved CCP’s expected intermediate and long-term results regarding Canadians awareness of and participation in Celebrate Canada activities. Annual program reports estimate total participation in all Celebrate Canada events to be between 6 to 8 million people during the evaluation period.

The intermediate outcome data for participation in Celebration events were estimates provided by funding recipients. Program data show that Canada Day had the highest number of participants (88%), followed by Celebrate Canada multi-day projects (8%), and National Aboriginal Day (2.4%). Multiculturalism Day and Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day had the fewest participants, attracting about 0.9% and 0.3% of participants respectively.

Although Canada Day has the highest number of participants, data shows that this participation has decreased over the last five years (Table 8). This seems to be a trend in other Celebrate events as well.

• Canada Day reported that more than 7.2 million Canadians participated in the event in 2011-12, and 5.8 million in 2015-16.
• Celebrate Canada period reported 740,000 participants in 2011-12, and 653,000 in 2015-16.
• Multiculturalism Day reported 69,000 participants in 2011-12 and 48,000 in 2015-16.
• Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day reported 21,000 participants in 2011-12 and 16,000 in 2015-16.

The only event that doesn’t follow this trend is the National Aboriginal Day, with 159,000 Canadians participating in the event in 2011-12 and an increase in participation to 207,000 in 2015-16.

While the trends are clear, it is important to note that these figures are estimates only, provided by funding recipients.

Table 8: Celebrate Canada participants by event type and fiscal year

Event	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16	Total (#)	Total (%)
Canada Day	7,204,480	7,066,332	7,159,800	6,804,524	5,837,120	34,072,256	88.3%
Celebrate Canada Period	740,024	633,838	672,067	428,888	653,548	3,128,365	8.1%
National Aboriginal Day	159,881	148,938	186,510	206,153	207,913	909,395	2.4%
Multiculturalism Day	69,176	87,474	70,355	68,366	48,138	343,509	0.9%
Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day	21,270	34,551	32,301	9,982	16,114	114,218	0.3%
Total	8,194,831	7,971,133	8,121,033	7,517,913	6,762,833	38,567,743	100%

Source: Celebration and Commemoration program (CCP) data, Evaluation of the Celebration and Commemoration Program for the period of 2011-12 to 2015-16: Administrative Data Review

Public opinion research provides survey results on the participation rate of Celebrate Canada activities in the past five years. Most Canadians aware of Canada Day activities reported that they participated in at least one activity in the past five years; more than one third of those aware of Canadian Multiculturalism Day and National Aboriginal Day activities participated in at least one activity; and almost one third of those aware of Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day activities participated in at least one activity in the past five years.

Figure 5: participation rate among Canadians aware of Celebrate Canada activities in the past five years

Public opinion research also provides feedback from Canadians participating in celebrations on their perception of program results. A majority of Canadians (65%) believe that participating in Celebrate Canada activities increases a sense of pride and belonging to Canada, more than half believe it increases a sense of belonging to local community (54%).

Regarding the sense of pride and the sense of belonging, two events were considered more relevant, Canada Day and Canadian Multiculturalism Day.

Table 9: extent of High Impact of Celebrations

Area and % stating high impact (6,7)	Canada Day (n=682)	Saint-Jean Baptiste Day (n=152)	National Aboriginal Day (n=134)	National Multiculturalism Day (n=90)
Sense of pride	70%	37%	50%	73%
Sense of belonging	66%	31%	42%	61%

Source: public opinion survey related to the Celebration and Commemoration Program, March 2017

A majority of Celebrate Canada funding recipients surveyed believed that Canadians participating in celebratory events significantly increased:

• their sense of belonging to local community (88%)
• their sense of pride (85%)
• belonging to Canada (82%)

Further, funding recipients identified unexpected positive impacts of their events including: rallying Canadians from surrounding areas, building acceptance of diversity in Canadians who participate in celebrations, building knowledge of Indigenous culture and pride, and enhancing planning and coordination between diverse social groups to welcome Canadian newcomers.

Table 10: in your opinion, to what extent did your activity have an impact on the following attitudes among your audience? 

	No extent at all	A small extent	A moderate extent	A great extent	Don’t know / No answer	Total responses
A sense of pride about being Canadian	4 (0.6%)	6 (0.9%)	80 (11.8%)	577 (84.9%)	13 (1.9%)	680
A sense of belonging to Canada	4 (0.6%)	9 (1.3%)	98 (14.4%)	556 (81.6%)	14 (2.1%)	681
A sense of belonging to the local community	3 (0.4%)	2 (0.3%)	63 (9.3%)	603 (88.7%)	9 (1.3%)	680

Source: survey of Celebrate Canada Recipients, March 2017

Canada Noon Day Show on Parliament Hill

The evaluation findings illustrate that the Canada Day Noon Show on Parliament Hill was effective in meeting its objectives. The Noon Show is considered Canada’s foremost protocol activity on Canada Day and is broadcast live across Canada to allow access to all parts of the country.^{Footnote 30}

