Evaluation of the Ecological Gifts Program

Cat. No.: xxx
ISBN: xxx
EC xxxxx

Unless otherwise specified, you may not reproduce materials in this publication, in whole or in part, for the purposes of commercial redistribution without prior written permission from Environment and Climate Change Canada's copyright administrator. To obtain permission to reproduce Government of Canada materials for commercial purposes, apply for Crown Copyright Clearance by contacting:

Environment and Climate Change Canada
Public Information Centre
Place Vincent Massey building
351 St-Joseph boulevard
Gatineau Quebec K1A 0H3
Toll free: 1-800-668-6767
Email: enviroinfo@ec.gc.ca

Photos: © Environment and Climate Change Canada

© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, 2025

Aussi disponible en français

Acknowledgements

The Audit and Evaluation Branch thanks those who contributed to this project and acknowledges the contribution of ecological gift donors and recipients, as well as Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) representatives who provided input and comments throughout this evaluation.

This report was prepared by the Evaluation Division of the Audit and Evaluation Branch, ECCC.

The report was approved by the Deputy Minister on August 25, 2025.

Accessibility Statement

As of the date of publication, this document has been verified for accessibility.

If you have any questions about this document, please contact us at: audit-evaluation@ec.gc.ca.

List of Tables

Table 1: Completion time for ecological gifts

Table 2: Appraisals reviews for ecological gifts

Table 3: Results for the Ecological Gifts Program

Table 4: Area secured by the Ecological Gifts Program, put into context

Table 5: Ecological Gifts Program actual expenditures (dollars)

Table 6: Performance metrics for the Ecological Gifts Program

Table 7: Service standards

List of Figures

Figure 1: Location and size of completed ecological gifts

Figure 2: Ecological Gifts Program process

List of Acronyms and Abbreviations

ARP: Appraisal Review Panel

CRA : Canada Revenue Agency

CWS: Canadian Wildlife Service

ECCC: Environment and Climate Change Canada

EGP: Ecological Gifts Program

GC: Government of Canada

HCP: Habitat Conservation and Protection Program

ITA: Income Tax Act

km: kilometers

KMGBF: Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework

1. Introduction

The Government of Canada (GC) has made several commitments towards protecting biodiversity through policies, funding initiatives, and legislation. These efforts are aimed at safeguarding Canada’s natural environment and the ecosystem services it provides, protecting wildlife habitats and connectivity corridors for species, and creating certainty for natural resource development.

The Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) Habitat Conservation and Protection (HCP) program aims to secure, protect, connect, improve and restore ecologically sensitive habitat, including wetlands, to contribute to the conservation and protection of migratory birds, species at risk and other wildlife. It aligns with ECCC’s core responsibility to conserve nature.

1.1. Background

The HCP is nationally led and regionally delivered and provides mechanisms to engage with organizations and individuals. The program’s partners include provincial and territorial governments, landowners, environmental non-governmental organizations, National Indigenous Organizations and Indigenous nations, governments, and communities, and other stakeholders. This program contributes to fulfilling ECCC’s obligations under the Species at Risk Act, the Migratory Birds Convention Act, and the Canada Wildlife Act, as well as to delivering on the ministerial mandate. The program also contributes to departmental results indicators related to nature conservation: Canada’s wildlife and habitats are conserved and protected; Canada’s species at risk are recovered; and Indigenous peoples are engaged in conservation.

The HCP comprises the following 11 components:

• The Protected Areas Program
• The Ecological Gifts Program (EGP)
• The Canada Nature Fund - Natural Heritage Conservation Program
• The Canada Nature Fund - Target 1 Challenge
• The Canada Nature Fund - Indigenous led Area Based Conservation Program
• The Canada Nature Fund - Indigenous Guardians Program
• The Nature Smart Climate Solutions Fund - Indigenous Partnership stream
• The Marine Conservation Targets Horizontal Initiative
• The ECCC’s participation in the Pathway initiative
• The ECCC’s participation in the North American Waterfowl Management Plan and the North American Wetlands Conservation Council (Canada)
• The ECCC’s participation in the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention)

This evaluation examined the EGP.

1.2. Overview of the Ecological Gifts Program

The EGP was established in 1995. Its objective is to enable landowners, in Canada, who own ecologically sensitive land to participate in the nature protection process and thus leave a legacy for future generations. Specifically, the EGP supports potential donors and recipients in completing land transactions that are recognized as ecological gifts under section 207.3(1) of the Income Tax Act (ITA) of Canada.

