Evaluation of the Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities, 2025

On this page

• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of abbreviations
• Introduction
• Executive summary
  • Key findings
  • Recommendations
  • Consideration
• Management response and action plan
  • Overall management response
  • Recommendation 1
  • Recommendation 2
• Background
  • Program background
  • Program description
  • Program reach and expenditures
• Key findings
  • 1. Program design, delivery and reach
  • 2. Supporting job seekers with disabilities
  • 3. Supporting employers
  • 4. Impacts of the COVID‑19 pandemic
• Conclusion and recommendations
  • Recommendations
  • Consideration
• Appendix A – Key findings and recommendations from the previous evaluation
• Appendix B – Detailed descriptions of program activities
• Appendix C – Logic model of the OFPD
• Appendix D – Evaluation questions
• Appendix E – Lines of evidence and methodology

Alternate formats

Evaluation of the Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities, 2025 [PDF - 1,84 KB]

Large print, braille, MP3 (audio), e-text and DAISY formats are available on demand by ordering online or calling 1 800 O-Canada (1-800-622-6232). If you use a teletypewriter (TTY), call 1-800-926-9105.

List of figures

• Figure 1: How job seekers, and funded organizations and project partners heard about the Program
• Figure 2: Comparison of gender distribution
• Figure 3: Comparison of age distribution
• Figure 4: Distribution according to other socio-demographic characteristics
• Figure 5: Incidence of employment by type of activity, 5 years pre-participation and 5 years post-participation (n=7,893)
• Figure 6: Net impact on participants' employment earnings (annual average, 5-year post-participation period)
• Figure 7: Net impact on participants' probability of being employed (annual average, 5-year post-participation period)
• Figure 8: Proportion of participants who received EI benefits by program activity (%), 5 years pre-participation and 5 years post-participation (n=7,893)
• Figure 9: Net impact on EI benefits received by participants (annual average, 5-year post-participation period)
• Figure 10: Proportion of participants who received social assistance benefits by program activity, 5 years pre-participation and 5 years post-participation (n=7,893)
• Figure 11: Net impacts on social assistance benefits received by participants, in relation to similar non-participants (annual average, 5-year post-participation period)
• Figure 12: Net impacts, by groups (cohort of fiscal years 2015 to 2016 and 2016 to 2017)
• Figure 13: Cost-benefit analysis and social rate of return
• Figure 14: Social return from investing in different types of program activities
• Figure 15: Incidence of employment of a 2017 cohort of participants, from 2018 to 2022 (n=1,381)

List of tables

• Table 1: Management action plan for recommendation 1
• Table 2: Management action plan for recommendation 2
• Table 3: Total program expenditures and number of persons with disabilities (job seekers) served
• Table 4: Profile of OFPD participants who began their participation from April 2015 to March 2017
• Table 5: Share of program participants, by program activity and cohort of participants
• Table 6: Distribution of focus group participants by program activity
• Table 7: Distribution of key informants by category

List of abbreviations

CERB

Canada Emergency Response Benefit

CRA

Canada Revenue Agency

EI

Employment Insurance

ESDC

Employment and Social Development Canada

OFPD

Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities

post

post-participation

pre

pre-participation

pp

percentage point

yr

year

Y

year

Introduction

The Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter referred to as "the Program" or OFPD) was introduced in 1997 to facilitate the labour market integration of persons with disabilities by providing funding to third-party organizations that deliver skills training, self-employment activities, job placements, and a range of other employment and wrap-around supports to job seekers with disabilities and employers.

The Program uses 3 funding streams.

• Stream 1 – Participant-focused Stream: This stream includes Work Experience (with potential wage subsidies) activities, Skills for Employment (including pre-employment and employability support) activities, Self-Employment activities, Enhanced Employment Assistance Services, and Enhanced Employer Support activities
• Stream 2 – Employer Stream: This stream focuses on Employer Awareness and Enhanced Employer Support activities
• Stream 3 – Career Advancement Stream: This stream, introduced in 2022, supports Career Advancement Work Experience activities, Skills for Advancement activities, and Employer Supports for Career Advancement

Funded organizations work with persons with disabilities to help them prepare for, obtain, and maintain, employment or self-employment. In addition, some funded organizations work with employers to raise their awareness of the benefits of hiring persons with disabilities, and to help them hire and integrate persons with disabilities into the workplace.

This is the fifth evaluation of the Program, which focused on program activities delivered from 2018 to 2022, under 2 streams:

• Skills and Employment, which included activities currently delivered under Stream 1 – Participant-focused Stream
• Working with Employers, which included activities currently delivered under Stream 2 – Employer Stream^{Footnote 1}

This evaluation focused on activities and outcomes prior to the transition of the Program into 3 new funding streams in 2023 and projects funded under calls for proposals since 2023 were beyond the scope of this evaluation.

Executive summary

Key findings

• The Program design provides flexibility to funded organizations to offer tailored disability-focused supports and services to job seekers and their employers. However, limited promotion of the Program and its supports, as well as a complex application process may limit access to the Program for certain organizations, job seekers, and employers
• Supports and services funded by the Program help job seekers with disabilities improve their employability, and find or maintain employment. It does so by helping them improve their skills – including job search skills and soft skills – and access more opportunities in the labour market
• Incremental impacts demonstrate that the Program also led to improvements in participants' labour market attachments. On average, participants in program activities earned $1,180 more annually and had a 3.7 percentage point (pp) higher incidence of employment than similar non-participants, in the 5-year post-participation period
• Subsidized Work Experience and Skills for Employment activities had the largest positive impacts on participants' employment outcomes, when compared to similar non-participants. Similar to what was observed for other labour market programs, participants who only received Enhanced Employment Assistance Services experienced small positive impacts
• While all socio-demographic groups show positive net impacts on employment outcomes, certain groups may face greater barriers to employment. Evidence pointed to unique barriers for newcomers or racialized individuals, individuals with physical disabilities, individuals with mental health related or developmental disabilities, and individuals in rural or isolated communities
• When considering costs and benefits for governments and participants, the Program yielded a positive social return on investment over 10 years, with every $1 invested yielding $1.31 in return. From a societal perspective, benefits outweigh costs within 4 years
• Program supports can contribute to an improved capacity of employers to hire and support employees with disabilities. It has encouraged some employers to hire persons with disabilities by reducing perceived risks and associated costs. It has also made this process easier for some employers who were already interested in hiring workers with disabilities but needed guidance with recruitment, onboarding, or training
• Employers shared that additional measures or complementary supports, particularly those offered after the hiring of a person with disabilities, may better meet their needs and support their capacity to hire and retain employees with disabilities
• The COVID-19 pandemic created financial and human resource challenges for some employers, but also led to changes that had a positive impact on the employment of some persons with disabilities. For example, the accelerated shift to remote or hybrid work allowed some workers to continue working during the pandemic and was beneficial for those facing mobility limitations or transportation-related barriers

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: Continue exploring strategies to provide more support to participants facing complex barriers, or who need more intensive or longer-term assistance to join and remain in, the labour market.

While the Program helped many persons improve their employability or their employment situation, different barriers continue to prevent some program participants from accessing program supports, joining the labour market, or maintaining employment in the medium- to long-term. Key barriers identified include cultural barriers, specific barriers associated with physical disabilities including mobility limitations, cumulative barriers related to being in rural or isolated locations, and unique barriers faced by those with invisible disabilities that may require more intense or a broader set of supports and services. While many of these barriers are structural or systemic in nature, and do not fall under the direct control of the Program, the Program could explore additional measures or partnerships, such as more culturally appropriate supports, that could help overcome these barriers while helping job seekers with disabilities take full advantage of complementary supports and resources they may be able to benefit from through other programs or services.

Recommendation 2: Collaborate with program stakeholders (for example, funding recipients) and partners to improve awareness of, and access to, the Program by clarifying roles and responsibilities to better promote funded services to job seekers and employers, and by simplifying the funding application process.

Findings from the current and previous evaluations revealed that there is a lack of awareness of the Program among potential participants, including both job seekers and employers. Efforts are currently being made by funding recipients to disseminate information about the services and supports they offer via their own networks. However, there is a lack of clarity regarding the role that could be played by the Department and other key program stakeholders to proactively reach persons with disabilities who are not already in contact with funded organizations and may need guidance to find and access the services and supports they need.

Consideration

Consideration 1: Continue making efforts to fill performance data gaps while refining the indicators used to track the progress made by program participants.

Based on the program data used for this evaluation (up to 2022), ongoing gaps were observed related to the indicators and the data collected for performance measurement purposes. These gaps were identified as part of previous evaluations and include the unavailability of granular data on Skills for Employment activities, and the lack of information on employer participants, which creates challenges in assessing the progress made towards some program outcomes, such as outcomes for employers. While the Program has recently started to make improvements in these areas, such as collecting data from employer participants, it would be beneficial to continue exploring additional improvements to inform policy analysis, research and evaluation activities.

Management response and action plan

Overall management response

Employment and Social Development Canada's (ESDC) Skills and Employment Branch and Program Operations Branch thank the Evaluation Division for conducting this Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities (OFPD) evaluation. We also acknowledge the contributions of service providers who collected the administrative data supporting this evaluation.

Projects funded by the OFPD provide a range of supports to improve employment outcomes for persons with disabilities. These include skills and pre-employment training, job placements, self-employment assistance, and wrap-around services. The Program also funds initiatives that help employers hire and retain persons with disabilities, enhance workplace accessibility, and adopt inclusive practices. Through these efforts, the OFPD promotes disability inclusion in the labour market.

The Program has had a positive and sustained impact on participants' labour market attachment and employment outcomes. The evaluation also identifies areas for improvement to further strengthen these results.

ESDC is already addressing some of the findings identified in this evaluation report. For example, in 2022, the Program launched a call for proposals to reduce barriers for new organizations and fund a more inclusive range of projects. Through departmental outreach to regional and national non-profits, the OFPD has supported over 114 projects across the country. This includes targeted initiatives for Canadians with learning disabilities, and Black persons with disabilities. Efforts to ensure programming meets the needs of all persons with disabilities, including those that have been historically underserved, will continue in future years.

Additionally, in 2023, the Program developed and implemented a new reporting tool. It collects more granular information on demographic characteristics of clients served, as well as performance data on employer-focused activities. This will help to the improve future measurement of participants' labour market attachment and employment outcomes.

In July 2024, the Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities, delivered through the OFPD, was launched to close the employment gap between persons with and without disabilities by 2040. The strategy outlines initiatives across ESDC and the Government of Canada, and ongoing efforts to embed a disability lens into program design and delivery, to address persistent barriers that limit participation and advancement in the labour market.

Recommendation 1

Continue exploring strategies to provide more support to participants facing complex barriers, or who need more intensive or longer-term assistance to join and remain in, the labour market.

Management response: ESDC agrees with this recommendation. As part of the Skills and Employment Branch's commitment to serving persons with disabilities, including those from underrepresented groups, the Program will continue to explore strategies to address the various barriers that continue to prevent some participants from accessing program supports, entering the labour market, or maintaining employment over the medium to long term. The Skills and Employment Branch will continue to engage with disability organizations to identify needs and best practices to assist individuals experiencing complex or multiple barriers to employment (for example, racialized, gender diverse, rural communities). This work will be carried out in collaboration with the Program Operations Branch, with input from service providers to ensure effective implementation in the next call for proposals.

Table 1: Management action plan for recommendation 1

Management action plan	Planned completion date	Action statusFootnote 2	Accountable lead(s)
1.1. Continue to consult disability organizations and other key stakeholders on complex barriers in a wide variety of communities across Canada	December 2026	Yet to commence	Director General, Workforce and Skills Development Policy Directorate, Skills and Employment Branch, in collaboration with the Program Operations Branch
1.2. Introduce new pilot projects to support individuals who need intensive or longer-term assistance	April 2028	Yet to commence	Director General, Workforce and Skills Development Policy Directorate, Skills and Employment Branch, in collaboration with the Program Operations Branch

Recommendation 2

Collaborate with program stakeholders (for example, funding recipients) and partners to improve awareness of, and access to, the Program by clarifying roles and responsibilities to better promote funded services to job seekers and employers, and by simplifying the funding application process.

Management response: The department has already developed robust public awareness and promotion activities on the OFPD targeting job seekers and employers, specifically through its Inclusive Workplaces advertising campaign (2019 to 2025), which ran online and on radio, promoting the hiring of persons with disabilities by small and medium-size employers. Since 2019, the online campaign has generated 225 million impressions, 998,000 clicks, and 740,000 visits to its campaign page. In 2024 to 2025, there were approximately 500 average weekly web visits to the Inclusive Workplaces campaign page when no advertising campaign was in market, compared to approximately 14,000 visits per week during the campaign (an increase by 2,600%). In addition, ESDC publicly promotes all OFPD calls for proposals and funding announcements and collaborates with service delivery partners on their project announcements and to produce employer or employee success stories that are shared online.