In its 2014 Performance Measurement, Evaluation and Risk Strategy, CCP established annual targets of 50,000 for crowd (estimated) and 1,000,000 in viewership for the Canada Day Noon Show^{Footnote 31}. Official estimates for the Canada Day Noon Show were not broken down by time slot in the administrative data provided by the program. However, crowd estimates were retrieved from various sources such as media outlets and reports^{Footnote 32}. These estimates range from a high of 300,000 during the 2011 Royal Visit to 25,000 in 2015 when the event took place under greater security following the 2014 shootings on Parliament Hill.^{Footnote 33} Eight in ten Canada Day attendees spent at least some time during Canada Day on Parliament Hill, the majority attending the Noon show.^{Footnote 34}

Poster/Canada Day Challenge

The Poster/Canada Day Challenge was effective in meeting the intermediate and long-term result of creating opportunities to participate in events of national significance. But, the effectiveness of the Poster/Canada Day Challenge has diminished over time as participation has steadily decreased over the past decade (from 14,989 in 2007-08 to 2,778 in 2015-16), with an average of 3,632 youth participating annually. Efforts to increase participation in the Poster/Canada Day Challenge have not shown convincing results as the total number of promotional materials sent (email outreach and physical copies) demonstrates a low conversion rate into number of participants, particularly regarding young participants. In fact, the number of participants and the number of promotional material sent to organizations in Canada for the Canada Day Challenge have been declining simultaneously throughout the evaluation period.

5.1.2.   Commemorate Canada component

Opportunities to participate

The evaluation findings illustrate that Commemorate Canada was effective in meeting the short-term results of creating opportunities for Canadians to commemorate and celebrate historical figures, places, events and accomplishments during the evaluation period.

Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, a total of 232 Commemorate Canada projects were funded across Canada.^{Footnote 35} The distribution of Commemoration Canada funded projects over the period of the evaluation is shown by province and territory in Figure 6 below. The largest number (42%) of commemorations projects funded by CCP occurred in Ontario (n=98), followed by Quebec (n=33) and British Columbia (n=24). Ontario received the largest amount of funding over the last five years ($22.6 million), followed by Prince Edward Island ($9.2 million) and Quebec ($5.2 million).^{Footnote 36}

Figure 6: distribution of Commemoration Canada funded projects by province and territory

Opportunities to commemorate World Wars were higher in Ontario (n=60), Quebec (n=25) and British Columbia (n=21) compared to other provinces and territories during the evaluation period.^{Footnote 37} Ontario also received the largest amount of funding ($6.48 million), followed by Quebec ($2.35 million) and Newfoundland and Labrador ($1.86 million). The average amount provided to a World War commemoration was $89,790.

Almost 50% of all core business Commemorate projects opportunities were in Ontario (n=18), followed by Quebec (n=6) and Prince Edward Island (n=4) during the evaluation period. Most provinces delivered three or fewer core business events throughout the evaluation period. Ontario received the largest amount of funding for core business events ($11.74 million) followed by Prince Edward Island ($7.19 million) and Alberta ($3.10 million).^{Footnote 38} The average amount provided to a commemorate project classified as ‘core business’ was $704,360.

Of Commemorate project opportunities linked to Road to 2017, 62% (n=20) were in Ontario. Other provinces delivered one or two Road to 2017 events throughout the evaluation period. Ontario received the largest amount of funding for Road to 2017 events ($4.43 million), followed by Prince Edward Island ($1.95 million) and Quebec ($550,000). Other provinces received $50,000 or less.^{Footnote 39} The average amount provided to a Road to 2017 commemoration was $225,760.

Awareness, participation and impacts

Data from a sample of Commemorate Canada projects that reported on attendance suggests that over 6.2 million participants took part in these Commemorate Canada projects between 2011-12 and 2015-16. This represents an average of 145,000 per commemoration event. Program data also show that core business commemoration had the highest proportion of all reported participants (74% of reported estimated attendees), followed by Road to 2017 and World Wars commemorations (both with 13% of reported estimated attendees).

Public opinion research gathers self-reported awareness of commemoration activities in the past five years. More than two-thirds of Canadians report being aware of the 100^th anniversary of World War I and the 75^th anniversary of World War II; almost half of Canadians report being aware of the 100^th anniversary of women's right to vote; about four in ten reported being aware of the 100^th anniversary of the Grey Cup, and less than one third of Canadians report being aware of the 150^th anniversary of the Charlottetown Conference or the 200^th anniversary of the birth of Sir John A. Macdonald (Figure 7).^{Footnote 40}

Figure 7: Canadians awareness of Commemorate Canada activities in the past five years

• The Canadians and their Pasts 2007-08 survey discovered that 32% of Canadians were “very interested” and 54% “somewhat interested” in “Canada’s past”. Just under 30% of Canadians who were aware of the 100th anniversary of World War I and the 75th anniversary of World War II said they participated in the activities, and just under one-quarter (24%) participated in the 100th anniversary of the Grey Cup. The rate of participation is lower for the 100th anniversary of women's right to vote and the 150th anniversary of the Charlottetown Conference (Figure 8).^{Footnote 41}

Figure 8: participation rate among Canadians aware of Commemorate Canada activities in the past five years

Regional variances in participation in different Commemoration themes were evident. Higher participation rates were found for the 100th Grey Cup on the Prairies, and higher participation rates in Atlantic Canada were found for the 150^th Anniversary of the Charlottetown Conference.