An ecological gift is a donation of ecologically sensitive land, or an eligible interest or right in land, to a qualified recipient, that has been certified by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change or a delegated certification authority. Subsequently, recipients become responsible for donated lands and ensure that their biodiversity and environmental heritage are conserved in perpetuity.

Over the evaluated period, ECCC spent $7.3 M to support EGP administration and operations.

The program contributes to habitat conservation in southern Canada^{Footnote 1}, where threats to biodiversity are the highest, and conserved and protected area coverage is in deficit compared to other regions.

Many key habitats, from marshes to grasslands, are found on private property located in southern Canada. Landowners have discretion on the conservation of these ecologically valued lands. For as long as there are private lands of ecological value to protect or conserve, the EGP may play a role in slowing the rate of the ongoing trend of land loss and in conserving the natural habitats.

Each ecological gift is unique, and several donation options are available to donors. Ecological gifts made to eligible recipients fall under the following categories:

• Full title. Also known as “fee-simple” in common law jurisdictions and simply as “ownership” in the Civil Code of Quebec, it is possible to donate the full title with no reserved rights to an eligible recipient
• Conservation easement or covenant. Landowners can preserve the natural values of their property and still retain ownership (also called eligible interests or rights in land). Outside the Province of Quebec, eligible interests in land are known as covenants or conservation easements and can be donated through the program
• Servitude. In the Province of Quebec, the eligible right in land considered by the EGP for donation is a personal servitude (which has a term of not less than 100 years) or a real servitude

The ITA provides income tax benefits as an incentive to conserve ecologically sensitive land and to assist those who could not otherwise afford to donate. In order for donors to be eligible to claim those benefits, the following three conditions must be met:

• The property must be certified as ecologically sensitive
• The property must be donated to an eligible recipient
• The fair market value of the donated property must be determined by the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

In accordance with the provisions of the Interpretation Act, the certification of the eligibility of charities to receive ecological gifts and the certification of the ecological sensitivity of land are the responsibility of the department. Determination of fair market value is delegated to the director level and is based on a recommendation from the Appraisal Review Panel (ARP). This delegation is appropriate given the low risk profile of the EGP and the subject matter expertise of program administrators.

The EGP is coordinated by a secretariat located in the National Capital Region and delivered in the provinces through five regional offices of ECCC’s Canadian Wildlife Service. More information on the program and its process can be found in the Canadian Ecological Gifts Program Handbook and in Appendix A.

1.3. About this evaluation

The evaluation of the HCP is part of ECCC’s Audit and Evaluation Plan 2022 to 2027. It provides an assessment of the relevance, the effectiveness and the efficiency of the EGP from 2018-2019 to 2023-2024. The evaluation mainly focused on program design, performance, efficiency, and delivery alternatives, as well as performance measurement and contribution to Reconciliation with Canada’s Indigenous peoples. The evaluation was conducted using the following methodology:

• File review including work plans, reports, research papers, news releases, surveys, backgrounders, written input from external partners, and literature reviews (more than 80)
• Analysis of the program administration and financial data (more than 10,000 data points)
• Interviews with program administrators and officials (5), donors and recipients (22), and with an ARP member (1)
• A case study focusing on outcome potential measurement options for the program

2. Findings

2.1. Relevance and alignment

Species and ecosystems around the world are declining at an unprecedented rate. According to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, nature loss is primarily driven by land-use and sea-use change, direct overexploitation of natural species, climate change impacts, pollution, and invasive alien species. Globally, around 1 million out of a total 8 million species are threatened with extinction.

Nature is also at risk in Canada. 20% of assessed species are facing some level of extinction risk. Moreover, continued land conversion and land- and sea-use intensification is resulting in an ongoing loss of natural habitats.

In December 2022, Canada became a signatory of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF), which aims to take urgent action towards halting and reversing nature loss by 2030. In 2024, ECCC subsequently published the Canada’s 2030 Nature Strategy: Halting and Reversing Biodiversity Loss in Canada, charting a path for how Canada is to implement the KMGBF.

The EGP supports conservation on private lands in southern Canada and is aligned with ECCC’s Nature Conservation mandate. Conservation is especially important in southern Canada, where threats to biodiversity are the highest, and conserved and protected area coverage is in deficit compared to other regions of Canada. Many key habitats, from marshes to grasslands, are found on private property located in southern Canada. Therefore, landowners play a vital role in their conservation.