ESDC will strengthen program collaboration with key actors, including regions and service delivery partners. Efforts will focus on clarifying roles and simplifying processes to improve access to services. These actions will ensure that the OFPD remains responsive to the needs of Canadians with disabilities. In addition to making training more accessible to employers, the Program is also maintaining its convening role through initiatives such as national roundtables and ongoing engagement with organizations serving persons with disabilities, fostering collaboration and sharing best practices to strengthen tailored approaches. For example, through an OFPD-funded roundtable in 2025, OFPD organizations, experts, and other stakeholders shared lessons learned on the use of artificial intelligence in the context of disability-inclusive employment.

Table 2: Management action plan for recommendation 2

Management action plan	Planned completion date	Action status	Accountable lead(s)
2.1. Collaborate with the Program Operations Branch to streamline the funding application process and reduce administrative burden (for example, through updates to the operational directives)	April 2027	In progress	Program Operations Branch, in collaboration with the Director General of the Workforce and Skills Development Policy Directorate, Skills and Employment Branch
2.2. Work with partners (for example, Job Bank) to increase awareness of the Program and other relevant supports	January 2027	Yet to commence	Director General, Workforce and Skills Development Policy Directorate, Skills and Employment Branch, in collaboration with the Program Operations Branch
2.3. Enhance the OFPD website to better promote the Program and clearly guide users toward available services and resources	January 2027	In progress	Skills Development Policy Directorate, Skills and Employment Branch, in collaboration with the Program Operations Branch

Background

Program background

The Opportunities Fund for Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter referred to as "the Program" or OFPD) was introduced in 1997, in response to a report of the Federal Task Force on Disability Issues, which recommended the creation of an employment fund to fill a gap in labour market programming for persons with disabilities, with a view of increasing their participation in the labour force.

The Program was first announced in Budget 1997 as a 3-year initiative, to promote the development of strategies to reduce barriers to the labour market participation of Canadians with disabilities who were relying on social assistance but would rather work and be financially self-sufficient. The Program was designed to serve those who are not in the labour force, but could work either part-time or full-time, if they were provided assistance to prepare for, find and keep jobs^{Footnote 3}.

The Program became permanent in 2000 and has undergone several changes, including recent changes stemming from Budget 2022 announcements in support of Canada's Disability Inclusion Action Plan and the Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities.

Canada's Disability Inclusion Action Plan and Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities

In 2022, Canada launched a Disability Inclusion Action Plan with the goal of including persons with disabilities in every part of life in Canada. The Plan also seeks to help achieve a barrier-free Canada by 2040 and is organized under 4 pillars:

• financial security
• employment
• accessible and inclusive communities
• a modern approach to disability

To support the implementation of the Plan, Budget 2022 proposed to provide $272.6 million of funding through the OFPD over 5 years.

In 2024 the Government launched the Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities. The Employment Strategy provides a framework to guide action under the second pillar (Employment) of the Disability Inclusion Action Plan, with the following main goals:

• Goal 1: help individuals find and maintain jobs, advance in their careers, or become entrepreneurs
• Goal 2: support employers to diversify their workforces by creating inclusive and accessible workplaces for employees with disabilities
• Goal 3: increase the supply, capacity, and reach of individuals and organizations that work to support disability inclusion and accessibility in employment, including by ensuring smooth transitions and long-term retention

Program description

Program administration and delivery

The Program funds projects delivered by third-party organizations across Canada known as Community Coordinators, funding recipients, or service providers.

These organizations deliver various employment supports and services to job seekers with disability or employers, such as job search assistance, skills development through training, funding for workplace accommodations, and wage subsidies.

The Program also supports third party organizations delivering Employer Awareness activities, through stand-alone projects or in conjunction with other program activities.

Eligibility criteria

To be eligible for the Program, job seekers must self-identify as having a permanent physical or mental disability that restricts their ability to perform daily activities. A medical certificate is not required to confirm eligibility.

Prior to COVID-19, participants were also required to be ineligible for employment benefits and support measures funded under Part II of the Employment Insurance (EI) program, such as those provided by provinces and territories through the Labour Market Development Agreements.

During the pandemic, introduced flexibilities included a suspension of this requirement. Since then, this flexibility has been maintained and became permanent in 2022.

Program services and supports

From 2018 to 2022, the Program delivered activities through 2 core streams:

• Skills and Employment, which included the following categories of activities:
  • Work Experience (subsidized or non-subsidized)
  • Skills for Employment
  • Self-Employment
  • Enhanced Employment Assistance Services
  • Enhanced Employer Support
• Working with Employers, which included the following categories of activities:
  • Employer Awareness
  • Enhanced Employer Support
  • Matching Services

Since 2023, program activities are delivered under the following 3 streams:

• Stream 1 – Participant-focused Stream, which includes the same activities as those delivered through the former Skills and Employment stream. Under this new funding cycle:
  • Skills for Employment activities can last up to 18 months, if they are intended to support those experiencing complex or significant barriers, instead of a maximum of 6 months for all participants under the previous funding cycle
  • These activities can also be used to help participants enhance their employability and link to the labour market through the development of social and emotional skills, or through other pre-employment supports
• Stream 2 – Employer Stream, which includes the same activities as those delivered through the former Working with Employers stream, except for matching services, which are no longer funded through the Program
• Stream 3 – Career Advancement Stream, which includes the following categories of activities:
  • Career Advancement Work Experience
  • Skills for Advancement
  • Employer Supports for Career Advancement

In addition, all funded projects, excluding stand-alone employer awareness projects, must contain an employment experience component. As such, Enhanced Employment Assistance Services and Skills for Employment activities are supposed to be offered only when they are combined with Work Experience or Self-Employment activities.

This evaluation focused on activities and outcomes prior to this program re-design and projects funded under any calls for proposals under these new streams were beyond the scope of this evaluation.

Detailed descriptions of program activities from each category and stream can be found in Appendix B.

Intended program outcomes

According to the Program's logic model^{Footnote 4} (Appendix C), participant-focused activities delivered through Stream 1 are intended to help persons with disabilities:

• enhance their employability (immediate outcome)
• find and maintain employment or return to school (intermediate outcome)
• integrate into the labour market (ultimate outcome)

Key findings related to these expected outcomes are presented in Section 2 – Supporting Job Seekers with Disabilities.

In parallel, activities delivered under the Employer Stream aim to achieve the following outcomes:

• participating employers are better able to hire and support persons with disabilities in the workplace (immediate outcome)
• participating employers hire and retain persons with disabilities (intermediate outcome)
• participating employers have implemented inclusive hiring and employment practices (ultimate outcome)

Key findings related to these expected outcomes are presented in Section 3 – Supporting Employers.

A complete list of evaluation questions can be found in Appendix D. The 4 lines of evidence developed to address these questions (document and literature review, focus groups, key informant interviews, and quantitative analysis using linked administrative data), with key methodological considerations and limitations, are presented in Appendix E.

Program reach and expenditures

Table 3 below presents the annual program expenditures and number of program participants (persons with disabilities) served from fiscal year 2017 to 2018 to fiscal year 2024 to 2025.

Table 3: Total program expenditures and number of persons with disabilities (job seekers) served

Fiscal year	Program expenditures	Participants served (job seekers)
2017 to 2018	$43,749,107	5,464
2018 to 2019	$35,209,916	4,452
2019 to 2020	$40,570,864	4,242
2020 to 2021	$40,413,2731	3,735
2021 to 2022	$69,800,844	4,375
2022 to 2023	$47,008,815	4,047
2023 to 2024	$86,520,375	N/A2
2024 to 2025	$88,343,119	3,8243

• Sources: Chief Financial Officer Branch and participant data tables produced by Service Canada's Business Intelligence Services (formerly Program Accountability)

Notes:

1. In fiscal year 2020 to 2021, another $12,543,311 was spent under the National Workplace Accessibility Stream initiative, a temporary COVID-19 measure delivered under the Public Health Events of National Concern Payments Act. This initiative served an additional 2,033 job seekers or workers with disabilities, as well as 5,495 employers
2. Data on the number of participants served was not yet available for fiscal year 2023 to 2024
3. For fiscal year 2024 to 2025, the number of participants served only includes Stream 1 participants

From fiscal year 2018 to 2019 to fiscal year 2021 to 2022, the period covered by the current summative evaluation, the Program served an average of 4,201 participants per year.

According to ESDC's Departmental Results Report, the relatively lower number of program participants served in fiscal year 2020 to 2021 is due to a number of COVID-19 related factors, including interruption of services, widespread reduction of jobs, withdrawing of job placement offers, and closure of education institutions^{Footnote 5}.

Key findings

1. Program design, delivery and reach

Flexibility of program design

The Program provides the flexibility to funding recipients to tailor a range of services and supports to persons with disabilities to help them progress towards integration into the labour market and to employers to help them hire and retain persons with disabilities. Additionally, supports can be provided at different stages of a persons' employment journey. These support measures include enhancing persons' employability and job readiness, helping them find and obtain employment, as well as entering and maintaining employment.

• Some interviewees (12/41 interviewees^{Footnote 6}, including 4 program officials and 8 job seekers) emphasized that the Program's flexible design supports employment readiness through customized training and support services adapted to the specific needs of persons with disabilities that address both soft and hard skills. Examples of tailored supports include digital literacy training, mental health management, industry-specific certifications, and job shadowing
• A few interviewees (9/41, including 6 funded organizations and 3 participating employers), explained that the Program supports labour market entry by facilitating job placements, providing job coaching, and preparing employers to accommodate workers with disabilities

"Projects usually have job developers and job coaches. After the workshops, participants either apply for jobs or get matched to specific roles. The job coach supports both the participant and employer-troubleshooting issues on both sides. Skill building doesn't stop when the workshop ends; it continues during the work experience"

• A few interviewees (3/41, including 2 funded organizations and 1 project partner) noted that the Program supports labour market attachment through follow-up services, accommodations, and continued training

In addition, a few (4) interviewees representing funded organizations specified that the Program adapts to local labour market conditions by targeting employers in specific sectors and geographic areas.

"We are very intentional about where we're placing people. We're looking at where they live, what the job market is like, and what employers are hiring"

Alignment with the Disability Inclusion Action Plan and Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities

Additional program funding of about $270 million over 5 years starting in fiscal year 2022 to 2023 represents a direct commitment to supporting persons with disabilities in securing and retaining meaningful employment, aligning with the goals of the Disability Inclusion Action Plan and the Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities^{Footnote 7}.

• The Program aims to increase the economic and social participation of persons with disabilities by addressing systemic barriers such as workplace inaccessibility, discrimination, and limited training opportunities, through targeted supports, which contributes to advancing Canada's Disability Inclusion Action Plan^{Footnote 8}
• Some interviewees (4) from funded organizations emphasized that the Program aligns with the Disability Inclusion Action Plan's employment pillar by engaging employers in awareness-building, inclusive hiring training, and stigma reduction. These activities seek to help employers understand how to accommodate and support persons with disabilities in the workplace

"Our goal is to reach 600 employers and to bring them together, to train them on inclusive hiring. We engage with them and work very closely with them to train them on different topics, and we have an online learning management system"

• A few interviewees from funded organizations (2) also highlighted how the Program supports the Employment Strategy's emphasis on equity by investing in Indigenous and community-led employment services. These efforts prioritize culturally appropriate service delivery and long-term relationship-building
• A few interviewees (2) described how the Program increasingly supports self-employment as a viable and empowering option for persons with disabilities, aligning with Disability Inclusion Action Plan's emphasis on economic and social participation and flexibility
• Some interviewed program officials (4) from the national and regional offices noted that the Program promotes collaboration between government and community organizations, which also supports the Disability Inclusion Action Plan by ensuring that program activities reflect the needs and aspirations of persons with disabilities

More than half of the funded organizations interviewed (10 out of 17) felt that the application process was positive, a few (2) of which specifically identified program officials as being helpful in their experience with the process.

However, various aspects of the Program's application process were identified by some key informants, including funded organizations and program officials, as potential barriers that could prevent some organizations from applying to, or from succeeding in the process, particularly for smaller or rural/remote organizations.