Low participation rates in Quebec were found across all Commemoration themes. This is consistent with the survey findings in Canadians and their Pasts that francophone Quebecers had significantly lower interest in all types of history (genealogy, ethnic group, religion, Canada) than the Canadian average, except in the history of their province, where they scored higher than the Canadian average.

The public opinion research demonstrated the extent of high impact of commemorations regarding the following ultimate outcomes of CCP, among others^{Footnote 42} :

• sense of belonging (attachment); and
• knowledge of history.^{Footnote 43}

Participants reported whether there was a “significant impact” of the Commemorative event they attended in one or more of these areas. The centennial anniversary of women’s right to vote had the greatest effect on participants’ sense of belonging to Canada (65%). Among participants commemorating the anniversaries of the Two World Wars, 61% reported a significant impact on their sense of belonging to Canada. Men were particularly likely to report these commemorations positively impacted their sense of belonging to Canada (76% of men compared to 50% of women). Participation in the 100^th Grey Cup had the least effect on a sense of belonging to Canada (44%) among the four commemorative themes identified in the survey.

The 2008 Terms and Conditions mentions “Canadian’s low level of knowledge about history and civics” as a key concern leading to the creation of the Commemorate component. As stated before, the Canadians and their Pasts 2007-08 survey revealed that about a third of Canadians are strongly interested in history.

A pre-event survey of a random sample of PEI residents and non-residents, reported in the PEI2014 case study stated that 63% of residents and only 36% of non-residents could identify the main result of the Charlottetown Conference.^{Footnote 44} Participating in commemorations of Women’s first right to vote, the 150^th anniversary of the Charlottetown Conference or commemorations of the World Wars increased the public opinion survey respondents’ knowledge of Canadian history among slightly over half (53%-56%) of participants.

5.2. Core issue 5: demonstration of efficiency and economy

There are several indicators that help to assess the efficiency and economy with which resources have been used. The CCP program had fluctuations in budgets, actual spending and operational costs over the years covered by the evaluation. There is limited information available on operational cost comparisons (by region or by project). However, the average cost per participant can be computed for Celebration activities using the best available data. Administrative data show grants and contributions for Celebration activities of $35 million across evaluation years, with an estimated 38.6 million participants. This equates to less than $1.00 cost per participant for these projects.

Table 11 demonstrates that total program expenditures doubled from $23.5 million in 2011-12 to $47.8 million in 2015-16. This 103% increase is substantial and is devoted almost entirely to funding five special initiatives commemorating specific events delivered under the Commemoration component. These projects include the 100th Anniversary of the Grey Cup, Bicentennial of the War of 1812, Hockey Canada 100th Anniversary, Cultural Pan-Am Games,^{Footnote 45} and Road to 2017, all of which were high government priorities.

Overall we see that CCP O&M costs have gone from $9.6 million in 2011-12 to $12 million in 2015-16, representing an increase of 24%.

Table 11: CCP administrative costs (in millions of $)

Resources	2011-12	2012-13	2013-14	2014-15	2015-16	Total
O&M expenditures	9.6	8.6	11.5	14	12	55.8
G&C expenditures	13.9	21.5	16.5	22.7	35.8	110.4
Total expenditures	23.5	30	28	36.7	47.8	166.1
Administrative ratio	41%	28.6%	41%	38.2%	25.1%	33.6%

Source: table “CCP Evaluation Financial Information April 2011 to March 2016”

5.2.1.   Celebrate Canada component

The CCP program has established service standards for both acknowledgement of receipt of an application, and for acknowledgement of the funding decision. The standard is two weeks for the acknowledgement of receipt of an application and is 18 weeks (20 since 2015) for notification of the funding decision for the Celebrate Canada component.^{Footnote 46} PCH’s goal is that 80% of the applications received by the Department will meet the published service standards for each program and/or program component.

Celebrate Canada did not achieve this two week service standard in the first two years of the evaluation period (31% in 2011-12 and 60% in 2012-13), but exceeded service standards as of 2013-14 (Figure 9).

Figure 9: compliance with Celebrate Canada standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – acknowledgment of receipt

The survey of Celebrate Canada funding recipients is consistent with the high achievement of service standards since 2013-14. In 2017, 86% of recipients were somewhat (20.7%) or very satisfied (65.3%) with the timeliness of acknowledgement of receipt of application.

Figure 10: compliance with Celebrate Canada Services standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – funding decision

Performance in meeting funding decision service standards declined for Celebrate Canada component from 97% in 2011-12 to 37% in 2012-13, before improving in 2015-16 (99%)^{Footnote 47} (Figure 10). The survey of funding recipients provides further impressions on service standards. In 2017, 65.6% of recipients were somewhat (30.8%) or very satisfied (34.8%) with the timeliness of notification of the funding decision. Overall, 22.9% of surveyed funding recipients reported that they were somewhat (17.8%) or very dissatisfied (5.1%) with the timeliness of notification of the funding decision.^{Footnote 48}

The evidence from the administrative data indicates that two-thirds of Celebrate Canada applications had a regular triage assessment (basic files ranged from a low 21.3% in 2012-2013 to a high 40.2% in 2014-2015). Administrative data shows that the vast majority of Celebrate Canada applications are for low-risk, low-value projects, with awards less than $5,000. However, they were subjected to the same rigorous review as higher-risk and higher-value application.

