Evaluation of the Harbourfront Centre Funding Program 2018-19 to 2022-23

Evaluation Services Directorate
October 16, 2023

On this page

• Executive Summary
• 1. Introduction
• 2. Program profile
  • 2.1. Program history
  • 2.2. Program activities, objectives and expected outcomes
  • 2.3. Program resources
• 3. Evaluation approach and methodology
  • 3.1. Scope, timeline, quality control and calibration
  • 3.2. Evaluation questions
  • 3.3. Data collection methods
  • 3.4. Evaluation limitations and mitigation strategies
• 4. Findings
  • 4.1. Relevance
  • 4.2. Effectiveness
  • 4.3. Efficiency
• 5. Conclusions
• 6. Recommendations, management response and action plan
• Annex A: Evaluation matrix
• Annex B: Bibliography

List of tables

• Table 1: HCFP total planned spending ($) per fiscal year, from 2018-19 to 2022-23
• Table 2: HCFP total actual spending ($) per fiscal year, from 2018-19 to 2022-23
• Table 3: program staffing resources (full-time equivalents), from 2018-19 to 2022-23
• Table 4: evaluation questions
• Table 5: summary of methodologies
• Table 6: evaluation limitations and mitigation strategies
• Table 7: recommendation 1 – Action plan
• Table 8: recommendation 2 – Action plan
• Table 9: recommendation 3 – Action plan

List of figures

• Figure 1: HCFP objectives and strategic areas
• Figure 2: HCFP logic model
• Figure 3: HC revenue sources 5-year trend
• Figure 4: HC CRE events and programs, from 2017-18 to 2021-22
• Figure 5: HC visitors & attendees 5-year trend (millions)
• Figure 6: sources of HC economic contributions

Alternate format

Evaluation of the Harbourfront Centre Funding Program 2018-19 to 2022-23 [PDF version - 539 KB]

List of acronyms and abbreviations

2SLGBTQI+

Two-Spirit, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, Plus

CAPF

Canada Arts Presentation Fund

CRE

Cultural, Recreational, and Educational

DEI

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

IDEA

Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, and Accessibility

FAA

Financial Administration Act

FCBTP

Fathers of Confederation Buildings Trust Program

FTE

Full-Time Equivalents

GBA Plus

Gender-Based Analysis Plus

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

HC

Harbourfront Centre

HCFP

Harbourfront Centre Funding Program

HVAC

Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning

PCH

Department of Canadian Heritage

TBS

Treasury Board Secretariat

Executive Summary

The Harbourfront Centre Funding Program (HCFP) is a single recipient program initiated by Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) in 2006 and delivered by the Department of Canadian Heritage (PCH) since 2016. The primary objective of the HCFP is to provide the Harbourfront Centre (HC) with operational funding support to contribute to its fixed operating costs, its ability to leverage funding from other government sources and pursue other revenue-generating strategies. The program also aims to help with capacity to provide the general public with continued access to cultural, educational and recreational programs and activities on the Toronto waterfront.

The evaluation covered the period 2018-19 to 2022-23 and examined the issues of relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency. Data collection and analysis drew upon a document and literature review, administrative and performance data review, and key informant interviews.

Key Findings

Relevance

The HCFP is addressing a continued and justifiable need. The HCFP funding is critical for HC’s continued operations. HC also has a continued need for capital funding support to enhance and maintain its campus and facilities. With the funding received through the HCFP, HC operations remained stable to ensure the organization could continue to provide diverse programming to the public, including during the pandemic when it pivoted its offerings to online formats. However, HC's financial needs, including those to support capital costs, exceed resources available through the HCFP. HCFP is aligned with federal government and departmental priorities, roles, and responsibilities, including those related to the promotion of arts and culture, climate change action, as well as equity, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility.

Effectiveness

The HCFP contributes to the stability of HC’s administration and operations in a variety of ways. The HCFP provides operational support to enable HC to provide cultural, recreational, and educational programs and events with significant engagement from the community. Through supporting HC to deliver a number of activities and create economic impact, the HCFP contributes to longer-term expected results of Torontonians and visitors valuing HC’s social, cultural, and economic impacts.

While the HCFP contribution to its operations is clear, HC does not yet have a sustainable operating foundation. It also does not have adequate revenues to support much needed capital improvements which will in turn help to attract revenues including sponsorships and other sources of funding. This financial uncertainty is a major barrier to maximizing expected results.

Efficiency

The HCFP has no dedicated funding for PCH internal operations or staff. It is delivered with existing resources through PCH’s Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch. While this may appear as being efficient, this lack of dedicated internal operations funding may cause strain on PCH resources and limits to some extent the support and attention to the HCFP.

However, efficient program delivery of the HCFP is supported through clear contribution agreements and reporting requirements, strong relationships, and understanding needs between both parties. Potential suggestions were identified to improve program delivery, including having dedicated resources to support PCH operations and administering the HCFP through the PCH Ontario regional office. However, there may be resource capacity constraints associated with these potential changes that would have to be considered.

Recommendations

The evaluation recommends that the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs:

Recommendation 1

Directs HC to develop a plan to diversify its sources of revenue, including the setting of targets, that supports its long-term financial sustainability. HCFP should support the HC by facilitating discussions with current and potential public funding partners.

Recommendation 2

Reviews the current program administration model to determine whether there are alternative program administration models that would improve overall efficiency of the HCFP.

Recommendation 3

Reviews the HCFP’s performance measurement framework to improve its overall relevance and better track the achievement of intended outcomes.

1. Introduction

This report presents the findings, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the Evaluation of the Harbourfront Centre Funding Program (HCFP). The evaluation was conducted to address evaluation requirements outlined in the Treasury Board (TB) Policy on Results (2016) and the Financial Administration Act (FAA).

The evaluation was conducted as prescribed in the Department of Canadian Heritage (PCH)’s Departmental Evaluation Plan 2022-23 to 2026-27. It covered the five-year period from 2018-19 to 2022-23 and examined the relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency of the program.