• Some funded organizations (7 out of 17) spoke to the complexity of the funding application process and how these issues could affect accessibility of the Program for some organizations. A few (3 of the 7) of these organizations specifically mentioned that this can discourage some organizations from applying. Key issues mentioned include the length and time required to complete an application, the supporting documentation required and certain terms and nuances being hard to understand
• Half of program officials interviewed (5 out of 10, including national and regional officials) also emphasized that the current application process is complex and may discourage participation, particularly from smaller or less experienced organizations. One of these interviewees added that organizations based in rural or isolated areas are more challenging to reach and more often submit applications that are screened out due to missing information
• A few of these interviewees (2 ESDC program officials) also noted that the volume of information required, the length of the forms, and administrative delays, may discourage some organizations from applying to the Program

These findings are supported by an internal research project which analyzed information about the experiences of unfunded organizations who applied to the Program. The research found that the Program's application process was complex and that eligibility requirements did not align with organizational structures, mandates and/or practices. The report also indicates that there is a need to review and adjust eligibility criteria for applications and to re-evaluate supporting document requirements^{Footnote 9}.

These findings suggest that simplifying the application process could potentially make program funding more accessible for smaller organizations with less organizational capacity. Additionally, simplifying application requirements would support the Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities' goals related to assisting "enablers" (that is, "people and organizations that work to better include persons with disabilities in the workplace^{Footnote 10}") and advance the Strategy's objective of increasing the supply, capacity, and reach of individuals and organizations that support disability inclusion and accessibility in employment^{Footnote 11}.

Gaps in the promotion of the Program

The Program is promoted through multiple channels, both formal and informal.

• Sources: Key informant interviews and focus groups

Figure 1: Text description

Channel, source or response	Funded organizations and project partners (number of respondents)	Job seekers (number of respondents)
Community-based organizations and agencies	11	28
Never heard of the OFPD before	5	22
Search engines and social media	2	15
Healthcare practitioners	0	13
Word of mouth and community connections	9	5
Structured information sessions	2	5

The most frequently identified channel through which job seekers, funded organizations, and project partners first heard about the Program is community-based organizations and agencies. Some funded organizations and partners heard about the Program using search engines and social media, or via structured information sessions. For job seekers, word of mouth and community connections, as well as healthcare practitioners were other common information channels.

However, there was a shared perception amongst many interviewees and focus group participants that the Program is not sufficiently promoted to service providers and potential participants (persons with disabilities and employers). While some organizations serving those with disabilities, including funded organizations, take initiative to promote the Program through community events and word-of-mouth, these efforts are not consistent, standardized, or sufficiently supported amongst organizations.

• The vast majority of job seekers who took part in focus groups and discussed the issue of program awareness (46/55) agreed that there is a need to do more outreach and promotion of the Program, and to provide job seekers with disabilities more information about the different supports available, using various channels and tools
  • Most of these focus group participants (42/46) explained that many job seekers with disabilities are unaware of the Program, which can create a barrier to access
  • Approximately half of them (24/46) added that information about the Program is hard to find or not visible enough, and that learning about it usually requires being connected to specific resources or organizations, or knowing other people that have taken part in the Program before
• A few interviewees from funded organizations (3) noted that, while some service providers are aware of the Program, promotion is not consistent and often depends on connections to other resources and referrals from organizations
• Some interviewees (3), including national and regional program officials, highlighted the need for more proactive and targeted outreach to organizations in rural, remote, and underserved communities, which often lack awareness of the Program and may not have the infrastructure to engage with federal funding opportunities. A few of them (2) added that general awareness of the Program remains low, particularly among new or smaller service providers
• It was also reported during interviews that low awareness of this type of program limits its effectiveness, and that the Program would benefit from improved visibility and communication

Limited awareness among employers

Focus group discussions with employers indicated that learning about the Program generally requires them to conduct research themselves, or to connect with community-based organizations or individuals who know about it.

The (6) employers who specified how they learned about the Program mentioned one or more of the following sources:

• A newsletter or email received via the distribution list of an organization funded through the Program (3 employers)
• Proactive research conducted on their own (3 employers)
• Interactions with an employment counsellor (1 employer)
• A job fair where they were connected with a service provider (1 employer)

Among those who discussed the issue further:

• One employer noted that if they wanted to hire again through the Program, they would need to do some research to find an organization offering program services
• a few (2 employers) emphasized that the Program is not well known, and that it would be beneficial to disseminate more information about it

A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (6), and one interviewee (project partner) also spoke to issues with program promotion to employers, noting that some employers might not use it because they are unaware of it and may not have the time needed to conduct research on the subject.

"In my experience, it's just a lack of awareness. This is where they become reluctant. Instead of searching for applicants, when they have multiple people lined up, they often skip over those with disabilities because they don't want to take the time to search around. In my experience, if employers were more aware, things could be different."

Strengthening employer engagement

A few employers who took part in focus groups and some interviewees representing funded organizations identified measures that could help improve the effectiveness of employer engagement efforts made through the Program.

• Building long-term relationships and trust through sustained engagement, with a view to better understanding employer needs and aligning services accordingly (6 interviewees)

"We focus on relationship building first... It's only when we feel there's a match with our client that we start to market the programs"

• Ensuring that proactive and consistent communications, as well as informed conversations, take place with employers (3 interviewees)
• Conducting more direct or in-person employer outreach (for example, via employer associations or networks, or through job fairs and community events, which helps normalize the hiring of persons with disabilities while increasing program visibility, in a low-pressure setting) (1 focus group participant and 2 interviewees)

Groups Less Likely to Access the Program

The majority of job seekers who took part in focus groups (29/49) reported that, after connecting with the right organization or service provider, they found it easy to access the supports they needed through the Program, or that they did not encounter any issues in this regard. Some of these job seekers (11/29) highlighted positive interactions with program officials, noting their supportiveness, quick responses, and adaptability to individual needs.

"I had never heard of this program before, but it was luck that I went to that job fair and stumbled into them. Once I knew those people were there, they opened up a bunch of doors for me"

At the same time, insights from interview and focus group participants suggest that job seekers from specific groups may be less likely to access the Program as they can face various barriers associated with awareness or access.

Newcomers with disabilities

• A few job seekers (6) who took part in focus groups stated that newcomers with disabilities may face challenges in accessing the Program as they are less likely to be knowledgeable about the government programs available in Canada or may face language barriers^{Footnote 12}
• Additionally, a few interviewees (5) from funded organizations and program officials shared a perception that some immigrants are less likely to access the Program due to cultural stigma and reluctance to self-identify as having a disability. For example, a representative from a funded organization indicated that:

"Immigrants, especially African immigrants, are much harder to reach. Mental illness is a taboo subject in these communities. […] This makes it difficult to reach this clientele because they don't even want to talk about it. Because these things can only be disclosed voluntarily, so if you don't self-identify, obviously, we can't help you"

Individuals with physical disabilities

• Some interviewees (5 out of 18), including funded organizations and job seekers, emphasized that people with physical disabilities are less likely to access the Program due to additional barriers, such as lack of access to transportation, or their limited capacity to use Internet
• A few (5) job seekers who took part in focus groups also noted that those who cannot drive or who face other mobility limitations (for example, not having accessible public transportation or other adapted transportation) may also have more difficulty accessing the Program due to transportation barriers

Individuals living in rural or remote areas

• A few (6) job seekers who took part in focus groups and a few (3) interviewed program officials mentioned that those located in rural areas or regions where specialized services or supports are not as available or accessible in general, are also less likely to be aware of the Program, and may have more difficulty accessing it

Individuals with invisible disabilities

• Job seekers with invisible or cognitive disabilities, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or autism, may have more difficulty accessing the Program. Some focus group participants (9) explained that they may have challenges demonstrating that they have a disability or that they truly need supports to obtain employment

Individuals with lower literacy, who are less functional, or who need more assistance navigating online resources

• A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (10) stated that the Program may be more difficult to access by those who are less functional or independent in general, who have lower levels of education or literacy, who need professional guidance to navigate government programs in general, or who need assistance to fill application forms
• A few of them (5) added that those who are not "tech-savvy", do not use social media, or are not comfortable using smart phones, may be less likely to become aware of the Program

2. Supporting job seekers with disabilities

Employability and labour market entry

Preparing for the labour market

A large majority of key informants (41/53) indicated that the Program plays a significant role in improving participants' employability and supporting their entry into the labour market.

In addition, more than half of job seekers who took part in focus groups (51/78) reported that the Program helped them develop skills, including job search skills and soft skills, gain work experience, or become employed or self-employed. Among these participants:

• A few (8/51) believed that they would not have been able to acquire work experience, gain employment, or become self-employed, without the Program, for example, because:
  • The Program allowed them to gain the self-confidence, attitude, and job search skills they needed to find work (5 focus group participants)

"I just didn't have the confidence and the belief in myself to do it. Going to them, I gained all that. I went twice a week to learn how to write a resume, how to do things, and be part of the workforce. Without those [support] groups, I don't think I would have been able to do it"

• The wage subsidy motivated an employer to give them an opportunity to work in their field after graduation from college, or as part of a co-op placement (2 focus group participants)

• Some (25 out of 78) found work or acquired work experience through the Program and reported that their participation was helpful in different ways, including by:
  • Making job search easier or more effective (for example, it strengthened their job search skills or allowed them to connect with potential employers more easily) (13 focus group participants)
  • Helping them develop specific skills that are valuable in the labour market, or allowing them to learn their new job more easily, while experiencing less pressure (9 focus group participants)
  • Helping them access more opportunities in the labour market (for example, it allowed them to access the "hidden labour market" or "get their foot in the door") (7 focus group participants)

"It definitely helps bridge the gap. […] There are other ways to get employed. I don't think it's the only way to do it, for those with disabilities. But it creates more opportunities for sure, and it has worked fairly well"

• A few (5 out of 78) did not find work or acquire work experience through the Program but were able to do so on their own and recognized that their program participation contributed, to some extent, to their success

Additional benefits

Beyond contributing to participants' employability and their labour market outcomes, close to half of job seekers in the focus groups (37 out of 78) and almost all job seekers interviewed (13 out of 14) reported other, more personal benefits from their participation in the Program. These include:

• developing self-confidence, self-trust, self-esteem, or self-acceptance (17 focus group participants, and 13 job seeker interviewees)

"I was going about disability the wrong way. I was letting it define me, instead of using it as a sub-set of who I am. [...] They gave [me] the confidence I needed to say: okay, I have a disability, but I'm more than that"

• having more social interactions and networking opportunities, or developing a sense of belonging to a community (10 focus group participants)
• increasing resiliency, motivation, or perseverance (5 focus group participants)
• improving self-awareness or understanding of personal strengths and capabilities (5 focus group participants)
• improving organizational skills, time management skills, independence, or general "life skills" (4 focus group participants)

"It helped me immensely. It probably helped me more in my personal life than for employment, because a lot of the skills that I had learned carried through in my personal life"

• increasing well-being, mental well-being, or capacity to handle stressors (4 focus group participants)
• increasing their capacity for self-affirmation or ability to disclose their disability (3 focus group participants)

"You're trying to hide your disability, you know, and you're not disclosing it to anyone. But when you're in these groups with similar people, you learn how your coworkers manage it, so you're learning from them""

• improving social or interpersonal skills (3 focus group participants)

Profile of participants

Table 4: Profile of OFPD participants who began their participation from April 2015 to March 2017

Socio-demographic characteristics	Cohort of participants
Number of participants	7,893
Gender
Men	55%
Women	39%
Other	Less than 1%
Missing or refused to answer	6%
Age
Under 30	53%
30 to 54	38%
55 and over	9%
Disability type
Mental health	33%
Developmental or intellectual	18%
Learning	14%
Agility	8%
Motor skills	5%
Hearing	3%
Visual	2%
Speaking	1%
Physical	1%
Other	12%
Missing	2%
Marital status
Married or common law	13%
Separated or divorced	8%
Single	69%
Missing or unknown	10%
Other socio-demographic characteristics
Indigenous	11%
Racialized	16%
Recent immigrant	2%

• Source: ESDC, OFPD administrative data

Men represented more than half of participants (55%). Overall, with respect to the type of disability, participants with mental health issues constituted the largest group (33%), followed by those with developmental disabilities (18%). Slightly more than half of participants were under 30 years of age (53%). A relatively small proportion of participants identified as being racialized (16%), Indigenous (11%), or a recent immigrant (2%).

The profile of the 2015 to 2016 and 2016 to 2017 cohorts of participants is similar to the profile of the 2011 to 2012 cohort examined in the previous evaluation of the Program, though they tend to be slightly younger and the proportion of Indigenous, racialized, and recent immigrant individuals doubled^{Footnote 13}.

To contextualize the profiles of program participants within the general population of Canadians with disabilities, the 2017 Canada Survey on Disability was used, recognizing that not all individuals in the survey are actively pursuing employment.