Until March 31, 2015, recommendations to fund Celebrate applications were sent to the Ministerial Office in large batches, which produced a lower compliance score than if fewer applications had been sent to the Ministerial Office at one time. Therefore a delay of a week or less (which was the case for 78% of projects in 2012-13, and 98% in 2014-15) affected the compliance score of a large number of applications.

Beginning in 2011-12, the Celebrate Canada component implemented the addition of workbooks during phase 1 of the modernization of the grants and contributions system (GCMI). Errors were noted in the workbook until 2015, and interviewees reported that the workbook for projects rated “basic” was unusable, causing the component to miss its target to assign projects the simpler “basic” process.

Celebrate Canada was largely delivered by the regional offices, and key informants mentioned that the lack of staff at some regional offices had impeded the efficiency of the delivery of the component while other key informants were appreciative of improvements made to forms.

5.2.2.   Commemorate Canada component

The Commemorate Canada component of the CCP program has a service standard of two weeks for the acknowledgement of receipt of an application, and 26 weeks for notification of the funding.^{Footnote 49} Commemorate Canada has the same goal of 80% of the applications will meet the published service standards.

The two-week service standard for acknowledging receipt of applications was met to a high degree (86%-96%) for Commemoration component in all five years covered by the evaluation period (Figure 11).

Figure 11: compliance with Commemorate Canada Services standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – acknowledgment of receipt

Performance in meeting funding decision service standards declined for the Commemorate Canada component from 99% in 2011-12 to 50% in 2014-15, before improving in 2015-16 (73%)^{Footnote 50} (Figure 12).

Figure 12: compliance with Commemorate Canada Service Standards 2011-12 to 2015-16 – funding decisions

In contrast to Celebrate Canada projects, Commemoration projects tend to be complex, with higher risk and higher values. All Commemorations applications went through a regular triage assessment, as is appropriate for these projects.

The number of commemoration projects funded varied tremendously during the evaluation period, from 6 in 2011-12 to 59 in 2014-15 to 136 in 2015-16 (113 of which were World War commemorations), which likely also affected compliance with the service standards.

The main opportunity for improved efficiency for the Commemoration component lies within the Terms and Conditions processes. Currently, there can be a requirement for separate Terms and Conditions for some commemoration projects. The work to create new Terms and Conditions and have them approved by Treasury Board was reported by key informants as time-consuming and inefficient.

5.3. Other evaluation questions

5.3.1.   Celebrate Canada Component - design and delivery

PCH key informants consider CCP’s delivery model, with regional delivery of Celebrate Gs&Cs (including assessment, monitoring, and payments) as appropriate. Key informants commented that Regions had better knowledge of clients and their context. Two regional PCH staff encouraged Celebrate headquarters staff to push for more standardization: one mentioned as an issue that Regions “manage quite differently around equitable distribution.”

PCH staff suggested improving the Celebrate funding model by fast-tracking small value/low risk applications through basic rather than regular triage processes, managing projects per level of risk. Note that action began in 2016-17 to pilot and implement a fast-track process for these small value/low risk applications through the Grants and Contributions modernization Project (GCMP) phase 3 modernization.

Funding recipients were generally satisfied (81%) with the simplicity of the funding application, its clarity (82%), and the process for submission (85%).^{Footnote 51} However, staff did suggest further simplifying application guidelines and procedures through online platforms.

67% of funded recipients reported satisfaction (somewhat or very satisfied) with their interactions with Celebrate Canada staff.^{Footnote 52}

Overall, funding recipients expressed satisfaction with the timeliness of application and funding notifications; however, some surveyed funding recipients provided suggestions via open-ended responses:

• High value applications need at least 9 months notification of funding award in order to adequately plan large events and book their entertainment.
• Low value/risk application were said to need shorter application windows (no more than 3 months) prior to an event as these organizations, often entirely volunteer-run, do not have permanent resources to plan celebratory events in advance.

Funding recipients were generally satisfied with the application and process for Celebrate Canada. However, approximately one in ten reported dissatisfaction with the funding application (11.2%), clarity of the form (9.7%) or process of submission (8.5%). Open-ended responses captured the type of difficulty some applicants may have, and suggested more support and reminders.

Interviews with staff and open-ended responses from funding recipients provide observations and suggestions about possible areas for flexibility. These included a request that a variety of foods be eligible, rather than simply cake.

Funding recipients were very appreciative of the Celebrate promotional materials they received from CCP. Several funding recipients would like to receive promotional materials in advance for all celebration days in order to use them for promotional activities. Further, some funding recipients indicated that they did not have access to relevant and high quality promotional materials for celebration days other than Canada Day.

Open-ended responses from Indigenous organizations identified the need to develop promotional materials that acknowledge the Indigenous contribution to Canadian heritage and are available in Indigenous languages.