2. Program profile

2.1. Program history

Harbourfront Centre

In 1972, the Government of Canada acquired 100 acres of land on Toronto’s central waterfront for future regeneration, and in 1976 established Harbourfront Corporation, a Crown Corporation to develop the lands for mixed use and to revitalize the area. By 1991, the federal government implemented recommendations from the Ontario Treasurer to create a new Harbourfront Corporation, operating as the Harbourfront Centre (HC), to replace the previous Crown Corporation. The new Harbourfront Corporation became a provincially incorporated not-for-profit organization mandated to continue the delivery of cultural, recreational, and educational programming on the waterfront site. In 1997, a 99-year lease was signed with the City of Toronto and the HC is now in its 36th year of the agreement.

At present day, HC continues to be a not-for-profit cultural organization which provides internationally renowned programming in the areas of arts, culture, education, and recreation, all within a collection of distinctive venues in the heart of Toronto’s downtown waterfront. HC is responsible for operating 10 acres of Toronto waterfront lands on behalf of its owners, the City of Toronto, and is also responsible for managing and programming the public facilities on the site. HC’s facilities include 4 theatres, an outdoor amphitheatre, the Power Plant Art Gallery, Harbourfront Craft Studios, Bill Boyle Artport, several additional exhibition areas, as well as marinas, piers, restaurants, and many indoor/outdoor spaces for cultural programming.

HC’s vision is to be recognized as Canada’s leading international centre for contemporary arts, culture, and ideas, and inspire audiences and visitors with a breadth of bold, ambitious, and engaging experiences. HC’s mission is to:

• Present, commission and incubate the work of contemporary artists in all disciplines.
• Deliver accessible, inspiring, and relevant artistic, cultural, educational, and recreational experiences.
• Foster learning and innovation through interdisciplinary and international artistic exchange.
• Steward the transformation of their campus and strengthen Toronto’s identity as an international waterfront city.

Guided by its vision and mission, HC’s strategy comprises 6 overarching objectives:

• Achieve programming excellence in the field of contemporary arts and culture.
• Invest in learning for artists, youth, and audiences across its campus.
• Build Indigenous capacity in the cultural sector.
• Lead creative place making and city building and invest in its physical site and facilities.
• Build HC’s recognition and reputation.
• Achieve financial and organizational strength.

Harbourfront Centre Funding Program

The HCFP is a single recipient program initiated by TBS in 2006 and delivered by PCH since 2016. The Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch in the Cultural Affairs Sector of PCH is responsible for the HCFP and its program design, management and budget, monitoring and reporting of results. While the HCFP supports operational, administrative, and capital costs of HC, programming costs are not eligible. Instead, programming costs are supported under a range of other federal funding programs.

2.2. Program activities, objectives and expected outcomes

The HCFP provides financial assistance through transfer payments to support the HC. The HCFP’s objectives and strategic areas of focus are presented in Figure 1.

HCFP primary objective	Provide operational funding support to HC.
HCFP supporting objectives	Assisting in covering fixed operating costs. Facilitating HC’s ability to leverage funding from other government sources and pursue other revenue-generating strategies. Allowing the organization to provide the general public with continued access to cultural, educational and recreational programs and activities on the Toronto waterfront.
HCFP strategic areas	Salaries and benefits of individuals employed by HC. Site operating costs, which are the annual operational costs of the prime HC cultural and sports facilities and site. Sponsorship and marketing, which are the costs of raising and servicing corporate sponsorships and the marketing of the Centre and site to the public. Administrative costs of maintaining the efficient day-to-day operation of the organization. Capital assets, which are the costs associated with major HC capital assets (e.g., the theatres).

Source: HCFP Program Documents

Figure 2 presents the HCFP logic model. By supporting HC administration and operational costs, the HCFP contributes to the organization and delivery of programs and events, as well as to community engagement. At the long-term level, it is meant to support Torontonians and visitors valuing HC’s social, cultural and economic contributions.

Short-Term outcomes	Contribute to establishing a stable foundation for HC’s administration and operations.
Medium-Term outcomes	Cultural, recreational and educational programs and events are organized and delivered at HC. The community engages with HC activities.
Long-Term outcomes	Torontonians and visitors value HC’s social, cultural and economic contribution.

Source: HCFP Program Documents

2.3. Program resources

The total planned and actual spending for the program from 2018-19 to 2022-23 is shown in the following tables (Tables 1 and 2). The variances in Vote 5 budgeted versus actual spending were due to amendments to the HCFP contribution agreement which provided HC with additional funding. All Vote 1 resources used to administer the HCFP are reallocated from other departmental programs administered by PCH’s Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch. There are no dedicated Vote 1 resources for this program.

In 2019-20, the HCFP provided an additional $7,500,000 to address improvements to HC’s infrastructure and operations. In 2020-21, HCFP provided HC with $1,250,000 to address impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. Budget 2021 provided an additional $20,000,000 supplement through the HCFP over a 2-year period for urgent capital work; this included $12,000,000 in 2021-22 and $8,000,000 in 2022-23.^{Footnote 1}

Fiscal year	Vote 1: Salary & EBPTable 1 note i & O&MTable 1 note ii	Vote 5: G&CsTable 1 note iii	Total
2018-19	60,968	5,000,000	5,060,968
2019-20	75,145	5,000,000	5,075,145
2020-21	85,824	5,000,000	5,085,824
2021-22	56,831	6,500,000	6,556,831
2022-23	317,185Table 1 note iv	11,500,000	11,817,185
Total	595,953	33,000,000	33,595,953

Source: Financial Planning and Resource Management, PCH

Table 1 notes

Table 1 note i

Employee Benefit Plan

Return to table 1 note i referrer

Table 1 note ii

Operation and Maintenance

Return to table 1 note ii referrer

Table 1 note iii

Grants and Contributions

Return to table 1 note iii referrer

Table 1 note iv

Increase in 2022-2023 due to change in budget allocation methodology.