Compared to Canadians with disabilities, program participants show a greater proportion of men (Figure 2). Program participants are also younger than the working-age population with disabilities (Figure 3).

• Sources: ESDC, OFPD administrative data; Statistics Canada. Canadian Survey on Disability, 2017. Table 13-10-0374-01 – Persons with and without disabilities aged 15 years and over, by age group and gender.

Figure 2: Text description

Population or group	Men	Women
2017 Canadian working age population with disability (aged 15 to 64)	44%	56%
OFPD April 2015 to March 2017 cohort	55%	39%

• Sources: ESDC, OFPD administrative data; Statistics Canada. Canadian Survey on Disability, 2017. Table 13-10-0374-01 – Persons with and without disabilities aged 15 years and over, by age group and gender

Figure 3: Text description

Age group	2017 Canadian working age population with disability (aged 15 to 64)	OFPD April 2015 to March 2017 cohort
15 to 24 years	13%	36%
25 to 44 years	32%	40%
45 to 64 years	55%	23%

In terms of other socio-demographic characteristics, racialized individuals, Indigenous participants, and recent immigrants are all slightly overrepresented among program participants, when compared to the overall Canadian population with disability.

• Sources: ESDC, OFPD administrative data; Statistics Canada. Canadian Survey on Disability, 2017. Table 13-10-0380-01 – Visible minority group of persons with and without disabilities aged 15 years and over, by age group and sex, and Table 13-10-0380-01 – Immigrant status and period of immigration for persons with and without disabilities aged 15 years and over, by gender; Aboriginal Peoples Survey, 2017. Table 41-10-0049-01 – Disability status, disability severity class and labour force status by Aboriginal identity, age group and sex.

Figure 4: Text description

Socio-demographic characteristic	2017 Canadian working age population with disability (aged 15 to 64)	OFPD April 2015 to March 2017 cohort
Indigenous	5%	11%
Racialized	14%	16%
Recent immigrant	1%	2%

Table 5 shows the share of the participant cohort examined by type of activity. A large majority of participants either received Enhanced Employment Assistance Services (48%) or took part in a subsidized Work Experience activity (39%).

Table 5: Share of program participants, by program activity and cohort of participants

Program activity	Participants in 2011 to 2012	Participants in 2015 to 2016 and 2016 to 2017
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	63%	48%
Skills for Employment	13%	10%
Wage Subsidy (now named subsidized Work Experience)	8%	39%
Self-Employment	5%	4%
Work ExperienceFootnote 15	10%	N/A

• Source: ESDC, OFPD administrative data

Following changes introduced in the Program, these proportions have shifted when compared to the 2011 to 2012 cohort of participants. At that time, Wage Subsidy activities (now named subsidized Work Experience) represented a smaller share of program activities undertaken by participants.

As shown in Figure 5 below, the incidence of employment of participants was 15 percentage points higher, on average, during the 5 years that followed their participation, than it was in the year prior to their participation in the Program.

However, this outcome trend does not reflect the net impact of the Program, due to the absence of a control group. Participants' incidence of employment may have been influenced by various factors other than program participation, such as changes in macroeconomic conditions or participants' skills and prior labour market history.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017

Figure 5: Text description

Program period or indicator	OFPD overall	Skills for Employment	Subsidized Work Experience	Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	Self-Employment
5 years pre	36%	36%	35%	34%	57%
4 years pre	37%	39%	38%	35%	52%
3 years pre	39%	41%	39%	36%	52%
2 years pre	42%	46%	44%	39%	49%
1 year pre	45%	49%	48%	41%	49%
Start year	71%	68%	94%	57%	42%
1 year post	67%	68%	80%	58%	48%
2 years post	62%	62%	73%	55%	44%
3 years post	59%	59%	69%	53%	42%
4 years post	56%	58%	63%	50%	41%
5 years post	55%	55%	62%	49%	Data not available
Post-participation average	60%	60%	69%	53%	44%
Change between average post periods and 1 year pre-period	Plus 15 percentage points (plus 32%)	Plus 11 percentage points (plus 22%)	Plus 21 percentage points (plus 44%)	Plus 11 percentage points (plus 28%)	Minus 5 percentage points (minus 11%)

The incidence of employment is based on the presence of annual employment or self-employment income as reported in tax data. Participants' incidence of employment was examined up to calendar year 2022, the most recent year for which tax data was available, except for participants in Self-Employment activities, whose post-participation results were available only up to calendar year 2021.

Unlike other participants, those who took part in Self-Employment activities experienced a decrease in their incidence of employment, which was 5 percentage points (or 11%) lower, on average, in the 4 years that followed participation, than in the prior year^{Footnote 16}.

An incremental impact analysis was conducted to compare participant results to the results of a comparison group, to learn about what would have happened in the absence of the Program. As presented in Figures 6 and 7 below, on average, participants earned $1,180 more annually and had a 3.7 percentage point (pp) higher incidence of employment than similar non-participants, in the 5 years that followed their program participation.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017
• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Figure 6: Text description

Type of program activity	Net impact on employment earnings ($)
Full cohort	1,180
Subsidized Work Experience	2,489***
Skills for Employment	2,262**
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	196

• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017, excluding participants in Self-Employment activities (n=7,591).
• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Figure 7: Text description

Type of program activity	Net impact on probability of being employed (percentage points)
Full cohort	3.7***
Subsidized Work Experience	13.3***
Skills for Employment	7.8***
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	2.6

• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Positive impacts on participants' employment income and incidence of employment were found across each type of program support^{Footnote 17}.

Subsidized Work Experience activities had the largest positive impact. On average, over the 5-year post-program period, participants who acquired subsidized work experience earned $2,489 more annually and had a 13.3 percentage point (pp) higher incidence of employment, than similar non-participants. Participants in Skills for Employment activities earned $2,262 more annually and had a 7.8 percentage point (pp) higher incidence of employment, on average, when compared to similar non-participants.

Finally, participants who only received Enhanced Employment Assistance Services experienced a small positive, but not statistically significant impact on their employment income and incidence of employment. These results are generally consistent with those from the previous evaluation of the Program, which examined a cohort of participants from 2011 to 2012.

Use of income-support programs

Use of Employment Insurance

When examining the impacts of labour market programs such as the OFPD, the receipt of EI benefits can be used as an indicator to assess labour market outcomes. While EI benefit recipients are unemployed, EI eligibility requires having worked a minimum number of insurable hours. EI receipt therefore signals that an individual has worked for a more significant period of time before losing employment and therefore has a stronger attachment to the labour market, as well as more recent work experience, than those who are not eligible for EI (for example, those receiving social assistance benefits).

As shown in Figure 8 below, in the 5 years before program participation, the proportion of participants receiving EI benefits, steadily declined. However, starting from the program start-year, this trend reversed, with EI benefit receipt increasing progressively among these participants.

This outcome trend does not reflect the net impact of the Program, since no control group was used. Part of the increase observed in the latter years (fourth and fifth year post-participation), could be caused by the fact that the amount of EI benefits included payments received through the EI's Emergency Response Benefit delivered in 2020^{Footnote 18}. In addition, receipt of EI benefits was determined based on the presence of EI benefits in each calendar year as reported in tax data. More granular information such as the duration of EI claims, or the type of EI benefits received, were not available through the data platform.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017.

Figure 8: Text description

Program period or indicator	OFPD overall	Skills for Employment	Subsidized Work Experience	Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	Self-Employment
5 years pre	7%	7%	7%	6%	12%
4 years pre	6%	4%	6%	5%	10%
3 years pre	4%	3%	4%	4%	8%
2 years pre	3%	3%	4%	3%	6%
1 year pre	3%	3%	4%	2%	6%
Start year	4%	4%	6%	2%	3%
1 year post	8%	6%	13%	4%	5%
2 years post	9%	9%	14%	5%	5%
3 years post	11%	12%	14%	8%	6%
4 years post	16%	16%	20%	12%	10%
5 years post	16%	17%	19%	13%	10%
Post-participation average	12%	12%	16%	9%	7%
Change between average post periods and 1 year pre-period	Plus 9 percentage points (plus 286%)	Plus 9 percentage points (plus 282%)	Plus 12 percentage points (plus 322%)	Plus 6 percentage points (plus 300%)	Plus 1 percentage point (plus 15%)

The incremental impact analysis of the Program also examined the usage of EI benefits following program participation.

As shown in Figure 9 below, on average, participants in subsidized Work Experience and Skills for Employment activities received slightly higher annual amounts of EI benefits, than similar non-participants over the 5-year post-participation period. On the other hand, participants who only obtained Enhanced Employment Assistance Services through the Program received slightly lower amounts of EI benefits, on average, than similar non-participants.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017, excluding participants in Self-Employment activities (n=7,591).
• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Figure 9: Text description

Type of program activity	Net impact on EI benefits received ($)
Full cohort	60
Subsidized Work Experience	299**
Skills for Employment	314*
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	-248**

• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Receipt of social assistance benefits

When examining the impacts of labour market programs such as the OFPD, receipt of social assistance benefits can also be used as an indicator to assess labour market outcomes. Social assistance receipt typically signals that an individual is unemployed and is not eligible for EI benefits, or unable to work.

As shown in Figure 10 below, during the 5 years before program participation, the proportion of participants receiving social assistance benefits gradually increased. This proportion reached 52% during the year when program activities started and then declined slightly afterwards. On average, during the 5-year period following their participation, 48% of participants received social assistance benefits.

When comparing the 5-year post-participation average to the one-year pre-participation level, a small decrease (minus 1%) in the proportion of participants receiving social assistance benefits can be observed across all groups of participants, except for those who only received Enhanced Employment Assistance Services (the proportion who received social assistance benefits increased by 4 percentage points for these participants).

The proportion of program participants receiving social assistance benefits decreased the most among participants in Self-Employment activities (minus 7 percentage points), and among those who took part in subsidized Work Experience activities (minus 5 percentage points)^{Footnote 19}.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017.

Figure 10: Text description

Program period or indicator	OFPD overall	Skills for Employment	Subsidized Work Experience	Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	Self-Employment
5 years pre	32%	34%	33%	31%	22%
4 years pre	35%	36%	36%	34%	25%
3 years pre	38%	38%	40%	38%	25%
2 years pre	43%	42%	44%	43%	25%
1 year pre	48%	47%	50%	49%	27%
Start year	52%	49%	53%	54%	25%
1 year post	49%	46%	47%	53%	23%
2 years post	49%	47%	47%	54%	21%
3 years post	49%	45%	46%	55%	22%
4 years post	47%	45%	44%	53%	21%
5 years post	45%	41%	42%	51%	18%
Post-participation average	48%	45%	45%	53%	21%
Change between average post periods and 1 year pre-period	Minus 0.3 percentage points (minus 1%)	Minus 3 percentage points (minus 5%)	Minus 5 percentage points (minus 10%)	Plus 4 percentage points (plus 9%)	Minus 7 percentage points (minus 24%)

Outcome trends (before and after participation) illustrated in Figure 10 cannot be attributed to program participation due to the absence of a control group for comparison. These changes in social assistance receipt may have been influenced by various other factors, such as labour market conditions, policy changes affecting eligibility criteria, or individual circumstances. Social assistance receipt was determined based on the presence of social assistance benefits in each calendar year as reported in tax data. More precise indicators such as the duration of periods of social assistance receipt, or the type of social assistance benefits received, were not available.

The incremental impact analysis of the Program also examined receipt of social assistance benefits following program participation. As shown in Figure 11 below, on average, participants who took part in subsidized Work Experience or Skills for Employment activities received less social assistance benefits than similar non-participants.

Indeed, when compared to similar non-participants, participants in subsidized Work Experience activities received $587 less in social assistance and participants in Skills for Employment activities received $1,295 less, on average, over the 5-year post-participation period.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017, excluding participants in Self-Employment activities (n=7,591).
• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Figure 11: Text description

Type of program activity	Net Impacts on social assistance benefits received ($)
Full cohort	-376
Subsidized Work Experience	-587***
Skills for Employment	-1,295***
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services	157

• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Overall, incremental impacts on employment outcomes and receipt of government income support demonstrate that the Program led to improvements in participants' labour market attachments compared to similar non-participants, with the largest positive and sustained impacts found for subsidized Work Experience and Skills for Employment activities.

Participants who only received Enhanced Employment Assistance Services experienced small positive impacts on employment outcomes, but received slightly lower EI benefits and slightly higher social assistance benefits than similar non-participants, which may indicate challenges in securing or sustaining employment. Enhanced Employment Assistance Services are relatively modest activities such as counselling, job search assistance and case management. These supports, when not combined with more intensive interventions, are not expected to increase participants' skills or influence their employment levels to a large extent.