It is important to note that the program was established in 1995 and its design and delivery have not been recently revised to align with this critical moment for nature and people. To improve its contribution to Canada’s important area-based conservation targets, EGP processes could be revised to foster the completion of a larger number of gifts.

2.2. Design

2.2.1.   Overall program design

Since 1995, the ITA has helped incentivize the conservation of private lands of demonstrated ecological value. Regardless of net income, donors can earn two important tax benefits upon completing an ecological gift: 1) the tax on capital gains is reduced to zero, and 2) a non-reimbursable Charitable Donation Tax Credit with a 10-year carry forward period (for individuals) or deduction (for corporations) is issued. In instances where portions of the value of a property are donated (split-receipting), these tax benefits are available only for the donated value. In addition, the donors can know the value of their property as determined by the federal Minister of the Environment before the donation is made and the value will be accepted by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA).

The EGP is best described as a service delivery program.  The program’s core function is to provide services to potential donors and recipients so that once donations of ecological gifts are completed and certified, donors can claim tax benefits.

• Donor-facing services. The program provides information on what constitutes an ecological gift, what potential tax benefits are available, and how to complete an ecological gift. ECCC program officials deliver the following three key administrative documents which enable the donor to claim related tax benefits:
  • A certificate of ecological sensitivity and recipient approval.
  • A notice of determination of fair market value assessment of an ecological gift^{Footnote 3}
  • A statement of fair market value of an ecological gift
• Recipient-facing services. The EGP provides information on the responsibilities that recipients take on when they accept an ecological gift. Once a gift is completed, recipients must monitor and manage the property in perpetuity (or for not less than 100 years in the case of a personal servitude in Quebec) and must request authorization before undertaking any change in use or disposition

After gifts are completed, the program monitors the status of ecological gifts to ensure gifts are conserved in perpetuity and recipients comply with their responsibilities under the ITA. To that end, the program reviews requests for change in use authorization and requests for disposition authorization, conducts a survey of ecological gift recipients, and undertakes periodic property monitoring, either in-person site visits or enabled by remote sensing and image processing technologies.

The program has developed and maintained a collection of webpages linked to a central hub, in support of service delivery. It has also  created a suite of supporting documentation, advice, and forms available in both official languages including: program handbook; donor brochure; donation and income tax scenarios; split-receipting; eligible recipients; application for appraisal and fair market value; guidelines for appraisers; retaining use of donated land; and information on disposition or change in use of ecological gifts.

The program also conducts regular outreach to raise awareness on the program its benefits among potential recipients and donors, in support of its service delivery. Given that potential donors are likely to interact with them, outreach is also extended to land transaction professionals, as well as financial and other professional advisors.

2.2.2. The role of donors and recipients

The first step in completing an ecological gift donation consists, for the potential donor, of identifying an eligible recipient willing to accept their gift. In practice, given the low awareness of the program among prospective donors, recipients typically inform potential donors about the EGP. In other words, eligible recipients typically identify properties of conservation value, and if landowners show openness in making a land donation, recipients may suggest that they participate in the EGP.

Recipients with EGP experience are more familiar with the process than donors, and they may have established working relationship with land transaction professionals. As a result, most donors rely on recipients’ experience and organizational follow-through for guidance and support in complying with EGP administrative requirements. Specifically, recipients typically seek to obtain a certification of ecological sensitivity, commission an appraisal report, and provide proof of a completed donation. In addition, when donors are not able or not willing to pay for an appraisal of fair market value, recipients typically absorb these costs.

Whether measured by number of gifts (89%) or by area secured (98%), most gifts are donated to eligible charities. It follows that the willingness and the capacity of the land trust community to engage in the EGP process drives much of the success of the program.

As a reflection of the value granted to recipients as essential delivery partners, EGP administrators consider such activities as in-person workshops, meetings, webinars, regional land trust conferences attendance, printed publications handout and discussions with recipients, to be key operational components of program delivery.

2.2.3. Gift evaluation process

Under the ITA, there is a requirement to determine the fair market value of an ecological gift. There is also a requirement that the said value be certified by program officials. While the ITA does not prescribe how to determine the fair market value of ecological gifts, the Budget Plan 2000 entrusted the Minister with exclusive authority for determining the value of ecological gifts.