Return to table 1 note iv referrer

Fiscal year	Vote 1: salary & EBPTable 2 note i & O&MTable 2 note ii	Vote 5: G&CsTable 2 note iii	Total
2018-19	27,069	5,000,000	5,027,069
2019-20	45,211	12,500,000	12,545,211
2020-21	50,819	6,250,000	6,300,819
2021-22	50,304	18,500,000	18,550,304
2022-23	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.Table 2 note iv
Total	173,403	42,250,000	42,423,403

Source: Financial Planning and Resource Management, PCH

Table 2 notes

Table 2 note i

Employee Benefit Plan

Return to table 2 note i referrer

Table 2 note ii

Operation and Maintenance

Return to table 2 note ii referrer

Table 2 note iii

Grants and Contributions

Return to table 2 note iii referrer

Table 2 note iv

Total actual spending was not available during the evaluation.

Return to table 2 note iv referrer

Table 3 below presents the number of staff in full-time equivalents (FTE) planned and actually allocated to the program over the evaluation period.

Fiscal year	Planned FTEs	Actual FTEs
2018-19	2.2	2.0
2019-20	1.3	1.5
2020-21	0.5	1.1
2021-22	0.4	0.4
2022-23	1.0	1.0

Source: HCFP Program Financial Data

3. Evaluation approach and methodology

3.1. Scope, timeline, quality control and calibration

The evaluation covered the five-year period of 2018-19 to 2022-23 and considered:

• funding prior to 2018-19 (to analyze long-term results);
• Gender-based Analysis Plus (GBA Plus); and
• both the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the program and how it responded to changing needs.

Based on senior management needs, this evaluation focused on the sustainability of PCH funding, HC’s capacity to leverage other sources of funds, and the relevance of funding vis-à-vis the current local cultural landscape in Toronto.

3.2. Evaluation questions

Table 4 outlines the evaluation questions by core issue. Please refer to Annex A for the full evaluation matrix.

3.3. Data collection methods

A combination of qualitative and quantitative data collection methods was used to address the evaluation issues and questions. These included the following:

3.4. Evaluation limitations and mitigation strategies

Table 6 presented below provides an overview of limitations and associated mitigation strategies for this evaluation.

4. Findings

4.1. Relevance

4.1.1. Ongoing need for the program

Evaluation question: To what extent is the HCFP addressing a continued and justifiable need?

Key findings:

• The HCFP funding is critical for HC’s continued operations. With the funding received through the HCFP, HC operations remained stable to ensure the organization could continue to provide diverse programming to the public, including during the pandemic when it pivoted its offerings to online formats.
• While HCFP has responded with time-limited capital funding to address urgent needs over the evaluation period, HC also has a continued need for capital funding support to enhance and maintain its campus and facilities.

HCFP funding is critical to the operations of the Harbourfront Centre

Over the five-year period covered by this evaluation, HCFP has provided almost $57 million in funding (approximately $29.3 million in operational funding and $27.5 million in capital funding) to HC and it will provide up to $6.5 million in additional annual funding up to 2025-26.^{Footnote 2} The annual contribution through the HCFP has been fundamental to HC’s ability to cover the following operational costs:

• Salaries and benefits;
• Site operating costs;
• Marketing and sponsorship;
• Administrative costs of maintaining daily operations of the organization; and
• Capital infrastructure.

Harbourfront Centre’s activities vary substantially and include curated cultural programs, marina operations, sailing, commercial parking operations, and leases to commercial space tenants.

Securing sources of capital investments is an outstanding need. HC operates a campus with aging facilities which increasingly require repairs, maintenance, and enhancements to maintain attractiveness to the public and drive revenue streams. HC estimates that the investment needed to update and maintain its facilities is approximately $106 million over the course of the next 20 years. HC has and continues to undertake capital improvements and efforts to ensure safety^{Footnote 3} and to revitalize its facilities to improve the organization’s ability to attract private donations as well as increase programming and rental opportunities.

HC has a diverse range of funding sources though there are pressures and shifts over time (Figure 3). The HCFP provided approximately 15% to 20% of total revenue sources over the period of the evaluation. In recent years, there has been a decline in non-government revenue streams, which include ticket sales, parking fees, corporate sponsorships, and individual donations. As well, the provincial government only provides programming grants to HC which do not cover any operating expenses.

Figure 3: HC revenue sources 5-year trend – text version

Revenue	2017-18	2018-19	2019-20	2020-21	2021-22
Parking, concessions and other income (%)	23	22	20	12	17
Facility rentals (%)	6	7	7	1	2
HCFP operational funding (%)	16	15	21	22	21
Event admissions and registrations (%)	12	13	12	1	2
Corporate sponsorships and donations (%)	7	8	7	4	8
Other revenue (%)	36	36	34	59	49
Total ($)	31,446,740	34,276,703	37,413,010	28,132,726	30,471,035

Source: HC Financial data

This trend in declining revenues is not unique to HC. Other comparable-sized arts and culture organizations, such as the Confederation Centre of the Arts, National Ballet of Canada, the Royal Ontario Museum, and the Canadian Opera Company has also faced similar declines.^{Footnote 5} In general, the decline in recent years is due to changes in government priorities and economic downturns. The COVID-19 Pandemic certainly also had a negative impact in 2020 and 2021.

However, unlike other arts and culture organizations such as the Confederation Centre of the Arts or The Forks in Winnipeg, HC does not have an additional revenue source in the form of an endowment fund. An endowment fund provides organizations additional financial stability especially when other sources of revenue fluctuate. In the case of HC, the Harbourfront Foundation was originally established in 1991 to manage a potential endowment. While this endowment was to be obtained through the disposition of specific federal properties to be held by the Harbourfront Foundation, this did not materialize. Rather than acting as an endowment fund, the Harbourfront Foundation plays a limited fundraising role for HC and acts as a conduit for revenues received through rental incomes and the operation of a parking lot.