5.3.2.   Other improvements to CCP design and delivery

Recipients were generally satisfied with the design and the delivery of the CCP. The most commonly cited success factor to Commemoration projects was the support provided by headquarters and Regional staff. Recipients mentioned the benefits of scheduled meetings with their project officer and follow-up emails to address application questions. Several recipients added that an interactive online application would facilitate timely application, notification and payment processes. A few recipients mentioned that delays in notification and payment served as a barrier that impeded their commitment to expenses.

5.3.3.   Funding

Some PCH staff expressed the importance of an equitable distribution of Celebrate funding across Canadian communities in the component’s regional funding distribution, while respecting the higher costs to deliver remote celebrations. In contrast, higher numbers of applications to the World War theme in one region led to a very low percentage of eligible costs being funded, a high number of rejections, and ultimately low staff morale. This suggests Commemorate funding should remain centrally distributed according to the popularity of the historical theme, in order to not short-change an area of the country more interested in one theme.

5.3.4.   Performance measurement

The Celebrate component intermediate outcome focuses on level of participation in Celebration events. Funding recipients provide anecdotal information regarding number of participants, aware that CCP funding for the subsequent year is dependent on the number of participants they report in their final report. PCH staff call into question the reliability of the number of participants reported in final reports, including the reporting burden to funding applicants for low value/risk funding recipients.

Data on the estimated immediate and intermediate outcomes is entered in the grants and contributions database. Although data on outcomes collected from final reports are sometimes not provided, are incomplete or received late, program staff estimates that they received 80% of the requested data.^{Footnote 53} The quality and timeliness of program data affect the ability to report on performance of outcomes.

In the absence of performance data, monitoring becomes even more important. Regional site visits were reported by key informants from more than one region, including instances where Celebrate recipients failed to mount an event. No official monitoring of the higher-budget Commemoration projects was undertaken, though two case study key informants mentioned program officers volunteering to visit events on their own time.

Commemorate recipients, whose projects receive much higher sums, should be required to survey participants, including on the long-term goal of “awareness of Canadian history.” However, given the low level of strong interest revealed in the 2007-08 survey it is important that CCP retain realistic targets for the education of Canadians in their history.

Popular commemorative themes, such as the World Wars, may receive funding from other sources or sustained media interest: to the extent that CCP funding and support is significant to a project or theme area, there can be stronger evidence that the program affected the desired outcomes.

5.3.5.   Official languages

The program does not collect data on CCP’s compliance with official language requirements. However, all documentation about the program was distributed publically (application guidelines, forms etc.) in both official languages. The survey of Celebrate funding recipients reported high satisfaction with the availability of services in the official language of choice (78% were somewhat or very satisfied). Many funding recipients reported providing their on-line material in both official languages.

The Terms and Conditions for the program specify that “where the recipient's activities address participants or an audience composed of both official-language groups… appropriate measures [are] to be taken” in the funding agreement to contribute to official language goals. PCH staff however report that there may be some confusion and inconsistency of application of official language requirements among different regions, and that there were few tools to enforce compliance for small grants.

6. Conclusions

6.1. Program relevance

CCP program is considered relevant and addresses a demonstrable need. The program is aligned with government and PCH priorities.

The National Commemoration Policy was identified as needing to be updated, particularly in adding definitions, using professional historical expertise more often, setting out roles and responsibilities, and adding a consultation mechanism for the Five-year Plan. The ICC was deemed effective particularly in fostering inter-departmental cooperation through communication, although effectiveness will be limited by its scope of authority.

Regarding the Celebrate Canada component, public opinion research indicates that the majority of Canadians agree that there is a need for the federal government to fund or support celebrations; as well there was sustained demand for funding over the period of the evaluation. Attendance at Celebrate events may have shown a downward trend, aside from National Aboriginal Day.

Commemorate Canada is aligned to an identified need, evidenced by both public support and demand demonstrated through applications for funding. The responsiveness of the Five-year Plan established under the Policy to federal government priorities including specific events to be commemorated was clearly evident before November 2015. The Policy and the ICC are deemed partially responsive to government and departmental priorities since November 2015 and therefore there is some support for updating the Policy and some aspects of the program. This represents an opportunity to update the Policy to ensure that historic persons or events chosen for commemoration will be relevant to Canadians, which was identified as the main success factor for commemorative events.

6.2. Performance – achieving expected outcomes

The Celebrate Canada component of CCP was effective in meeting the short-term result of creating opportunities to participate in community events open to the public and free of charge. Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, over 8,400 Celebrate Canada projects were funded across the country. Celebrate Canada’s most popular event, Canada Day, achieved CCP’s expected intermediate and long-term results. Annual participation estimates for the Celebrate Canada component are in the 6 to 8 million persons range, with 88% of participants attending at least one Canada Day event in the past five years. If there is a cloud on the horizon, it is that the low percentage (19%) of eligible expenses, and the small amounts granted may be endangering some free celebrations.