As members of the federal public service, EGP administrators have a duty of stewardship. Federal public servants are entrusted to use and care for public resources responsibly, for both the short term and long term. Although tax benefits available to donors of ecological gifts are not public resources but rather foregone revenue, the same standard of prudent stewardship applies. In the context of the EGP, the duty of stewardship is especially relevant in consideration of the process whereby the value of ecological gifts is determined, as this value has a direct impact on claimable tax benefits. The fair market value of a gift is authoritative as per ITA provisions. As a result, care must be exercised to avoid the determination of property values which are either under or over the fair market value.

The low risk of unfair valuations is the result of the following two key factors outside the EGP:

• Charities that are recognized as eligible recipients of ecological gifts must have a registered charity status with the CRA and comply with all applicable rules and regulations. In addition, conservation charities are required to adopt or committing to adopt the Canadian Land Trust Standards and Practices, under which they have a general duty to ensure sound transactions, including by obtaining an independent appraisal by a qualified appraiser in advance of closing (Standard 9), and to avoid fraudulent or abusive transactions and to uphold public confidence in land conservation (Standard 10)
• Designated appraisers in Canada are qualified professionals, bound by existing codes of conduct  and standards of professional practice (in Canada and in Quebec (French only)). Designated appraisers who do not fully adhere to codes of conduct or standards of practice can be sanctioned, have their professional practice limited, or have their right to practice revoked. The appraisal review procedure is also governed by the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice

The Appraisal Review Panel

Upon considering the value of the tax assistance allowance and the difficulty of valuing donations of ecologically sensitive land, the Budget Plan 2000 directed the following:

• The value of all ecological gifts is to be determined by a special process under the authority of the Minister of Environment and Climate Change
• As a result, in addition to regulations, codes of conduct, and standards of practice of both conservation charities and professional appraisers (acting as incentives to the delivery of appraisals devoid of inaccuracies and as disincentives to commit fraud), fair market valuation under the EGP benefits from an added layer of risk mitigation: the ARP

To conduct the appraisal review, ECCC has contracted the ARP, a panel of independent real estate appraisal professionals, through an open call for proposals. The ARP operates under guidelines developed by program administrators to review submitted appraisal reports. Once an appraisal review is complete, the panelists issue their recommendation on a fair market value for each ecological gift. The recommendation ensures consistency with the Canadian Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. The panel may recommend a value that is either equal, lower, or higher than the value provided in the submitted report. Based on this recommendation, program administrators exercise the delegated ministerial authority to determine the fair market value of the ecological gift and issue a “Statement of Fair Market Value of an Ecological Gift Pursuant to the Income Tax Act of Canada”, which the donor can subsequently use to claim tax benefits.

2.2.4. Designing for digital service delivery

Canada, like most countries, is experiencing a rapid transformation in the delivery of government services. In 2020, the GC adopted the Policy on Service and Digital. In July 2023, the Chief Information Officer of Canada presented an update to Canada’s Digital Ambition, a strategy that guides the delivery of government services in a digital age. The policy and the strategy state that services provided to Canadians must be accessible, inclusive, easy to use, and secure; digitally enabled; configured to protect privacy; and available in both official languages. To that end, service delivery programs across the GC are expected to invest in obtaining quality data, gather client insights, understand user experiences, measure and improve service satisfaction.

The services provided by the EGP to Canadians are not available online end-to-end. For EGP donors and recipients, typical interactions with program administrators are done by letter mail, email and occasionally over the phone. The lack of a digital platform where application status can be monitored on-demand has led an interviewed recipient to develop its own tracking system, with features comparable to a case management system.

A proven approach to modernizing service delivery relies on developing and implementing a digital service delivery application which integrates program administration, data management, and a client-facing portal. One such type of application is provided by client relationship management platforms, which can be designed to include a client portal. A digital service delivery would be a powerful tool to the EGP. Its additions would include an increase in collaboration, transparency, and certainty for donors and recipients. More generally, it would incentivize recipients’ willingness to repeat their participation in the program and to promote this option among potential donors of ecologically sensitive land.

2.3. Delivery

Service delivery is an important area of focus for the GC. The guiding principles and best practices of the Policy on Service and Digital and the Digital Standards are expected to guide teams responsible for delivering services to Canadians. The EGP as currently delivered, is not meeting client needs and expectations with respect to timelines and predictability.