HCFP responded to changing needs in certain ways

HCFP funding provides HC with the operational capacity to respond to some of the changing needs of the public. This included delivering diverse programming and events to engage with Toronto’s multicultural communities, as well as providing accessible programming by removing both physical and financial barriers for as much of HC’s events and programming as possible. About 70% of HC activities are free.^{Footnote 6}

With nearly 90% of Toronto residents believing that the arts make Toronto a better place to live, the arts sector remains very relevant to the local population.^{Footnote 7} However, the arts and culture sector is increasingly competitive and HC must find ways to remain relevant in an area where other arts, cultural projects and offerings have also received government funding in recent years.^{Footnote 8} With increased competition within Toronto’s arts and culture sector, some stakeholders interviewed noted that HC has struggled to remain competitive, particularly due to inadequate maintenance of their campus.

HC has acknowledged this need to reestablish itself in Toronto’s arts and culture landscape and used funding provided by the HCFP to undertake capital improvements and repairs to update its performance spaces during the evaluation period. HC has also engaged external consultants for the undertaking of an institutional rebrand and revisioning of the organization, which will reevaluate the Centre’s mission, offerings, and values to support a renewed visual identity.^{Footnote 9} These efforts are expected to strengthen HC’s position in the cultural landscape as a hub for creative connection for artists and audiences, and visitors. The launch of this rebrand is expected in 2023, aligned with the Centre’s 50th anniversary.

It is expected that renewed facilities and rebranding efforts will help HC’s campus to remain relevant and help increase visitor attraction as well as corporate sponsorships for HC. However, these initiatives are not yet substantially complete, and it is unknown to what extent benefits will be realized.

HCFP helped the HC respond to the COVID-19 Pandemic

HC was negatively impacted by the pandemic in 2020-21 and 2021-22. Public health regulations meant that the HC was not able to deliver the regular quantity of its programming during these 2 years. The HCFP identified the impacts on the organization and provided HC with $1.25 million in 2020-21^{Footnote 10} through the COVID-19 Emergency Support Fund. This included additional support from various other funding programs such as the Canada Arts Training Fund and the Canada Arts Presentation Fund. Emergency support allowed HC to continue operating and maintaining its campus. Though much of HC’s programming was cancelled or postponed, HCFP funding allowed it to respond to the evolving operating realities during the pandemic by pivoting to provide online programming.

4.1.2. Alignment with federal priorities and PCH’s roles and responsibilities

Evaluation question: To what extent is the HCFP aligned with federal government and departmental priorities, roles, and responsibilities?

Key findings:

• HCFP is aligned with federal government and departmental priorities, roles, and responsibilities, including those related to the promotion of arts and culture, climate change action, as well as inclusion, diversity, equity, and accessibility (IDEA).
• While good alignment exists with the PCH mandate, other HCFP delivery options may exist.

HCFP is aligned with PCH and federal government priorities, notably those related to arts and culture

The HC is seen as a “key cultural centre that contributes to the vitality of Toronto’s waterfront” and is a key landmark for domestic and international visitors.^{Footnote 11} PCH has responsibility over matters “relating to Canadian identity and values, cultural development and heritage,” which includes multiculturalism, the arts and cultural heritage along with industries such as performing arts, publishing, and film. The HCFP’s funding support for HC’s artistic and cultural endeavors fit well with PCH’s mandate.

HCFP also supports other government priorities, including IDEA and sustainable development

There is some alignment between the HCFP and federal government priorities related to IDEA. HC has demonstrated a commitment to IDEA values through the creation of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and Accessibility Committees, as well as the creation of a Workplace Discrimination, Harassment and Violence Prevention Online Training program, which is an annual training requirement for all HC employees. HC has demonstrated commitments to accessibility of its campus, events, and programming through the inclusion of accessible doors, entranceways, ramps, kiosks and counters, and venue seating as part of planned capital asset improvements. Financial barriers to events and programming have also been reduced, with 70% of offerings being free to the public. HC’s efforts to strengthen its commitment to IDEA values are reported to PCH through a variety of HCFP reporting mechanisms.

HC’s Zero Carbon Energy Performance Plan, which is considered as part of the organization’s capital investments, demonstrates alignment with government priorities on climate change action. This plan is supported by capital funding received through the HCFP, which has directly resulted in a portion of capital renovations that include sustainable, renewable energy retrofits through the installation of solar panels and improved heating, ventilation, and air conditioning across the HC campus.

While good alignment exists with the PCH mandate, other HCFP delivery options may exist

PCH remains a suitable federal department for delivering the HCFP, primarily due to its focus on community, culture, and the arts. It is also largely a department that provides funding through Gs&Cs to community and other organizations.

However, it is worth considering the extent to which other entities could support HC in building a stable financial foundation for the organization. Given its objective of generating an important economic impact, there may be an opportunity for HC to seek additional financial support from economic development focused organizations.

4.2. Effectiveness

4.2.1. Achievement of the program’s expected outcomes

Evaluation question: To what extent has the HCFP achieved its expected outcomes?

Key findings:

• The HCFP contributes to the stability of HC’s administration and operations in a variety of ways. The HCFP provides operational support to enable HC to deliver cultural, recreational and educational programs and events which receive significant engagement from the community.
• Through supporting HC to deliver a number of activities and create economic impact, HCFP contributes to longer-term expected results of Torontonians and visitors valuing HC’s social, cultural and economic offerings.
• While the HCFP contribution to its operations is clear, the HC does not yet have a sustainable operating foundation. It also does not have adequate revenues to support much needed capital improvements which will in turn help to attract revenues including sponsorships and other sources of funding. This financial uncertainty is a major barrier to maximizing expected results.
• In general, the HCFP’s objectives, logic model, and associated performance measures are useful and appropriate for accountability and decision-making. GBA Plus considerations are included in the program’s objectives, design, and performance measures.

HCFP contributes to operational costs for HC

HCFP operational funding provides HC with the organizational capacity and foundation required to deliver arts and culture events and programming. Over the evaluation period, the funding allowed HC to begin addressing its deficit, improve internal systems, bring in new levels of expertise within the organization and retain existing staff, cover site operating costs of HC buildings and structures as well as other administrative costs incurred in maintaining the day-to-day operations.