The Commemorate Canada component reached its short-term result of creating opportunities to commemorate and celebrate historic figures, places, events, and accomplishments. There have been significant increases in the number of Commemorate Canada projects funded. Between 2011-12 and 2015-16, a total of 232 Commemorate Canada projects were funded across Canada.Data from the sample of Commemorate Canada projects who reported on attendance suggests that over 6.2 million participants took part in these projects between 2011-12 and 2015-16, representing an average of 145,000 per commemorative event. Public opinion research suggests that those participating in commemorations often reported an impact on national pride, knowledge of history, or belonging.

6.3. Performance – efficiency and economy

Program expenditures and operational costs fluctuated between 2011-12 and 2015-16. Celebrate appears to be delivered at the rate of less than $1.00 per participant, but participant numbers need to be verified, especially as these may be declining. Over these same years, the program had service standards for acknowledgement of receipt of application, and for notification of the funding decision. The Commemorate Canada component was in compliance with the standard for acknowledgement of receipt of application, but Celebrate Canada did not meet its service standard in the first two years. Both components were in compliance with the standard for acknowledgement of funding decision for two out of the five years.

There are opportunities to improve efficiency of program administration in the areas of triage and regional office staffing requirements (Celebration) as well as creating an umbrella set of Terms and Conditions (Commemoration). The example of Celebrate’s temporary drop in compliance with service standards during a phase of the modernization of the grants and contributions system shows that technological change does not always immediately deliver efficiencies.

6.4. Other evaluation issues

The design of CCP was found to be effective; some minor suggestions to improve program design and delivery were brought forward. For Celebrate these include streamlining small value/low risk project processes, considering a more transparent approach to funding distributions, and considering regional and cultural needs.

Performance measurement and monitoring should be improved to better monitor high value/risk projects. Modernization could assist in providing better data, more efficiently, while the program may also consider systematic measuring of intermediate and ultimate outcomes, particularly for Commemoration projects or large-scale Celebrate projects.

6.5. Looking forward

Findings from the evaluation demonstrate that a number of PCH modernizations, such as those undertaken by the GCMP, should have positive effects on CCP. CCP should continue to work with the GCMP to deliver streamlined risk-based processes including on-line applications and fewer requirements for small CCP amounts, and developing generic terms and conditions to cover as many commemorations as possible.

Should less information be required on the results of small grants, CCP is encouraged to come up with other performance measures. Two suggestions:

Several PCH staff expressed a commitment to equitable geographic distribution of Celebrate funding across their Region. Administrative data could provide data towards this new measure, in support of the “across Canada” goal for the component.

Public opinion surveys are ideally suited to collecting data on intermediate and ultimate outcomes of the CCP, particularly on Celebrate Canada.

7. Recommendations and management response and action plan

Recommendation 1 – action plan

Action item	Deliverable(s)	Timeline	Program official responsible
1.1 Ensure that PCH’s leadership as supported by the revised Policy is fully implemented and that the program continues to foster interdepartmental cooperation through regular communication with ICC members. (a, b, c, e)	Organize a meeting with ICC members to obtain suggestions aimed at modernizing the National Commemoration Policy.	April 30, 2018	Director, Celebration and Commemoration Program
	Create a working group to update and strengthen the National Commemoration Policy, including the definition of “national significance”.	June 30, 2018	DG, Major Events, Commemorations and Capital Experience Branch; Director, Celebration and Commemoration Program
	Seek ministerial approval with regards to revised Policy and mandate, as well as the approval of a strategic federal government plan for commemoration themes.	November 30, 2019	Director, Celebration and Commemoration Program
1.2 Update Program Guidelines to reflect changes in Policy. (d)	Update Program Guidelines	December 31, 2019	Director, Celebration and Commemoration Program
Full implementation date : December 31, 2019

Recommendation 2 – action plan

Action item	Deliverable(s)	Timeline	Program official responsible
2.1 Assessment of need, creation and implementation of tools to monitor high value/risk CCP projects by PCH staff and to identify measures to be taken in response to non-compliance.	Tools are created and implemented, and staff is trained to perform on-site monitoring to ensure client compliance with Contribution Agreement. Commemorate Canada has developed an Excel sheet to gather data that will allow a “roll up” of results.	Implemented in Summer 2016 and is ongoing	Director, Celebrate and Commemorate Program
2.2 Periodic monitoring of Celebrate events by Regional staff is performed to ensure that expected outcomes are achieved, particularly in the case of events that attract a greater number of participants and require a greater amount of funding.	Systematic monitoring of events is performed; mitigation measures and more rigorous and consistent mechanisms are in place to measure participation.	Tools and templates to measure participation were available during the 2011-16 period covered by the evaluation.	Director, Celebrate and Commemorate Program
2.3 A measure of the geographic reach “across Canada” should accompany the CCP medium-term result for Celebrate of “Canadians across Canada have opportunities to participate in community events that are open to the public and free of charge”.	Mechanisms will be in place to measure participation (i.e. through the experimentation of an algorithm to determine geographic reach and ideal distribution according to pre-established criterion).	Experimentation approved by EXCOM in 2017. Implementation of algorithm to be implemented in Fall 2018 (in time for Celebrate intake for 2019-20).	Director, Celebrate and Commemorate Program
Full implementation date : October 31, 2018