A recent survey of 97 land trusts conducted by Canada’s Impact and Innovation Unit indicates that almost half of respondents do not prefer (10%) or are indifferent (35%) to using the EGP when securing land donations. This represents a high proportion, given that the EGP was designed to incentivize donations of ecologically sensitive land by providing financial benefits to donors.

While all interviewed recipients have indicated that they would like to see every eligible land donation access the tax benefits to which they are entitled, in their experience not all donors who could participate decide to do so. The current process is perceived as burdensome and lengthy by many donors and recipients. Given the current timelines, donor participation in the EGP, for the improved tax benefits, is typically not worth it for properties that have a low market value. As a result, some donors who would otherwise be well positioned to complete the EGP process do not receive the improved tax benefits.

The current delivery process creates barriers to participation and results in the unintended exclusion of some donors. As an illustrative example, out of 206 full or partial donations of land made to a recipient between 2014-2015 and 2023-2024, only 112 (or 54%) were certified by the EGP. As a result, the donors of 94 undeveloped properties of conservation value (or 46%) did not receive improved tax benefits under the ecological gift provisions of the ITA, despite their contributions to the conservation of Canada’s natural heritage. The tax circumstances of these donors are unknown, and the EGP may not have been presented as an option.

2.3.1. Service delivery timelines

More than half of the surveyed recipients said that timelines were a major (28%) or an important (32%) challenge. During interviews, all recipients agreed that the length of the process was a major challenge. Table 1 reports how many ecological gifts were completed in 180 days or less, between 181 and 365 days, and more than a year. This information is based on an incomplete administrative dataset and presents a potential underestimation of the time it takes to complete a gift.

Table 1: Completion time for ecological gifts

Time to completion	Number of ecological gifts (proportion)
Gifts completed in 180 calendar days or less	171 (43%)
Gifts completed between 181 and 365 days	144 (36%)
Gifts completed in more than 1 year and up to 8 years	85 (21%)

Source: Administrative data was provided by Ecological Gifts Program administrators.

Time to complete ecological gifts is determined by several factors and the input of several actors. While EGP administrators have direct control over some process steps, other steps are of the responsibility of donors or recipients. For example, applicants are responsible for:

• handling information requests on ecological sensitivity in relation to incomplete submissions
• commissioning and responding to information requests on the appraisal report
• returning the signed Notice of Determination
• drafting, signing, and registering conservation easement agreements
• completing land transactions with their lawyers
• providing final title documents to demonstrate that the donation has been made

Other factors might impact timelines. These may include delays in obtaining land title information from the land registry office. Administrative data does not support the disaggregation of time to completion by factor or by actor.

Service standards

Service delivery programs typically establish service standards for steps over which they have direct control. Service standards hold program administrators accountable for delivery and provide predictability to current and prospective clients. Current services standards for steps of the EGP which are under the responsibility of ECCC administrators are summarized in Appendix B.

The EGP currently lacks service standards for the following two process steps out of five which are under its control. These include: 1) the issuance of a certificate of ecological sensitivity, and 2) the issuance of a statement of fair market value. In addition, the current 90 calendar day service standard related to the issuance of a notice of determination of fair market value does not cover all the steps of the EGP process, which contributes to the lack of predictability experienced by applicants.

Based on available data, notice issuance over the evaluated period took more than 90 days for 97 out of 516 applications. For these applications, an average of 196 days, or more than 6 months, elapsed between the submission of an appraisal report and the determination of fair market value. Available data is not sufficient in determining what proportion of these extended timelines are under the control of EGP clients, on the one hand, and of the ARP on the other.

All process steps in ECCC’s control do not have a service standard. This is considered a major issue by recipients who experience a significant lack of timeline certainty as a result. Lack of predictability impacts recipients’ ability to secure and use matching funds within the established timelines in funding agreements. Although recipients have learned to plan for contingencies, they are not always successful in so doing. This could ultimately translate into missed opportunities for recipients and funders when it comes to optimizing the funding received and may create a risk related to the securement of ecologically sensitive properties.

The main alternatives to the EGP for an individual or a corporation which is interested in disposing of a property for conservation purposes are to sell or to opt for a charitable gift of capital property. According to some recipients, these alternative land transactions have been finalized within a month^{Footnote 4}, as have a few ecological gifts. Individuals and corporations also have the option to complete the donation in advance of ecological gift certification. Under the provisions of the ITA, donors have up to three years to apply for EGP after a donation has been made.