HC does not have a sustainable financial foundation and relies on federal and municipal funding

HC’s operations are heavily reliant on the funding HC receives from the federal and municipal governments. While the HCFP funding has represented an important portion of the Centre’s operating budget, HC does not currently have a sustainable financial foundation for administration and operations. Even with amendments to the HCFP funding agreement to increase funding from $5 million to $6.5 million in operational support funding annually, HC reported a deficit of $2.5M for 2021-22.

In addition to being reliant on HCFP to support its operations, HC is also reliant on capital funding exceptionally provided through the HCFP to maintain and enhance its campus facilities. Evaluation interviewees noted that HC’s capital enhancements were expected to lead to increased operating revenues as well as improved ability to attract corporate sponsorship. However, additional sources of revenue will be required for HC to achieve a sustainable financial foundation as it would allow the Centre to proactively address facility maintenance and enhancement needs, thereby prolonging the value and useful life of current capital assets.

As mentioned previously, endowment funding was initially planned upon the creation of HC in 1990 but did not materialize. Endowments are used by similar organizations for providing long-term support, as they offer a perpetual source of income that can reduce an organization’s reliance on annual fundraising and government grants.

The HCFP enables HC’s delivery of cultural, recreational, and educational programs

The HCFP has been instrumental in providing stable operational support to enable HC to organize and deliver diverse cultural, recreational, and educational (CRE) programs and events that have received significant engagement from the community. HC’s events and programming include a variety of artistic forms such as music, contemporary theatre, dance, circus, crafts, visual arts, literature, Indigenous-focused arts, relaxed performances, and the ongoing celebration of diverse cultures. Highlights of such events and programming coordinated and delivered by HC include:

• Nordic Bridges (2022) – a year‐long cultural initiative, supported by the Nordic Council of Ministers and curated and produced by HC, which fosters cultural exchanges between the Nordic Region and Canada in the areas of theatre, dance, film, visual art and design. As part of the delivery of this program, HC collaborates with 20 cultural partners in 10 cities across Canada.
• Speak Surge Amplify (2021) – a digital performance series focused on the intersectionality of Canadian Indigenous culture and 2SLGBTQ+ as part of National Indigenous History Month and Pride.
• BRAVE Festival (2019): Secret Lives, Second Chances – an arts festival featuring artists who have created new artistic paths or explored hidden talents in the second phase of their careers. Most notably, the 2019 BRAVE Festival featured the Museum of Broken Relationships, which broke all previous attendance records for the Artport Gallery with 30,310 visitors.

In non-pandemic years, HC delivered an average of over 4,000 events and nearly 500 programs annually (Figure 4). In addition to campus attendees and visitors, HC delivered programming for the City of Toronto youth through camps and school visits, which engaged roughly 30,000 children and students annually.

Figure 4: HC CRE events and programs, from 2017-18 to 2021-22 – text version

Fiscal year	Number of CRE events	Number of CRE programs
2017-18	4,566	488
2018-19	4,593	491
2019-20	4,203	201
2020-21	1,291	137
2021-22	1,561	65

Source: HCFP program documents

While the number of CRE programs appears to drop sharply in 2019-20, this was unrelated to the pandemic. Harbourfront Centre’s senior management team undertook a review of measurements methodology for reporting events and programs. Changes to this methodology impacted the total number of CRE programs reported during 2019-20.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of events and programming decreased, with only 1,291 events and 137 programs in 2020-21. Despite the challenges of the pandemic, HC was able to use the HCFP’s operational support funding to transfer some of its arts and culture content to online digital formats. In 2020-21, online programming attracted 285,935 attendees, which represented roughly 17% of HC’s attendees for the year. This shift to online digital formats allowed HC to continue its delivery of CRE programming, while pandemic public health restrictions were imposed.

The annual number of attendees^{Footnote 12} and visitors^{Footnote 13} of HC decreased during the pandemic years. In non-pandemic years, HC welcomes 3.6 million attendees who actively participate in programming, and 5 million visitors access the HC campus annually. However, during pandemic years, these figures fell to roughly 3 million visitors and 2.3 million attendees annually (Figure 5).

Figure 5: HC visitors & attendees 5-year trend (millions) – text version

Fiscal year	Number of visitors	Number of attendees
2017-18	5	3.6
2018-19	5.1	3.6
2019-20	5	1.5
2020-21	3	1.7
2021-22	2.8	2.3

Source: HCFP program documents

While the program’s visitor and attendee data may seem to suggest a decrease in attendees in the year 2019-20, these figures were impacted by changes in data collection. In July 2019, HC partnered with Beanfield Metroconnect to install campus-wide Wi-Fi access points to enable tracking of visitors across the campus. During the installation period, HC senior management reviewed available information to establish a new baseline for both visitors and attendees: “HC welcomes 5 million people to our site each year, 1.5 million of these visitors engaging in arts, culture, education and recreational activities.” These figures were used to substitute the missing values for the year 2019-20 as reported as part of the HCFP Annual Final Report for that year.

Additionally, the number of visitors quoted for each year may not accurately represent unique individuals. The system used to track this metric may double count individuals if they visit the campus on multiple occasions, or if they have multiple devices within range of campus-wide Wi-Fi access points during their visit. Attendee metrics also overlap with visitor metrics, as each attendee is also counted as a visitor. Nonetheless, these figures provide some indication as to the extent to which HC programming and events are engaged with and embraced by the community.

HC’s financial statements show a decrease in expenses for events and facilities during pandemic years. With the impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic subsiding, the most recent financial statements for 2021-22 show an increase in expenses for events and facilities, as well as an increase in revenues for parking, concessions, and other event-related income. This indicates that HC is trending towards pre-pandemic levels of CRE programming and events as well as community engagement.