Labour market outcomes by socio-demographic factors

The impacts of the Program on labour market outcomes were also examined across socio-demographic groups. Results presented in Figure 12 below show that across all groups, impacts are positive on both incidence of employment and employment income.

The findings indicate that these impacts are relatively consistent, suggesting that the Program benefits eligible individuals in a relatively similar way.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017, excluding participants in Self-Employment activities (n=7,591).
• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

Figure 12: Text description

Socio-demographic characteristic	Net impact on incidence of employment (percentage points)	Net impact on employment earnings ($)
Overall average	6.7***	1,635*
Women	6.5*** (not statistically different from average)	2,002 (not statistically different from average)
Men	6.9*** (not statistically different from average)	1,332** (not statistically different from average)
Aged 30 or less	3.7** (statistically different from average)	1,730 (not statistically different from average)
Aged 31 to 54	10.2*** (statistically different from average)	1,660** (not statistically different from average)
Aged 55 or more	9.5*** (not statistically different from average)	1,066 (not statistically different from average)
Indigenous	8.8*** (not statistically different from average)	1,008 (statistically different from average)
Racialized	5.0*** (statistically different from average)	1,400* (not statistically different from average)
Recent immigrant	8.4*** (not statistically different from average)	2,413** (not statistically different from average)
Claimed the Disability Tax Credit	3.7* (not statistically different from average)	1,490* (not statistically different from average)
Developmental disability	2.4 (statistically different from average)	1,347 (not statistically different from average)
Learning disability	3.3** (statistically different from average)	1,594 (not statistically different from average)
Physical disability	6.4*** (not statistically different from average)	2,889* (statistically different from average)

• Note: Significance levels: ***1%, **5%, *10%

However, while all groups show positive impacts, some groups seem to have higher or lower impacts than the average, when compared to the overall impacts. Figure 12 highlights the groups for which the impact is statistically different from the average^{Footnote 20}.

For age groups, program impacts on the incidence of employment were relatively lower for individuals aged under 30 (plus 3.7 percentage points) and were relatively higher for individuals aged 30 to 54 (plus 10.2 percentage points), when compared to the overall average impact (plus 6.7 percentage points). When considering their socio-demographic profiles, participants aged under 30 were more likely to be men and to have obtained the Disability Tax Credit^{Footnote 21}, and were disproportionately represented among those with developmental and learning disabilities. They also reported less employment earnings over the 5 years prior to their participation ($2,263). As for participants aged between 30 and 54 years old, the differences observed were that they were less likely to report mental health disabilities, and that they reported more employment earnings over the 5 years prior to their participation ($6,528).

Similarly, individuals with developmental or learning disabilities showed positive, but lower than average impacts on their incidence of employment (plus 2.4 percentage points and plus 3.3 percentage points). These disability groups were predominantly composed of younger individuals, suggesting that age and disability type could intersect, and that these groups could face greater challenges to entering the labour market.

Racialized and Indigenous individuals also showed positive impacts, but that were lower than the overall average (plus 5.0 percentage points on the incidence of employment for racialized individuals, and a $1,008 increase in employment earnings for Indigenous individuals). Limited differences were observed in the socio-demographic profiles of these participants, except that racialized participants were more likely to report being recent immigrants and reported lower employment earnings over the pre-participation period, while Indigenous participants were more likely to report learning disabilities.

These socio-demographic differences could contribute to some variation in the impacts observed. In addition, findings from qualitative lines of evidence suggest that racialized groups may face systemic barriers to entering the labour market.

Longer-term labour market outcomes

Employment retention

Some participants were able to retain their employment for a long period. Yet, interviewees and focus group participants identified multiple barriers that can make it challenging for participants to retain their jobs or stay employed for the medium to long term. A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (4) reported that they were still employed by the organization that hired them through the Program (for example, for a subsidized job placement, or following a specific training activity), which shows how the Program can be a stepping stone towards regular employment.

Among employers who hired persons with disabilities through subsidized job placements and took part in focus groups:

• half (4 out of 8) reported that program participants were all hired on a regular basis after the end of their job placement, and still work in their organization today
• some (3 out of 8) reported that some of the employees hired through the Program stayed in the organization following their job placement
• one reported that placements did not lead to regular employment because of organizational constraints

However, a few (3) interviewees (funded organizations and project partners) mentioned that financial incentives such as wage subsidies are effective in encouraging employers to hire persons with disabilities, but that these placements do not always lead to long-term employment.

"On the job retention side, it would take a bit more"

Additionally, a few employer interviewees (4) emphasized that successful outcomes for participants often depend on aligning job roles with individual strengths and support needs, and noted that, when participants are not well-matched with their job roles, the duration of their employment is often short. At the same time, qualitative data collected through focus groups and interviews did not allow measuring the extent to which employers who used the Program were satisfied with the services and supports, nor to determine how many retained the workers hired through the Program.

Persisting barriers and challenges to labour market outcomes

Employer attitudes and perceptions

Some job seekers who took part in focus groups (26 out of 78) reported experiencing or witnessing reluctance to hire persons with disabilities, as part of their interactions with potential employers, which they believe to be caused by various reasons, including:

• apprehensions regarding health and safety risks and potential liabilities for the employer
• lack of awareness of supports or technologies available for workplace accommodations
• preconceived ideas regarding productivity, potential to work, or risk of absenteeism
• lack of awareness regarding the benefits of hiring workers with disabilities

In addition, some of these job seekers who took part in focus groups (7 out of 26) also noted that once they are hired, employers may be unwilling to provide workplace accommodations or may lack commitment or proactiveness in this area.

"I'm able to get hired. However, then the job doesn't want to give you the accommodations that I need … I require like mobility devices, and I've had jobs who wouldn't let me use accommodations for that. I've had jobs who said: I wouldn't have hired you if you had brought your mobility aid to the interview"

A few of these job seekers (5 out of 26) felt that expectations of receiving wage subsidies when hiring workers with disabilities can limit retention following subsidized job placements (5 participants).

"I feel like people with disabilities are just tools and without this subsidy, we're [considered] useless to society"

Labour market requirements, conditions or trends

A few (14) job seekers who took part in focus groups reported having difficulty finding job opportunities that would be a good fit for them, because there is a lack of:

• jobs that align with their personal needs, attitudes, interests, or circumstances, and offer high enough wages or good working conditions (7 participants)
• opportunities for remote work, which is especially interesting for those with vision-related disabilities or mobility limitations (5 participants)
• opportunities for part-time jobs or jobs with flexible work schedules (5 participants)

A few (6) job seekers who took part in focus groups pointed to labour market dynamics, such as increased unemployment or competition from other job seekers in the labour market, which make it challenging to find work or become self-employed in general and can also limit participants' success through the Program. A few interviewees (3), including job seekers, also pointed to structural shifts in the labour market towards more short-term or part-time job opportunities, and less stable employment being available, as a systemic barrier that disproportionately affects marginalized groups, including persons with disabilities.

Gaps in transportation infrastructure

A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (9) shared that transportation-related challenges (for example, commute time being too long, lacking access to an adapted vehicle, or not having access to public transit) can limit opportunities in the labour market, especially in rural areas.

Disability type and severity

Different types of disabilities can be associated with specific challenges for participants seeking employment. During focus groups with job seekers, the following labour market barriers or challenges faced by those with physical disabilities were identified:

• transportation-related issues (9 participants)
• limitations in the types of tasks they can perform or jobs they can occupy due to disability (8 participants)
• accessibility devices or software being unavailable or temporarily malfunctioning (4 participants)
• employers' reluctance to hire them due to health and safety risks associated with their specific disability (2 participants)
• difficulty discussing job opportunities or disability-related needs due to speech-related disabilities (2 participants)
• business facilities not being adapted for accessibility (for example, not wheelchair accessible) (1 participant)

In comparison, those with invisible disabilities (for example, learning, cognitive, or mental health-related disabilities) reported facing different barriers in the labour market, including:

• episodic mental health issues or other health issues preventing them from working temporarily, or making it more difficult to maintain employment (8 participants)
• difficulty disclosing their disability, making it more difficult to obtain the accommodations needed (2 participants)
• challenges with social interactions at work due to a disability that can affect social interactions such as autism (2 participants)

Some key informants (10 interviewees, including job seekers and employers) also stressed that disability type affects how individuals interact with the Program, and what supports they need. For example, participants with physical disabilities often face accessibility and transportation barriers, whereas those with cognitive or mental health conditions may require more intensive, ongoing support. Similarly, some interviewees from funded organizations (5) mentioned that the Program is less effective in helping those with more complex needs or facing greater barriers in the labour market, for example, due to untreated mental health conditions or low digital literacy.

"There are some people [with complex needs] who are just not there yet. They're just not work ready yet, we try our best to ensure that people are actually looking for employment as a means to move forward"

Newcomers and racialized individuals

Some (5) interviewees (funded organizations and regional staff) noted that persons with disabilities from racialized or newcomer communities may face additional barriers due to cultural stigmas associated with disabilities and a reluctance to self-identify as having a disability. Insights from a few job seekers who took part in focus groups (8 job seekers) also indicated that newcomers with disabilities can face additional challenges in the labour market:

• lack of Canadian work experience (4 participants)
• lack of networking opportunities or difficulty navigating the local labour market (3 participants)
• limited access to employment supports or specific job opportunities due to citizenship status (1 participant)
• financial barriers to foreign credential recognition (1 participant)

Potential age-based discrimination

A few job seekers (3 focus group participants) reported facing age-based discrimination on top of other barriers limiting their ability to find work.

Complementary or additional support or services

Close to half of job seekers who took part in focus groups (35 out of 78), and a few job seeker interviewees (2 out of 14), identified areas for improvement in the Program or suggested complementary measures that could help enhance the labour market outcomes of program participants, or those of persons with disabilities more generally. Their suggestions include:

• Strengthening supports for skills development, preparation for employment, and job search (16 focus group participants and 1 interviewee), for example, by providing:
  • more support or funding for upskilling or career-oriented training (9 focus group participants)
  • career counselling and assistance with career transition (4 focus group participants and 1 interviewee)
  • more support for training on accessibility related software, tools or screen readers (1 focus group participant)
• Offering additional measures or services to facilitate labour market integration (8 focus group participants), such as:
  • guidance to help participants disclose their disability, request accommodations, manage employers' expectation, or handle situations where their needs are not being met (5 focus group participants)
  • paid internship opportunities (2 focus group participants)
  • additional funding for ergonomic assessments or workplace accommodations (1 focus group participant)
• Increasing resources or measures supporting employment retention (10 focus group participants and 1 interviewee), including:
  • longer-term supports, where case workers remain available during work placements and conduct follow-ups on a regular basis (8 focus group participants)
  • financial support to extend the duration of subsidized job placements (for example, from 3 to 6 months), providing participants and employers additional time to adjust and succeed in their roles (1 interviewee)
• Enhancing service delivery and accessibility (6 focus group participants), for example, by:
  • ensuring service providers inform participants about the full range of available supports for which they may be eligible (4 focus group participants)
  • providing funding directly to end users (job seekers and employers), rather than through intermediaries such as employment agencies (1 focus group participant)
• Providing additional supports for self-employment (3 focus group participants), such as:
  • a monthly stipend or additional funding to support entrepreneurs with disabilities in launching their businesses (2 focus group participants)
  • training on how to use social media and online self-marketing tools (1 focus group participant)
• Additional support for transportation (4 focus group participants)
• Peer support programs (3 focus group participants)

In addition to specific supports and services, some job seekers who took part in focus groups (17 out of 78), about half job seeker interviewees (7 out of 14), and a few (2) funding recipients, emphasized the need to improve access to mental health services and supports, mental health professionals, counsellors, mentors, or social workers^{Footnote 22}.

A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (6) also indicated that discontinuity in the availability of program supports can sometimes have negative impacts on participants' outcomes. For example, one of them reported that they were about to obtain a job placement when the organization providing them program supports shut down.

Cost-benefit analysis

A cost-benefit analysis was conducted to assess the longer-term impacts of the Program and whether the benefits outweigh costs. It used the net impact results presented earlier for a cohort of participants who started a program activity between April 2015 and March 2017. The outcomes observed over the 5-year post-participation period were then projected for an additional 5 years, resulting in a 10-year post-participation analysis window. The main objective of this analysis was to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Program, while addressing the following questions:

• Did the Program result in net financial benefits or losses 10 years after participation ended?
• When did investment in the Program break even (where benefits equal costs) from a societal perspective?
• What was the rate of return on investment in program activities over the 10-year post-participation period?