Appendix A: evaluation framework

Available upon request: PCH.dse-esd.PCH@canada.ca

Appendix B: list of references

• Arbour, JM, Parent G. (2006). Droit international public, Éditions Yvon Blais.
• Bodnar J. (1992). Remaking America: Public Memory, Commemorations and Patriotism and the Twentieth Century, Princeton University Press.
• Charron, H. (2008). « La tuerie de polytechnique, usages du passé et discours commémoratif », dans Pâquet, M., Faute et réparations au Canada et au Québec contemporains, NOTA BENE.
• Comité permanent des anciens combattants (2011). « Commémoration au 21^e Siècle,
• Rapport du Comité permanent des anciens combattants ».
• Department of Canadian Heritage (2008/2015). “Grants & Contribution Category: Celebration and Commemoration Program Terms & Conditions”.
• EKOS Research Associates INC. (2017) “Public Opinion Survey Related to the Celebration and Commemoration Program, Final Report”.
• Evaluation Services Directorate (2017), “Evaluation of the Celebration and Commemoration Program (CCP), For the period 2011-2012 to 2015-16, Administrative Data Review, Technical Report.”
• Evaluation Services Directorate (2017). “Evaluation of the Celebration and Commemoration Program, Technical Report on Cases Studies.”
• Frédéric (2016). « En réaction à la reconnaissance du génocide par l’Allemagne la Turquie rappelle son ambassadeur à Berlin », Le Monde Fr
• Groupe de recherche sur les politiques (2017). « Évaluation du programme des célébrations et commémorations, Revue de littérature ».
• Hayday & Blake (2016). Celebrating Canada: Holidays, National Days, and the Crafting of Identities, University of Toronto.
• McKay et al. (2012). Warrior Nation: Rebranding Canada in an Age of Anxiety, Toronto.
• Mensah J. (2010). Black Canadians, Fernwood Publishing.
• PCH Corporate report. CCP - 2016 Audit report.
• Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). “Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future, Summary of the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.”
• Ward, O. (2015). “How Canada Recognized the Armenian Genocide”, The Toronto Star, April 19, 2015.

Appendix C: National Commemoration Policy

Background

Recognizing and celebrating a nation’s outstanding persons, places, and events is integral to the foundation of a land’s historical memory and for contributing to the identity, cohesion, and sense of belonging of its peoples. Most nations around the world have developed formal or informal programs for commemorating significant aspects of their history. Canada is one of more than 100 countries that are committed to the United Nations’ World Heritage Convention, which seeks to identify, protect, and conserve cultural and natural heritage places of outstanding universal value.

Commemoration does not deal solely with the past. Who and what we choose to commemorate as a country speaks volumes, not only about who we have been but who we are as a country and who we aspire to be in the future.

Mandate

At the federal level, the Department of Canadian Heritage (PCH) has the mandate to foster a strengthened sense of what it means to be a part of the Canadian community and strives to secure Canadian culture in an era of globalization. It provides Canadians with opportunities to share their stories, to learn and to understand more about one another, to involve them in nation-building, and to recognize and celebrate Canadian achievements.

By the terms of the Department of Canadian Heritage Act (C-17.3), the Minister has the powers, duties, and functions in “all matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction, not by law assigned to any other department, board, or agency of the Government of Canada, relating to Canadian identity and values, cultural development, heritage, and areas of natural or historical significance to the nation.”

On the advice of the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada, the Minister designates historic places of national significance, as well as the persons, events, and other historical phenomena that will be commemorated. The national historic sites program has been administered by Parks Canada and its predecessors since 1914. The strict criteria, however, does not lend it the kind of flexibility needed to address all of the many and diverse requests from Canadians that it receives each year.

Distinct and vital contributions to the commemoration of Canadian history and heritage are also made by a number of other federal departments, boards, and agencies. Veterans Affairs Canada is responsible for commemorating the achievements, sacrifices, and contributions of those who served overseas and on the home front in the major conflicts of the 20^th century, and present-day Canadian Forces peacekeepers. Public Works and Government Services Canada oversees commemorations on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, which have traditionally focused on the theme of Parliamentary democracy and responsible government in Canada. Other commemorations outside the boundaries of these areas, but on federal lands within the National Capital Region, are administered by the National Capital Commission. Other means of commemorations are supported by the federal government, such as the naming of geographical features by the Geographical Names Board of Canada, the issuing of commemorative postage stamps by Canada Post, coinage from the Royal Canadian Mint, and bank notes from the Bank of Canada (see below for a list of department responsible for commemoration).

Need for National Commemoration Policy

Throughout the federal government, the commemoration of significant people and events has been dealt with in an ad hoc manner. The lack of planning and infrastructure which would support and facilitate cooperation and coordination among departments has led to the perception that federal commemorative efforts are too often centered in Ottawa. It has led, in many instances to a costly reactive approach to commemoration. The National Commemoration Policy and its Interdepartmental Commemoration Committee seek to create a more coordinated, systematic and consistent approach to commemoration.