The HCFP contributes to HC holding value among Torontonians and visitors

HC engaged an external consultant to conduct research to better understand the Centre’s audiences and their perceptions of the Centre. Through this research, it was found that Torontonians and visitors have a strong emotional connection to both the Harbourfront area as well as HC itself. This research demonstrated not only a familiarity toward HC, but also a love and pride for the Centre.

HCFP funding, combined with other sources of funding and the support of hundreds of volunteers annually, contributes to HC’s capacity to provide a number of activities and program offerings. These activities include the rehabilitation of Toronto’s waterfront, providing a waterfront space which can be enjoyed by the public, and providing free arts and culture programming. HC works with hundreds of cultural and community organizations to offer events and festivals reflecting Canada’s diverse society and supports a diverse range of artists and communities. HC hires over 1,000 professional artists on an annual basis, resulting in spending of over $1 million on artist fees annually.

As a result of the multidisciplinary nature of these operations and offerings, interviewees noted that the full value of these activities and program offerings may not be fully appreciated. Due to operations being spread over a wide range of impacts and not focused in any single given area, HC’s identity may not be well understood by Torontonians and visitors.

The HCFP contributes to HC’s economic benefits

HC’s operations and visitor spending generate an important economic impact at the local, regional, and provincial levels. Figure 6 presents a visual overview of HC’s economic contributions.

Figure 6: sources of HC economic contributions – text version

The figure is an Image of a logic model indicating the economic impact of visitor spending to access the Habourfront Centre.

• Visitor spending in Toronto directly impacts
  • Harbourfront Centre
  • Wages
  • Key Contractors
• The purchases from suppliers involved indirectly impacts:
  • Subcontractors
  • Distribution
  • Suppliers
• The supplier employee wages spent on private consumption have induced impacts on:
  • Retail
  • Housing
  • Restaurants
• Visitor spending to access Visitor spending also generates employee spending from tourism-related activities which also have induced impacts on:
  • Retail
  • Housing
  • Restaurants

Source: HCFP program documents

In 2019-20, an Economic Impact Study of HC demonstrated considerable direct and indirect economic benefits associated with HC’s operations in terms of gross spending, gross domestic product (GDP), wages, and FTEs. In particular, the study found that at the regional level, HC’s operational spending contributes $43.2 million in gross spending, $21.6 million in GDP, $21.8 million in wages, and sustains 384 FTEs annually in the Toronto census metropolitan area. In addition, HC’s visitor spending contributes $202.8 million in gross spending, $139.6 million in GDP, $104.3 million in wages, and sustains 3,101 FTEs annually at the regional level.

Performance measurement supports accountability and decision-making in many ways

HCFP’s objectives and performance measures are focused on the support of HC’s operations, particularly those relating to HC’s social, cultural cohesion, and diversity priorities.

The current performance measurement framework may not fully incentivize and support HC in the achievement of greater financial sustainability. One of the primary objectives of the HCFP is to provide operational funding support to HC that it can use to leverage funding from other government sources and to pursue other revenue-generating strategies. However, multiple sources of evidence suggest that HC has continued to experience challenges in securing other sources of funding outside of PCH. Additionally, HC’s operational deficit presents a risk that may impact the program in the achievement of the short-term outcome on HC’s financial sustainability.

HC faces high needs to repair, maintain, and upgrade its current campus and facilities to ensure ongoing relevance, continue to attract visitors and attendees for programming and events, and build its capacity to generate revenue from other sources. While capital funding has been provided through the HCFP to address these capital deficiencies, the full impacts of this capital investment are yet to be seen.

HC has incorporated GBA Plus considerations

HC’s Board of Directors works closely with the senior management team at HC to deliver programming and events that reflect Toronto’s diverse community and its visitors. HC’s commitments to GBA Plus are evident through the emphasis of IDEA values in HC’s governance structures, outreach and communications, and strategic and planning documents.

To enhance its commitment to GBA Plus and IDEA over the evaluation period, HC staff began engaging an external consultant to assist in conversations, competency-building workshops, committee creation, and policy review and development. In addition, HC continued to invest in and present the work of female artists, Indigenous artists, Black artists, artists of colour, and deaf and artists with disabilities throughout its multidisciplinary programming. HC also delivers country-specific festivals such as Nordic Bridges, which fosters cultural exchanges between the Nordic Region and Canada in the areas of theatre, dance, film, visual art and design.

As a result of these actions, HCFP funding supports a broad range of communities through HC and the HCFP maintains and enhances HC’s commitments to diversity. In response to a recommendation of the previous evaluation of the HCFP related to developing GBA Plus indicators and improving data, HC implemented a survey in 2022 to collect an inventory of available GBA Plus related data to inform HCFP reporting requirements. While the results were not available, HC had also taken steps to prepare its first set of GBA Plus inventory data during the evaluation period.

Interviewees identified further actions for HC to strengthen its commitments to GBA Plus values. This includes increased diversity in the composition of HC’s staff and board of directors to embed values of diversity and inclusion at HC’s core. They also noted opportunities for the HC to improve outreach to diverse communities through development of a comprehensive local engagement strategy.

4.3. Efficiency

4.3.1. Program delivery

Evaluation question: To what extent is the HCFP delivered efficiently?

Key findings:

• HCFP has a very low administrative cost ratio because the program has no dedicated funding for PCH internal operations or staff. It is delivered with existing resources through PCH’s Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch. While this may appear as being efficient, this lack of dedicated internal operations funding causes strain on PCH resources given the extent and frequent intensity of managing the funding relationship with HC.
• Efficient program delivery is supported through clear contribution agreements and reporting requirements, strong relationships, understanding needs and between both parties.
• Potential suggestions were identified to improve program delivery, including having dedicated resources to support PCH operations, administering the HCFP through the PCH Ontario regional office.

Lack of funds to administer the HCCP has strained program delivery

The HCFP has no dedicated funding for PCH internal operations or staff to support its delivery. PCH’s Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch has had to reallocate resources to administer the HCFP. For example, this reallocation represented 0.4 FTEs and $50,304 of Vote 1 funding for the year 2021-22.^{Footnote 14} While this makes the program appear efficient from a resource perspective, a risk has been identified that the Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch does not have sufficient resources to manage the HCFP and provide in-depth monitoring of HC. Multiple interviewees noted that having a dedicated resource for HCFP would help to improve program delivery, especially as the HCFP takes up a significant portion of a non-dedicated PCH staff’s time.