The net social benefit (for the government and participant) is $7,271, which represents an average rate of social return of 131%, or 8% per annum over 10 years following participation.

As shown in Figure 13 below:

• for participants, the total net benefits were $6,450
• for the government, the total net benefits were $821

Overall, from a societal perspective, the Program "breaks even" 3.4 years after participation. The break-even point corresponds to the moment when the investment made by government generates an equal amount of net benefits to society.

• Source: Administrative data – Labour Market Program Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 2015 to March 2017, excluding participants in Self-Employment activities (n=7,591).

Notes:

1. Program costs include the program expenditures and the loss incurred by society when raising additional revenues, such as taxes to fund government spending
2. Government Deductions include EI premium, Canada Pension Plan or Québec Pension Plan contributions and income and sales taxes. Employment earnings include fringe benefits (for example, employer paid health insurance, pension contributions) and earnings lost during the time spent in the Program
3. Estimates based on administrative program data and average public health care cost data from a report of the Canadian Institute for Health Information. More details about the methodology can be found in the following technical report: Cost-benefit analysis – Incorporating public health care costs savings in the context of the labour market programs evaluation

Figure 13: Text description

Costs or benefits for government (cumulative impact, net present value, discounted at 5% per year)

• Program costs¹: minus $5,670
• Employment Insurance: minus $187
• Social assistance: plus $3,994
• Government deductions²: minus $2,595
• Health care cost savings³: plus $89
• Total net benefit: plus $821

Costs or benefits for participant (cumulative impact, net present value, discounted at 5% per year)

• Employment Insurance: plus $187
• Social assistance: minus $3,994
• Government deductions: minus $2,595
• Employment earnings³: Plus $12,852
• Total net benefit: plus $6,450

Total net social benefit (government plus individual) over 10 years:

• $7,271, which represents a social rate of return of 131%

The social return is an indicator which shows how much net benefits accrued to society due to a $1 investment in a government program.

As shown in Figure 14 below, all types of program activities yielded positive social returns over time. Overall, each $1 invested in the Program yielded $1.31 in return over a 10-year period following participation. Subsidized Work Experience activities yielded the highest social return among all types of program activities.

• Sources: Administrative data – Labour Market Program Data Platform. OFPD participants from the April 2015 to March 2017 cohort, excluding participants in Self-Employment activities (n=7,591)

Notes:

1. The cost-benefit results for Enhanced Employment Assistance Services were not presented. This is because the incremental impact results were almost equal to zero
2. The break-even point is reached when the amount of investment made by the government generates an equal amount of net benefit to society

Figure 14: Text description

Type of program activity	Social return per $ invested
Overall OFPD	1.31
Skills for Employment	2.38
Subsidized Work Experience	2.84

3. Supporting employers

Encouraging the hiring of persons with disabilities

A few employers who took part in focus groups (2) and some employer interviewees (6) indicated that wage subsidies and structured job placements encourage employers to hire persons with disabilities. For example, some of them reported that:

• the Program allowed them to explore what hiring workers with disabilities could look like by providing a "safety net" or by minimizing the risk of having to incur "out-of-pocket" expenses to overcome potential challenges that may arise (1 employer interviewee and 1 focus group participant)
• due to budget constraints or resource limitations, they would have not been able to hire participants without the Program (1 employer interviewee and 2 focus group participants)

Increasing hiring capacity

More than half of employers who took part in focus groups (5 out of 9) and some employer interviewees (5) reported that the Program increased their capacity to hire workers with disabilities in different ways, for example, by:

• facilitating onboarding through structured services, such as tailored onboarding plans or job coaching (5 employer interviewees)
• helping them cover initial hiring and training costs (2 focus group participants)
• allowing workers to express their concerns or needs for additional supports confidentially, through someone who can intervene on their behalf with the employer, as needed (2 focus group participants)

Meeting employers' human resources needs

All 8 employers who took part in focus groups and who hired participants as part of subsidized Work Experience activities (also referred to as subsidized job placements), said that participants met their human resources needs, and almost all of these employers (7 out of 8) noted that at least one participant was hired on a regular basis after their job placement.

Among these employers, a few (3) described their experience with the Program in very positive ways. For example, one of these employers mentioned that using the Program resulted in several successful job placements, including 2 with participants who are still employed by the organization today, and others that allowed participants to grow professionally, go back to school, or obtain better jobs in other organizations.

Other organizational benefits

More than half of employers who took part in focus groups (5 out of 9) reported that their experience with the Program provided other benefits for their organization. Some employers (3 out of 9) stressed that workers with disabilities improve organizational cultural and performance, because they:

• go above and beyond regarding employment, as it gives them a sense of belonging (1 employer)
• tend be consistent and stay longer in the same organization, which diminishes turnover (1 employer)
• bring compassion, humanity, and humour in the workplace (1 employer)
• sometimes have special talents or strengths such as higher attention to detail and deeper capacity to focus (1 employer)

A few employers (2) noted that their participation helped them improve human resources processes, by:

• changing the way they select candidates, while focusing more on skills, and transferable skills, than on education and work experience (1 employer)
• reconsidering onboarding processes using a more equity- and accessibility-focused lens (1 employer)

These findings were echoed by a few program officials interviewed, who noted that employers who participate in the Program often continue inclusive hiring beyond the initial engagement, and by different studies showing that employers who have hired individuals with disabilities are more likely to do so again, as they recognize the advantages of inclusivity^{Footnote 23}.

Employers who took part in focus groups did not report that their experience with the Program changed their perceptions of workers with disability, either positively or negatively, because they already had an organizational culture that values diversity among staff or were already aware of the benefits of hiring workers with disabilities.

However, a few (5) program officials interviewed reported that employers who engaged with the Program develop a more positive view of the skills and contributions of persons with disabilities.

In addition, a few interviewees from funded organizations and program officials (6) noted that Employer Awareness activities help to reduce stigma surrounding disability among employers, and to address misinformation about disability and employment, such as the costs of workplace accommodations.

Finally, limited evidence from key informant interviews and focus groups suggests that the sharing of success stories and program promotion, among other factors such as recent legislative changes, may also encourage some employers to hire more workers with disabilities.

• A few (4) interviewees noted that employers often share their positive experiences within their networks, which may encourage other organizations to explore hiring individuals with disabilities
• One interviewee representing a funded organization reported that, since the adoption of the Accessible Canada Act and the Accessible British Columbia Act, many federally and provincially regulated employers have sought guidance from their organization to ensure compliance with these new laws, which created a valuable opportunity to promote the hiring of persons with disabilities

A few (3) employers interviewed and most employers who took part in focus groups (7 out of 9) identified areas for improvement or made specific suggestions of measures that could help improve the Program's effectiveness for employers. These ideas included:

• Strengthening positive attitudes and aspirations of participants (3 focus group participants) – for example, by encouraging participants to believe in themselves and aspire for longer-term employment, so they adjust their mindset to the idea of transitioning to stable employment^{Footnote 24}
• Providing additional supports during employee onboarding and post-employment (3 focus group participants and 5 interviewees) – for example, by helping employers discuss the disability and promote related resources with new hires or to support those who have already transitioned into the workplace and are facing new challenges
• Allow more flexibility in funding (4 focus group participants) – for example, by improving the timing and duration of program funding or expanding eligibility criteria to include for-profit organizations, and by making sure that funding is available in a timely manner, when employers need it, rather than on a cyclical basis. One employer specifically noted that they would have been interested in using the Program again, after their first experience, but could not do so because there was no more funding available

4. Impacts of the COVID‑19 pandemic

Key finding 4.1

The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted the labour market situation of some persons with disabilities, including program participants. The pandemic also created some financial challenges for some organizations and new human resource challenges for some employers.

Negative impacts on persons with disabilities

The COVID-19 pandemic led to various disruptions that negatively impacted the Canadian workforce, including persons with disabilities. Findings from Statistics Canada's June 2020 Labour Force Survey^{Footnote 25} indicate that:

• among respondents aged 15 to 64 with a long-term condition or disability, two-thirds (66%) reported being employed prior to the start of the pandemic, while 55% reported being employed at the time of the survey
• among those who were employed before the pandemic, over one-third (36%) reported experiencing a temporary or permanent job loss or reduced hours since March 2020

The pandemic was more severe for persons with disabilities. Many persons with disabilities relied on the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) during the crisis. However, overall impact of the CERB on individuals' income varied across the country due to its interactions with other income-support programs. For example, disability income assistance recipients who received the CERB were treated differently depending on where they lived, with some provinces allowing them to receive the entire CERB amount without cutting back disability benefits, some provinces partially exempting CERB income from the calculation of disability benefits, and other provinces not exempting CERB income at all from this calculation^{Footnote 26}.

Challenges experienced by program participants^{Footnote 27}

More than half of job seekers who took part in focus groups and who discussed the issue (30 out of 56), and almost all job seeker interviewees (13 out of 14), reported that the pandemic had negative impacts on their situation in the labour market, including:

• job loss and difficulty finding work, or a reduction in work hours, at least temporarily (18 focus group participants, 6 interviewees)
• being already unemployed and finding it more difficult to find work (9 focus group participants, 4 interviewees)
• continuing to work on a self-employment basis, but loosing revenue for various reasons (for example, having less clients due to international travel restrictions or temporary lockdowns) (2 focus group participants)

Some of these participants (16 focus group participants and 11 interviewees) identified specific factors or issues that made job search efforts more challenging during this period, such as:

• fewer jobs being available, for various reasons such as temporary lockdowns and social distancing restrictions limiting the number of in-person staff (8 focus group participants and 6 interviewees)
• some employers being reluctant to allow workers to work from home, even when this would have been feasible (3 focus group participants)
• some persons with disabilities being more susceptible to severe illness, further limiting their willingness to take specific jobs or go outside their home (2 focus group participants)

A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (6) and interviewees (10) suggested that some participants' ability to obtain or maintain employment was also hindered by challenges or issues faced in other areas of their lives that were affected by the pandemic, including:

• mental health challenges, sometimes affecting job readiness or retention (4 focus group participants, and 10 interviewees including job seekers and representatives of funded organizations)
• difficulties with the transition to online learning (3 focus group participants and 1 interviewed job seeker)

"He was very overwhelmed, he said. He preferred, like, physical conversation, face-to-face, and not online" [a mother referring to her son with a disability]

• a decline in physical health resulting from COVID, further preventing them from working (1 focus group participant)

Negative impacts faced by employer participants

Some employers who took part in focus groups (4) and a few employer interviewees (4) reported that the pandemic had negative impacts or created challenges for their organization, including:

• limited ability to hire and retain workers with disabilities, due to reduced revenues, staffing cuts, and operational uncertainty (4 interviewees)
• temporary shutdowns (2 focus group participants)
• some neurodivergent staff members having difficulty adapting to their new daily routine, which hindered their progression at work (1 focus group participant)

The growth of telework

Results from Statistics Canada's June 2020 Labour Force Survey^{Footnote 28} reveal that, among those aged 15 to 64 who had long-term conditions or disabilities and were employed:

• the majority (58%) were working from home instead of at their usual workplace
• about 29% were working at their usual workplace outside the home

A few (4) job seeker focus groups participants indicated that the COVID-19 pandemic increased opportunities for remote work which was seen to be a great option for those with mobility limitations or vision loss, and those who do not have access to public transit or have difficulty commuting to work. This was echoed by 3 interviewees representing funded organizations who noted that the normalization of remote work during the pandemic opened new employment pathways for persons with disabilities, particularly those facing mobility or transportation barriers. However, findings from the literature indicate that remote work emerged as both an opportunity and a challenge for some persons with disabilities.

• Flexible work arrangements allowed some individuals to access employment that was previously unavailable due to transportation barriers or inaccessible workplaces, but many persons with disabilities faced significant difficulties in adapting to remote work due to inadequate accommodations and inaccessible technology^{Footnote 29}
• Results from the 2017 and 2022 Canadian Survey on Disability^{Footnote 30} indicate that the increase in working from home benefited persons with disabilities through a decrease in unmet needs for workplace accommodations, which diminished from 40% in 2017 to 35% in 2022. However, this decrease varied across groups and was less significant for those with more severe disabilities

Maintaining employment during the pandemic

A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (3) reported that they stayed employed during the pandemic as:

• they were able to work remotely (2 participants)
• they were working in sectors that were considered essential services and remained open (for example, a drug store) (1 participant)

The administrative program data confirms that the incidence of employment^{Footnote 31} of a 2017 cohort of participants declined to about 55% in 2020 and 54% in 2021 (relative to about 61% in 2019) and recovered to about 60% in 2022.