Objectives

The National Commemoration Policy is an umbrella-policy designed to support, coordinate, and bridge the areas between existing federal commemoration policies and programs without displacing existing individual department and agency mandates. The Policy’s first function is to establish a forum for the consideration and coordination of a broad range of commemoration activities across Canada. The Policy foresees the formal creation of an Interdepartmental Commemoration Committee. The second function of the Policy is to provide a method of identifying, considering, and acting where appropriate upon those requests for commemoration that cannot be addressed through existing mandates. To address those requests, a program would need to be created.

The policy will also help to foster a sense of belonging and feeling of pride in Canadians by: recognizing the country’s diverse and exceptional figures, places and accomplishments, embracing cultural and historical plurality; enhancing knowledge, appreciation and understanding of the history of Canada through a comprehensive national program of commemoration which complements other national programs; encouraging Canadians to participate in commemorative activities; and reaffirming the values we share as Canadians.

Planned outcomes

Increased opportunities for Canadians to celebrate their people, their stories, and key events, therefore, increasing participation;

Increased knowledge and understanding by Canadians of their shared history, values, and interests;

Increased sense of shared citizenship among Canadians and an increased sense of pride and belonging to Canada;

Better lateral communication at the federal level, enabling departments and agencies to share best practices, lessons learned, and information on respective commemorative activities, thereby, enhancing diversified collaboration and avoiding repetition of mistakes and redundancy;

A better coordinated approach to interdepartmental activities when federal commemorative projects fall within the scope of more than one department or agency and where there is no clearly designated departmental or agency lead;

Ability to address those requests for commemoration that do not fall under the purview of other federal organizations’ mandates.

Roles and responsibilities

The minister: The Minister of Canadian Heritage is responsible for the National Commemoration Policy. The Minister of Canadian Heritage will determine the appropriate forms of commemoration for national commemorations not covered by other federal bodies’ mandates.

The interdepartmental commemoration committee: The Interdepartmental Commemoration Committee will be comprised of delegates from federal government organizations whose mandates encompass the initiation and implementation of commemoration projects or whose mandates are essential to such projects. The committee is currently including:

• Canada Museum of Science and Technology;
• Canada Post Corporation, Canada Aviation Museum;
• Canadian Heritage;
• Canadian Heritage Rivers Systems;
• Canadian Museum of Civilization;
• Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography;
• Canadian Museum of Nature;
• Canadian War Museum;
• Foreign Affairs and International Trade;
• Geographical Names Board of Canada;
• Historic Sites and Monuments Board;
• Human Resources Development Canada;
• Industry Canada;
• Library and Archives of Canada;
• National Arts Centre;
• National Battlefields Commission;
• National Capital Commission;
• National Defence;
• National Film Board of Canada;
• National Gallery of Canada;
• Natural Resources Canada;
• Parks Canada;
• Public Works and Government Services of Canada;
• Royal Canadian Mint;
• Transport Canada;
• Veterans Affairs Canada.
• Be chaired by the Assistant Deputy Minister, Sport, Major Events and Regions at PCH;
• Provide a forum for lateral communication, enabling departmental and agencies to share information on respective commemorative activities, thereby avoiding redundancy and enhancing diversified collaboration;
• Coordinate interdepartmental activities when federal commemorative projects fall within the scope of more than one department or agency and where there is no clearly designated departmental or agency lead;
• Provide guidance in the development of a strategic federal government plan for commemoration;
• Review those cases that fall through the gaps of existing policies and mandates, prior to their delegation to PCH for action;
• Provide expertise in respective areas of responsibility during the initiation of those commemoration activities that do no fall within the purview of existing mandates;
• Report regularly to the Minister of Canadian Heritage;
• Annually review and advise upon the five-year plan.

Department of Canadian Heritage will support the Committee by:

• Providing policy, planning, managerial, and organizational services to support the effective implementation of the National Commemoration Policy;
• Maintaining primary responsibility for fall-through-the-gap commemoration projects, as designated by the Committee;
• Taking action on those requests deemed appropriate by PCH as referred by the Committee; and
• Coordinating commemoration activities in cases where the fall-through-the-gap commemoration projects, delegated to PCH, also involve different government departments or agencies.

Forms of commemoration

The form of commemorative projects selected by PCH is consultation with the Committee will be decided on a case by case basis and may vary from the construction of physical monuments, to celebrations or special events, to the production of learning materials.

Commemoration of former Prime Ministers

Policies related to the commemoration of former Prime Ministers currently exists within the mandates of other federal organizations. The Committee will therefore act as a coordinating body at the time of the passing of a Prime Minister or former Prime Minister to ensure that an appropriate commemoration is undertaken.

Anniversaries

Anniversaries of national significance (in milestone years, i.e. 10, 25, and subsequent 25 year intervals) such as those found in Anniversaries of Significance 2008-2012 (or other subsequent Five-Year Commemoration Plan^{Footnote 54}) will be taken into consideration by the Committee and PCH in the development of a progressive strategic federal government plan for commemoration.

Learning Materials

Learning materials surrounding commemorations and anniversaries of national importance will be developed.

Consultation

The Committee and PCH will consult with provincial, municipal, and other authorities prior to the development of projects which may involve the jurisdiction of these authorities. Jurisdiction may involve theme, content, method, or geography, e.g. the development of a learning package or province wide scholarship, the commemoration of a provincial figure, the placement of a monument on municipally owned land.