As well, the evolving complexity with the HC is significant and has a disproportionate level of engagement with the HCFP that exceeds the level of communication required with other comparable-sized funding recipients. Engagement in recent years includes ongoing, frequent communication and meetings with Branch staff at the Director General, Director and program staff levels as well as regular briefings at the senior management level.

There are risks to PCH's ability to manage and provide effective oversight of the HCFP. With no dedicated funding for PCH internal operations or staff, PCH has only one staff member assigned to manage the file and there are specific skills and knowledge required of the position given the complex nature of the HCFP. Additionally, in 2022, turnover in this key position represented a significant loss in corporate history and knowledge for the program. Although workarounds have been put in place to mitigate these risks, such as the identification and use of a support resource and ongoing efforts on succession planning, there remains a risk presented to PCH’s ability to sustain the HCFP. These factors indicate a need for dedicated resources to the program who can devote greater attention to program administration, monitoring, and oversight.

Efficiency is supported by clear agreements and strong relationships

Efficiency of program delivery is supported through clear contribution agreements and reporting requirements, strong relationships, and good understanding of needs between both parties. The HCFP has clear terms, conditions and requirements as outlined in its contribution agreement with HC. In addition, there are strong relationships and communication channels between HC and PCH, particularly in comparison to previous years where this had been identified as a weakness of the program. The strength of this relationship is largely due to PCH staff having a strong understanding of the needs of HC as well as the importance of the program to HC’s continued operations. This can be partially attributed to the business cases prepared in 2014 and 2017 which provided PCH with a clear understanding of HC’s operating context.

There are potential areas for efficiency improvements

Better monitoring, enhanced operational resources, and consideration of alternative delivery mechanisms were identified as opportunities for better program efficiency. Interviewees noted that the HCFP could be improved through increased monitoring of HC’s adherence to program expectations and requirements. This would include increased due diligence to ensure appropriate use of funds and ensure a consistent understanding of reporting information provided by HC. However, it was noted by interviewees that dedicated operational resources for the HCFP would be required for increased monitoring of the program.

The delivery model of HCFP was also identified as presenting certain challenges to efficiency. Some interviewees stated that the HCFP may benefit from being delivered through the PCH Ontario regional office as opposed to the national office. HC accesses funding from other programs which are delivered through the PCH Ontario regional office. As such, delivering the HCFP through the Ontario regional office could allow for a more coordinated effort between PCH’s funding programs to address HC’s funding needs. It also could streamline the monitoring process across multiple programs which would benefit from the close physical proximity between the PCH Ontario regional office and the recipient.

Other PCH arts and culture programs, such as the Fathers of Confederation Buildings Trust Program (FCBTP), have realized efficiencies through program delivery out of a regional office. However, no formal analysis has been performed to understand the Ontario regional office’s capacity to be able to deliver the HCFP. Furthermore, some evaluation interviewees expressed concerns that the PCH Ontario regional office also faces capacity constraints and that regional delivery of HCFP would still require dedicated program operating funds.

It was also identified that the HCFP may benefit from being moved under a larger, overarching PCH funding program. For example, the FCBTP became a part of the Canada Arts Presentation Fund (CAPF) in 2014. According to key informants, consolidation of the FCBTP under CAPF led to better communication and sharing of knowledge and information between required parties. However, potential negative impacts were also identified by interviewees for this proposed change. Some noted that the consolidation of the HCFP under a larger program with multiple recipients may decrease PCH’s ability to support HC’s unique needs. Though limited investigation was completed into this option, it appears that the work done through HCFP requires specific expertise and knowledge to manage, which would not be found under other PCH programs.

5. Conclusions

Based on evaluation findings, the HCFP is generally relevant, effective, and efficient. It supports HC’s operations and contributes to delivering high quality CRE programming and events that meet the expectations of the arts and culture community. There are, however, risks to continued relevance and performance including an evolving environment and challenges to leveraging adequate supports from other sources to maintain the HC infrastructure and programming.

Overall, the HCFP continues to address key financial needs and is aligned to a certain extent with government priorities and the PCH mandate. HC requires operational funding from the federal government to deliver its programming. The HCFP supports government priorities related to the promotion of arts and culture. HC’s operations have also included a variety of actions to align with IDEA priorities, which include engaging external IDEA expertise for the creation of a DEI committee and DEI policy review, as well as continued investment and presentation of artists from underrepresented communities. HC’s campus capital renovations include sustainable, renewable energy and retrofits, which are aligned with the federal government’s priorities related to climate change action.

The operational funding support provided through the HCFP is critical to HC’s ability to cover operational costs such as salaries and benefits, site operating costs, marketing and sponsorships, as well as the administrative costs of maintaining the daily operations of the organization. Ultimately, this support helps provide HC with the capacity required to deliver programs and events, including during the pandemic when HC pivoted the delivery of their programming to online formats. Such activities and offerings, as well as their associated economic impact, are likely to result in visitors valuing HC’s social and cultural contributions to society.

More recently, capital funding provided through the HCFP has been crucial to allow HC to repair, maintain, and enhance campus facilities to maintain attractiveness to the public and drive revenue streams. The results of these investments have not yet been fully realized and capital expenses are not normally included under the HCFP.

HC is facing long-term funding deficits for operations and for capital improvements. One of the supporting objectives of the HCFP is that operational funding provides the organizational stability needed so the HC can leverage funding and other sources of revenues, but the organization has not realized this. Exceptionally, the program has provided additional funds for capital improvements with the expectation that it will help drive up revenue from private sources. However, the increasingly tight financial environment resulting from a slowing economy and federal government budget reductions announced in Budgets 2022 and 2023, is expected to put greater pressures on PCH programs moving forward. It will be important to manage client expectations on supplemental funding opportunities in the coming years.