• Source: Administrative Data Technical Report – Labour Market Data Platform. Cohort of OFPD participants from April 1, 2015 to March 31, 2017.
• Note: These outcomes only include those of participants who started the Program between January and March 2017, inclusively. Focusing on these participants allowed to observe outcomes during at least two full years following the onset of the pandemic (that is, 2021 and 2022).

Figure 15: Text description

Calendar year	Incidence of employment (1,381 participants)
2012	36%
2013	39%
2014	43%
2015	45%
2016	47%
2017 (start year)	74%
2018	63%
2019	61%
2020 (COVID)	55%
2021	54%
2022	60%

New opportunities for program participants

A few job seekers who took part in focus groups (2) reported that the pandemic context had positive impacts on their labour market situation or future employment prospects, because it helped them seize job opportunities that would have not been available otherwise due to recruitment challenges faced by some employers, or because specific positions had to be created to respond to increased or changing demands induced by the pandemic. All employer focus group participants (9/9) reported that, despite the challenges it created, the pandemic also had at least one positive impact or benefit for their organization which could be viewed as particularly beneficial for hiring or supporting persons with disabilities. Some examples include that:

• it forced or amplified the transition to remote or hybrid work (3 employers)
• it increased the focus placed on health and safety in the workplace, or well-being at work (3 employers)
• it encouraged them to develop new virtual training tools (2 employers)
• demand boomed in their industry during the pandemic, which led to increased hiring (1 employer)

Conclusion and recommendations

The OFPD generally supports the achievement of program objectives by offering flexible and tailored disability-focused supports to job seekers with disabilities and their employers. The Program also supports the objectives of the recently announced Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities and the Canada Disability Inclusion Action Plan by promoting inclusive hiring, improving employer awareness, helping to build Indigenous and community capacity, and increasingly supporting flexible employment pathways such as self-employment.

However, the complexity of the application process and the limited promotion of the Program to potential funding recipients and clientele (job seekers and employers) may be limiting access to the Program. These challenges appear to be limiting the awareness of the Program and the supports and services provided by funding recipients, and limiting access to the Program by certain organizations, such as smaller or rural and remote organizations who may not have the capacity to complete lengthy or complex application processes.

When assessing the Program's contribution to the employment outcomes of persons with disabilities, findings show that the Program contributes to the employment readiness of persons with disabilities by helping them develop the skills and confidence needed to obtain employment and find new employment opportunities.

The analysis of incremental impacts demonstrate that the Program led to improvements in participants' labour market attachments. On average, participants in program activities earned $1,180 more annually and had a 3.7 percentage point (pp) higher incidence of employment than similar non-participants, in the 5-year post-participation period. Among support activities, participants in subsidized Work Experience and Skills for Employment activities experienced the largest positive impacts, when compared to similar non-participants. Similar to what was observed for other labour market programs, participants who only received Enhanced Employment Assistance Services experienced small positive impacts on employment outcomes.

All socio-demographic groups showed average positive net impacts on employment outcomes. However, both qualitative and quantitative evidence demonstrated that when these impacts are assessed by different socio-demographic factors, certain groups seem to have higher or lower impacts than others, and that certain groups of persons with disabilities can face additional barriers to realizing positive employment outcomes.

The Program also supports employers in various ways to hire persons with disabilities. This could include providing more information about hiring persons with disabilities, job-matching services, wage subsidies, and ongoing support to help employers integrate and retain employees with disabilities.

Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic created multiple challenges for both employees and employers, particularly for persons with disabilities seeking for or trying to maintain employment. However, it also provided some new opportunities, for example, with the shift to remote work, which was less prominent prior to COVID.

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: Continue exploring strategies to provide more support to participants facing complex barriers, or who need more intensive or longer-term assistance to join and remain in, the labour market.

While the Program helped many persons improve their employability or their employment situation, different barriers continue to prevent some program participants from accessing program supports, joining the labour market, or maintaining employment in the medium- to long-term. Key barriers identified include cultural barriers, specific barriers associated with physical disabilities including mobility limitations, cumulative barriers related to being in rural or isolated locations, and unique barriers faced by those with invisible disabilities that may require more intense or a broader set of supports and services. While many of these barriers are structural or systemic in nature, and do not fall under the direct control of the Program, the Program could explore additional measures or partnerships, such as more culturally appropriate supports, that could help overcome these barriers while helping job seekers with disabilities take full advantage of complementary supports and resources they may be able to benefit from through other programs or services.

Recommendation 2: Collaborate with program stakeholders (for example, funding recipients) and partners to improve awareness of, and access to, the Program by clarifying roles and responsibilities to better promote funded services to job seekers and employers, and by simplifying the funding application process.

Findings from the current and previous evaluations revealed that there is a lack of awareness of the Program among potential participants, including both job seekers and employers. Efforts are currently being made by funding recipients to disseminate information about the services and supports they offer via their own networks. However, there is a lack of clarity regarding the role that could be played by the Department and other key program stakeholders to proactively reach persons with disabilities who are not already in contact with funded organizations and may need guidance to find and access the services and supports they need.

Consideration

Consideration 1: Continue making efforts to fill performance data gaps while refining the indicators used to track the progress made by program participants

Based on the program data used for this evaluation (up to 2022), ongoing gaps were observed related to the indicators and the data collected for performance measurement purposes. These gaps were identified as part of previous evaluations and include the unavailability of granular data on Skills for Employment activities, and the lack of information on employer participants, which creates challenges in assessing the progress made towards some program outcomes, such as outcomes for employers. While the Program has recently started to make improvements in these areas, such as collecting data from employer participants, it would be beneficial to continue exploring additional improvements to inform policy analysis, research and evaluation activities.

Appendix A – Key findings and recommendations from the previous evaluation

The previous evaluation cycle included a 2-phased summative evaluation. Phase 1 was completed in 2018 and focused on the implementation of reforms announced in federal budgets 2012 and 2014. Key findings included the following:

• About 22% of survey respondents noted that they would have been unlikely to find work without participating in the Program
• Post-program, more participants were employed, self-employed or returned to school:
  • 55% in fiscal year 2016 to 2017 compared to
  • 42% in fiscal year 2012 to 2013
• Post-program employment and self-employment is conditioned by many factors, including:
  • illness or disability
  • the inability to obtain an employment income that exceeds available social assistance benefits
  • lacking access to adapted transportation
  • family or other personal responsibilities
• The OFPD could serve more clients and there is opportunity to increase awareness of the Program among employers

The Phase 1 evaluation recommended to:

• continue enhancing employers' awareness of the valuable contribution that persons with disabilities can make and of the various supports available to facilitate their hiring and workplace integration
• explore the possibility of extending the availability of supports and follow-ups with participants
• further clarify the concept of social innovation and its application within the context of the Program, and establish specific criteria for assessment and monitoring purposes
• better link the Program's logic model to the reforms and new policy directions of the Program, and continue improving indicators used for performance measurement purposes

Phase 2 was completed in 2020 and concentrated on longer-term participant outcomes and employers' experiences with the Program. Key findings included the following:

• Over the 5-year post-participation period, the average annual earnings of participants increased by 38% due to participation in the Program. This translates to about $1,100 higher than non-participants with similar characteristics
• Skills for Employment and subsidized Work Experience activities were the most effective program activities at improving participants' employment opportunities and decreasing reliance on social assistance benefits
• Overall, $1 investment in the OFPD program yields $1.7 in return over a 10-year period following the activity

The Phase 2 evaluation recommended:

• examining ways to contact participating employers directly for the purpose of performance measurement
• collecting more granular data on the Skills for Employment activity, to increase understanding of what elements contribute to changes in employment and employment earnings
• re-examining the 6-month limit placed on training programs as a result of program reforms

Appendix B – Detailed descriptions of program activities

The following descriptions of program activities are based on the content of the 2018 and 2023 OFPD calls for proposals.

Skills and Employment stream (now Stream 1 – Participant-focused Stream)

Work Experience (subsidized or non-subsidized) activities

Work experience activities provide support to employers to encourage them to hire persons with disabilities whom they may not otherwise hire. These activities can either be subsidized or non-subsidized and may be combined with Enhanced Employer Support activities.

Where a wage subsidy is provided to the employer, it must be an established share of actual wages paid to the participant and mandatory employment-related costs. Wages paid should be in-line with the prevailing labour market rate for the position to be filled by the participant.

Skills for Employment activities

Skills for Employment activities enable participants to undertake and develop skills, from basic to advanced, that are required for employment.

These activities, during which time participants may receive income support and other supports, must be used to provide training to participants to prepare for specific employment opportunities related to a stable or expanding sector, where there is a reasonable expectation of employment. The specific skills training supported through Skills for Employment activities must reflect current or projected local employment opportunities. Training can be full-time or part-time, and may include short classroom-based courses, distance learning, internet-based instruction or correspondence courses.

Enhanced Employment Assistance Services

Enhanced Employment Assistance Services support the provision of a mixture of activities (special services) tailored to meet the needs of persons with disabilities to facilitate their integration into employment. These services help these individuals to prepare for, find, obtain and maintain employment.

Enhanced Employer Support activities

The activities focus on helping employers prepare for the integration or inclusion of persons with disabilities into their workplace and will normally include activities that precede the placement of participants with employers.

Self-Employment activities

Self-Employment activities provide support to facilitate the economic independence of persons with disabilities. Participants may receive income support and other supports from the recipient organization, including technical and consultative support to help them assess their business concepts, prepare business plans and launch their enterprise.

Participants must provide evidence of their ability to personally invest a minimum of 10% of the cost of the launch of the business.

Working with Employers stream (now Stream 2 – Employer Stream)

Employer Awareness activities

Employer Awareness activities aim to raise the profile of persons with disabilities within the employer community and to highlight the capabilities and skills of workers with disabilities. These activities may include working with the employer community to address barriers and increase employment opportunities for persons with disabilities by helping employers prepare for the integration of persons with disabilities into their places of work. These activities must be used to promote the valuable contribution persons with disabilities make to the workforce.

Enhanced Employer Support activities

Enhanced Employer Support activities focus on helping employers prepare for the integration or inclusion of persons with disabilities into their workplace, in anticipation of the future hiring of persons with disabilities.

Matching Services (2018 to 2022 funding cycle only)

Matching Services aimed to build connections between employers looking to hire and persons with disabilities looking for work, while providing support to both parties throughout the hiring and integration process. Such services were delivered through the OFPD, as part of a 5-year pilot project that started in fiscal year 2018 to 2019.

Stream 3 – Career Advancement Stream (current funding cycle only)

Career Advancement Work Experience

These activities may include supporting and subsidizing the costs of employers in providing time-limited job placements, internships or job-shadowing (up to 12 months) for employees with disabilities, to help them acquire or enhance new skills and competencies and gain professional experience in certain areas of expertise (for example, moving from stock workers to bookkeeping or office assistant, etcetera).

Skills for Advancement

These activities may include, but are not limited to, measures to assist employed persons with disabilities better assess and articulate their needs, or to help employers re-design work processes, split tasks, and foster the advancement and success of their employees with disabilities, by reorganizing work around their strengths.

Employer Supports for Career Advancement

Employer Supports for Career Advancement activities focus on helping employers support career growth of persons with disabilities in their workplace and will normally include activities that precede the placement of participants with employers. However, these activities may also be offered following the placement of participants, to facilitate the establishment of a successful working relationship and to promote longer-term success.

• Source: OFPD Performance Information Profile (July 2019 version)

Appendix C – Logic model of the OFPD Text description

Inputs

• 1. Program budget, personnel and physical resources

Activities

• 2.1 ESDC administers a contribution program that provides project funding to eligible recipients
• 2.2 Recipients deliver labour market projects for participating persons with disabilities and/or employers

Outputs

• 3.1 Participating persons with disabilities have received training and/or employment supports
• 3.2 Participating employers have received awareness building supports, capacity building supports and/or have been connected with persons with disabilities looking for work

Immediate outcomes

• 4.1 Participating persons with disabilities have enhanced employability
• 4.2 Participating employers are better able to hire and support persons with disabilities in the workplace

Intermediate outcomes

• 5.1 Participating persons with disabilities return to school and/or find and maintain employment
• 5.2 Participating employers hire and retain persons with disabilities

Ultimate outcome

• 6.1 Participating persons with disabilities are integrated into the labour market and participating employers have implemented inclusive hiring and employment practices

Appendix D – Evaluation questions

Summative component

Program design, delivery and reach

• 1. To what extent and how do the OFPD's design and delivery model support or hinder the achievement of program objectives?
  • 1.1 To what extent and how is the OFPD meeting the needs of eligible job seekers with disabilities, and specific groups within this population?
  • 1.2 Is there a need for additional (either complementary or alternative) supports or services?
  • 1.3 How effectively is the Program promoted among service providers who may qualify for funding, and potential participants (that is, eligible job seekers with disabilities)?
  • 1.4 Are specific groups of job seekers with disabilities less likely to be aware of the Program or be able to access it, and why?
  • 1.5 Are there other factors or barriers that may influence the Program's reach or accessibility?