In general, HCFP’s objectives, logic model, and associated performance measurement framework support accountability and decision-making. Given that HC has experienced challenges in leveraging HCFP funding to secure revenue from other sources outside of PCH, there is an opportunity for the program to review its strategies for supporting this expected outcome as well as its associated performance measurement indicators. There are opportunities to identify ways the Program can better track HC in the achievement of its financial sustainability.

While the HCFP appears to be delivered in an efficient manner in many ways, it is negatively affected by the lack of operational resources. To minimize risks and improve the efficiency of the program, it is important to seek ways to ensure dedicated program operating funding and consider other possible delivery models, including moving the delivery of the HCFP to the Ontario regional office or under a larger, overarching PCH funding program.

6. Recommendations, management response and action plan

Based on the findings and conclusions, this evaluation offers the following three recommendations related to the effectiveness and efficiency of the HCFP:

Recommendation 1

The evaluation recommends that the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, directs HC to develop a plan to diversify its sources of revenue, including the setting of targets, that supports its long-term financial sustainability. HCFP should support the HC by facilitating discussions with current and potential public funding partners.

Management response

Recommendation accepted.

The evaluation recommends that the HCFP requests a plan from HC for revenue diversification, including targets, to ensure the long-term sustainability of the organization.

The Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, will support the organization in helping to facilitate discussions with other potential funding partners, while also linking targets and reporting to the contribution agreement for the organization.

Action Plan Item	Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
1.1. Amendment to the contribution agreement to include the deadlines to obtain the revenue diversification strategy and plan and (if required) any changes to the organization’s funding model.	1.1.1. Contribution agreement amendment	November 2023	Director, Arts Presentation and Training Directorate, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch
1.2. HCFP will request that HC report on internal fundraising capacity plan developed by the HC consultant/development team.	1.2.1 Fundraising Report from client (HC)	December 2023	Director, Arts Presentation and Training Directorate, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch
1.3. HCFP will request that HC prepare a revenue diversification strategy.	1.3.1. Strategy document from client (HC)	March 2024	Director, Arts Presentation and Training Directorate, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch
	1.3.2. Detailed implementation plan from client (HC)	September 2024	Director, Arts Presentation and Training Directorate, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch
1.4. HCFP will help facilitate discussions with current and potential private and public funding partners.	1.4.1. Summary document of discussions facilitated with public funders.	July 2024	Director, Arts Presentation and Training Directorate, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch

Full implementation date: September 2024

Recommendation 2

The evaluation recommends that the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, reviews the current program administration model to determine whether there are alternative program administration models that would improve overall efficiency of the HCFP.

Management response

Recommendation accepted.

The evaluation raised questions regarding the current administration model for the HCFP. The Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, will prepare a comparison report regarding potential delivery models for the HCFP to ensure the highest-level efficiency and service in its administration.

Action Plan Item	Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
2.1. Inventory alternative administration leads for HCFP delivery	2.1.1 Inventory Report	September 2024	Director General, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch
2.2 Assessment of gains/losses of other potential delivery models	2.2.1 Comparison report	November 2024	Director General, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch

Full implementation date: November 2024

Recommendation 3

The evaluation recommends that the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, reviews the HCFP’s performance measurement framework to improve its overall relevance and better track the achievement of intended outcomes.

Management response

Recommendation accepted.

The Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, recognizes the benefits of a coherent performance measurement framework and tools that support strategic planning, program decision-making, and reporting.

The program will review its performance measurement indicators to ensure data collection and analysis are as streamlined as possible while still making available strategic information to support planning, decision-making and reporting.

Action Plan Item	Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
3.1. Review and update program’s performance measurement indicators	3.1.1. ADM approved PIP	September 2024	Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs
3.2. Ensure that HCFP terms and conditions, contribution agreement and associated reporting forms align with updated performance measurement indicators.	3.2.1. Updated HCFP tools which correspond to updated performance measurement indicators.	March 2025	Director, Arts Presentation and Training Directorate, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch
3.3. Initiate an annual Performance Measurement Reporting process for the HCFP and present the findings to senior management.	3.3.1 Performance Measurement Report 2024-25 presented to the Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs	Annually, beginning October 2025	Director General, Arts and Cultural Sector Strategy Branch

Full implementation date: October 2025

Annex A: Evaluation matrix

Annex B: Bibliography

• Arts Council England. (n.d.). Endowments in the Arts (PDF format). artscouncil.org.uk.
• Department of Canadian Heritage. (2022, February 1). Departmental Results Report 2020-21. Canada.ca
• Department of Canadian Heritage. (2018, September 14). Harbourfront Centre Funding Program Evaluation 2014–15 to 2017–18. Canada.ca
• Department of Canadian Heritage. (2021, August 11). Toronto’s Harbourfront Centre Receives Government of Canada Support for Urgent Capital Work.Canada.ca.
• Destination Canada. (n.d.). Destination Canada.
• Destination Canada. (2022). Destination Canada 2022-2026 Corporate Plan Summary (PDF format).
• Government of Canada. (2022, July 8). Government of Canada invests over $1.4 million to support arts and culture in Greater Toronto Area. Canada.ca.
• Nestruck, J. K., & Taylor, K. (2021, May 14). Arts endowments are worth millions. So why can’t organizations draw on them to survive the pandemic? The Globe and Mail.
• National Council of Nonprofits. (2017). Endowments. Councilofnonprofits.org.
• Office of the Prime Minister of Canada. (2021, December 16). Minister of Tourism and Associate Minister of Finance Mandate Letter. Pm.gc.ca.
• Toronto Arts Foundation. (2018). Arts Stats 2018: Why the Arts Matter (PDF format). Torontoartsfoundation.org
• Toronto Artscape. (2015, December). Canadian arts, Culture and Creative Sector (PDF format). artscape.ca

© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Canadian Heritage, 2023
Catalogue No.: CH7-71/1-2024E-PDF
ISBN: 978-0-660-69698-0