Outcomes for participants (persons with disabilities)

• 2. To what extent and in what ways does the Program help participants improve their employability, enter the labour market, and/or maintain their labour market attachment?
• 3. How do disability type, gender, or other intersecting identity factors, influence experiences with the Program and outcomes for participants?
• • 3.1 Are there programmatic, systemic or other external factors that could explain differences related to gender or other intersecting identity factors, if any?

Employer-focused activities and related outcomes

• 4. To what extent are the services and supports offered through the Program effectively helping employers to hire and retain workers with disabilities?
  • 4.1 How do program activities encourage employers to diversify their staff through the hiring of persons with disabilities?
  • 4.2 To what extent are the services and supports available through the OFPD, and the way they are delivered, aligned with the needs of employers, and why?
  • 4.3 How effectively do OFPD-funded organizations promote these services and supports to employers?
  • 4.4 To what extent and how did participation in the Program influence employers' attitudes towards the hiring of persons with disabilities?
  • 4.5 Are there other supports or measures that could further encourage the employers reached through these activities to hire more persons with disabilities?

COVID-19 pandemic

• 5. How did the COVID-19 pandemic impact employment opportunities for program participants (or persons with disabilities more generally), and what were the implications for their employers and the Program?

Formative component

Regarding projects that started in 2023

• 6. To what extent and how is the OFPD aligned with the objectives of the Employment Strategy for Canadians with Disabilities and Canada's Disability Inclusion Action Plan more broadly?
  • 6.1 Is there a need to improve specific aspects of the OFPD's design or delivery model to further align it with the goals of the Strategy or Plan, and why?
  • 6.2 Are there remaining gaps in these areas, or any lessons learned through the implementation process?

Appendix E – Lines of evidence and methodology

Document and literature review

The previous OFPD evaluation was completed in 2020. A preliminary literature review was written for the present evaluation in 2022, before the current Evaluation Plan and research questions were approved.

The 2022 review looked at literature covering the general context of disability and employment; meanwhile, a previous review made in 2020 – contracted for an evaluation of the Workforce Development Agreements but also useful for the Program – looked at studies assessing the effectiveness of various types of activities to assist persons with disabilities.

The review conducted for this evaluation therefore looked at sources – academic journals, grey literature, and government documents – published after these 2 previous reports were completed and focusing on issues closely related to the evaluation questions:

• program design and delivery
• outcomes for persons with disabilities
• engagement of employers
• the impact of COVID-19

For this literature review, EBSCO database keyword searches were conducted using terms including (among others):

• person(s) with disabilit(ies)
• employability
• job seeking
• barrier(s)
• accessibility
• support(s)
• opportunit(ies)
• intervention(s)
• government
• intersectionality
• identit(ies)
• gender
• employer(s)
• wage subsid(ies)
• COVID-19 pandemic

These keyword searches produced a list of sources that was streamlined for relevance and supplemented by a variety of government documents to yield a bibliography of 70 sources in English, most of them published since 2020.

Because there were relatively few relevant Canadian studies, international studies were included if they addressed themes closely related to the current evaluation.

Focus groups

The focus groups were conducted to gather in-depth information from a sample of job seeker and employer participants regarding all themes and evaluation questions, except evaluation question 6, which was not applicable.

Focus groups with job seekers

To diversify the profile of participants as much as possible, while allowing comparisons to be made between the experiences and insights of participants from different categories or groups (in terms of program activities, disability type, or socio-demographic profile), job-seeker participants were selected using purposive sampling.

The recruitment started in mid-October 2024 and ended in mid-February 2025, when the last focus group with job seekers was conducted.

A total of 1,587 invitations were sent, and 78 program participants took part in a focus group, which represents an overall response rate of about 5%. As shown in the table below, the sample of focus group participants is comprised of program participants who took part in various program activities.

Table 6: Distribution of focus group participants by program activity

Program activity or activities undertaken (according to administrative data)	Number and percentage of focus group participants
Work Experience (non-subsidized) only	1 (1%)
Work Experience (subsidized) only	8 (10%)
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services only	40 (51%)
Self-Employment	2 (4%)
Skills for Employment only	16 (21%)
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services and Work Experience (non-subsidized)	5 (6%)
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services and Work Experience (subsidized)	4 (5%)
Skills for Employment and Work Experience (subsidized)	1 (1%)
Enhanced Employment Assistance Services and Skills for Employment	1 (1%)
Total	78 (100%)

Focus groups with employers

The Department does not collect the contact information of employers who receive program services or supports (including wage subsidies). Therefore, to recruit employer participants for focus groups and individual interviews, a letter developed in collaboration with the Evaluation Working Group was distributed by Service Canada regional program staff to 56 organizations who received program funding as part of both the current and previous evaluation cycles, inviting them to provide us the contact information of a sample of at least 5 employers to which their organization provided program services and supports, between 2018 and 2022.

In total, 39 funded organizations sent lists of employer participants to the Evaluation Directorate. These files included a total of 806 employers. Employers from regions where it would be possible to recruit a high enough number of participants to hold a focus group discussion were regrouped. The other employers were moved into a separate file, which was used to recruit employers for individual interviews conducted in parallel.

A total of 466 employers were invited to a focus group, and 9 of them participated, which represents a response rate of approximately 2%. These employers included 3 participants from Ontario and 6 from Western Canada. All of them received wage subsidies.

Methodological limitations and considerations

• The views and lived experiences shared by focus group participants are not necessarily generalizable to the full population of program participants, nor to the overall population of job seekers with disabilities, which are both highly diverse
• Despite the efforts made to diversify the profile of focus group participants as much as possible, program participants who responded positively to focus group invitations did not include individuals from more hard-to-reach population segments, including Indigenous participants living on-reserve, and participants from the Territories
• Focus groups participants may share specific characteristics that differentiate them from other program participants, and that cannot necessarily be measured or assessed using program data, such as their personal attitudes or level of interest vis-à-vis the subjects discussed
• Various factors that are external to the Program, and were not captured in program data, or were not necessarily mentioned by focus group participants, could have influenced the achievement of program outcomes, either positively or negatively, such as changes in local labour market conditions

Key informant interviews

Sampling and recruitment of interviewees

For interviews with ESDC and Service Canada staff, participants were recruited from a list of potential interviewees prepared by Working Group members and sent to the Evaluation Directorate. This list included individuals with expertise in one or more of the following areas:

• delivery of national OFPD projects, involving direct interactions with funded organizations
• provision of operational guidance and directives to regional Service Canada offices
• development of calls for proposals and assessment of applications
• design of the Program's policies and recent enhancements
• development and implementation of the Performance Information Profile and related tools
• challenges faced by persons with disabilities in the labour market, including accessibility issues

For interviews with funding recipients, a purposive sampling approach was used to select participants from a list of 68 organizations, including 53 organizations funded under both the current and previous funding cycles, and 15 organizations funded under the previous cycle only (2018 to 2022). Organizations funded only under the current cycle were excluded from the sample due to their limited experience in delivering OFPD-funded services.

A total of 24 funded organizations were invited to an interview and 17 participated. These organizations were sampled to ensure representation of each Service Canada region and of various types of projects, both in terms of program activities and scope (regional versus national).

To recruit job seeker participants for individual interviews, purposive sampling was also used. After focus groups, the socio-demographic composition of participants was analyzed to identify underrepresented groups within the program population. Job seeker participants from these specific population segments were sent a total of 373 email invitations, which resulted in 14 interviews being conducted, for a response rate of approximately 4%.

Finally, for interviews with employer participants, due to the limited number of potential participants to draw from, all of those not invited to a focus group were sent an invitation to participate to an individual interview. Those interested to participate in a focus group but who were not available at the proposed date and time were also offered to be interviewed individually. This allowed to interview a total of 12 employer participants.

Overall, a total of 53 interviewees were conducted with participants from 5 main groups, distributed as follows:

Table 7: Distribution of key informants by category

Key informant group	Number of participants
ESDC and Service Canada program staff – National headquarters	5
ESDC and Service Canada program staff – Regional offices	3
OFPD–funded organizations and partners	19
Job seekers	14
Employers	12
Total	53

Methodological limitations and considerations

• Interview findings may not be generalizable to all job seekers, employers, or funding recipients, particularly those who did not participate in the evaluation. However, key informants were selected to ensure representation from various types of funded projects (in terms of scope, region, and type of program activities delivered), stakeholders who play different roles in the Program, and job seekers from various socio-demographic groups
• The specific demographics and characteristics of the selected participants might not reflect those of the entire population served by the OFPD program, thereby limiting the applicability of the results. For example, despite efforts made to oversample job seekers from specific groups, some underrepresented groups, including those from the Territories and participants who acquired non-subsidized work experience, did not respond positively to the invitation, and are not represented in the sample

Linked administrative data and net impact analysis

The analysis of linked administrative data used a quantitative causal machine learning method called Modified Causal Forests. This method was used to estimate program impacts. The Modified Causal Forests method consists of a causal machine learning approach designed for estimating heterogeneous treatment effects and developing optimal policy.

The outcomes of OFPD participants (treatment group) who began OFPD activities between April 2015 and March 2017, were compared to individuals who were eligible but only received a limited support measure or did not participate (control group). This control group was constructed using individuals who received low-intensity Employment Assistance Services under the Labour Market Development Agreements and self-identified as having a disability. These individuals were selected from the same reference period and matched on observable characteristics to ensure comparability.

The data analyzed was from the Labour Market Program Data Platform developed by ESDC's Evaluation Directorate, which contains integrated data from multiple sources, including OFPD administrative data, EI data (including EI Part I data on EI claims, and EI Part II data on program participation) and income tax data from the Canada Revenue Agency. Personal identifiers were removed to protect privacy and confidentiality.

Participants' labour market outcomes, including incidence of employment, employment earnings, use of EI benefits, and use of social assistance benefits, were assessed using income-tax data. These indicators are reported as annual averages over the 5-year post-participation period.

Methodological limitations and considerations

• The findings can only be reported on a calendar year basis mainly due to the structure of the Canada Revenue Agency's T1 and T4 data. In addition, it was not possible to identify whether the participant had full-time or part-time employment
• Analyses could only be conducted on the disability types that were common to both non-participants and participants because the disability classifications reported by the participants and non-participants were not the same
• Results of the present study are not directly comparable to those of similar past analyses of the Program, and any comparison should be done with caution
• There might have been pre-existing differences between the participants and non-participants that were not captured during the matching process. It was not possible to completely rule out the influence of these unobserved factors

Cost-benefit analysis

The reference period used for the cost-benefit analysis consisted of participants who started a program activity between April 2015 and March 2017. The outcomes observed over the 5-year post-participation period were then projected for an additional 5 years, resulting in a 10-year post-participation analysis window.

Methodological limitations and considerations

• The cost-benefit analysis is based on quantifiable costs and benefits. Starting with the benefits side, the analysis included both earnings and fringe benefits. It also included the income tax paid, sales taxes, EI and social assistance use, EI premiums paid, Canada Pension Plan or Québec Pension Plan contributions, and public health care cost savings. With the exception of fringe benefits and sales taxes, all theses benefits were estimated using quasi-experimental methods
• Health care cost savings were estimated based on administrative program data and average public health care cost data from a report of the Canadian Institute for Health Information^{Footnote 32}
• On the cost side, this analysis took into account the direct costs of program activities, along with the marginal social cost of public funds (see, for example, Browning, 1987). More specifically, this means that the direct resource costs should be multiplied by a factor greater than one, in order to capture distortions arising from financing the Program by raising tax revenue. Following the advice received from expert peer reviewers, the marginal social cost of public funds represented 20% of program costs and subsequent impacts on sales taxes, income taxes as well as on EI and social assistance outlays
• The benefits and costs were calculated over a 10-year period after participation in the Program and were subject to an annual discount rate of 5%. This discount rate applied to the 2015 to 2025 period and reflected the sum of an average inflation rate of 3% and of an average real interest rate of 2%, according to Statistics Canada
• Overall, the cost-benefit analysis took into account most of the key costs and benefits, but some other important factors were not considered because of data limitations. It did not include intangible benefits such as higher well-being and reduced criminality