2.3.2. Recipients and the gift valuation process

Most ecological gifts recipients are small-scale organizations with limited capacity, often run by volunteers. According to interviewed and surveyed recipients, fair market valuation is the most challenging step of the EGP process, 34 percent of surveyed land trusts are of the view that the fair market value appraisal process is a challenge for them, and an additional 19 percent view the process as a major challenge.

Of the 84 charities that received ecological gifts over the evaluated period, 78 (or 93%) received two gifts per year or fewer. For smaller charities, the current workload associated with appraisal commissioning and the review process required for participation in the EGP is significant and can impact their capacity to undertake additional habitat conservation projects, including additional ecological gifts.

Appraisal commission

As with any typical land transaction for a land trust, prospective donors and recipients must commission a professional to produce an appraisal report estimating the fair market value of the property, which for the EGP is the first step in obtaining a fair market value determination from ECCC.

According to recipients interviewed, it is challenging to secure the services of a qualified professional for the appraisal of undeveloped land of ecological value. In addition, recipients note that demand for appraisal services have gone up and lead times for the delivery of appraisal reports have increased since the COVID-19 pandemic. This has resulted in appraisers typically only being able to start work one to two months after their services are retained. Professional fees for appraisal services have also increased, further straining smaller recipients’ capacity to undertake securement projects. These challenges have a significant impact on all land transactions beyond ecological gifts. As a result, commissioning and obtaining the appraisal report has become a significant pinch point for recipients for all securement projects.

Appraisal review

According to one panel member, approximately 25 to 30 percent of submitted appraisal reports are found lacking in their demonstration of highest and best property use, which has a direct impact on valuation. This is typically the result of reports having been prepared by appraisers who lack the required competence and experience to undertake valuation of undeveloped land. When appraisal reports are found lacking in their demonstration, the ARP requests additional information and analysis to substantiate the original claim. The ARP may consider a revised demonstration of fair market value.

All communications between the ARP, the recipient or donor, and the retained appraiser are in written form. According to program administrators, this mode of communication has been noted by recipients to be the source of lengthy delays and has recipients raising concerns about transparency and willingness to collaborate in addressing any appraisal shortcomings. Many land trusts expressed concerns regarding questions received from the ARP. In 2021, over 50 percent of the appraisals submitted in the Ontario region received questions from the ARP and revisions to the submitted reports were requested. As a result, land trusts made over 15 complaints to program administrators that year alone. Complaints underlined the fact that ARP written communications were condescending in tone, unnecessarily focused on minor details, and resulted in significant delays in the donation process.

Administrative data shows that over the evaluated period it took an average of 150 calendar days for the notice of fair market value determination to be issued after the appraisal report had been submitted to the ARP, for the subset of appraisals for which the ARP required more information and resulted in a revised value. By comparison, it took an average of 70 calendar days to complete this step for appraisals whose value was confirmed without additional information being required. Although this step in the process is important in complying with the obligation in matters of stewardship of funds, these interactions have the potential of a negative impact on donors, according to recipients. 27 percent of surveyed land trusts are of the view that appraisal disagreements constitute a barrier, for donors, to a successful participation in the EGP, with an additional 19 percent viewing this factor as a major barrier.

2.2.3. Barriers faced by Indigenous communities and organizations

According to some recipients working with Indigenous Peoples and to recent media reports, prospective donors are increasingly interested in giving back land of conservation value to Indigenous communities and organizations. While reasons for giving land back may differ from one donor to another, these gifts enable Indigenous communities to reclaim stewardship over traditional lands and ecosystems, protecting them for future generations and as the socio-ecological basis of their traditional culture.

Giving land back to Indigenous communities and organizations is not easy to accomplish for interested parties as these land transactions raise complex legal issues. Under the current legislation framework in Canada, not all Indigenous communities have the legal capacity to enter land transactions or to hold legal title to real property. As a result, becoming an eligible recipient of ecological gifts is more complex for Indigenous communities than it is for non-Indigenous organizations, and this constitutes a significant barrier in accessing EGP services. In line with the GC approach on Gender-based Analysis Plus and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, efforts should be made to remove barriers to accessing services that impact specific population groups.

The EGP website currently does not contain any information supporting donors and Indigenous organizations aiming to become recipients. ECCC intends to develop communications or information products which could be made available to potential donors or recipients through various existing channels of communications and engagement sessions to foster the use of EGP when possible.

2.4. Effectiveness and performance targets

2.4.1. Fair market values are verified

The appraisal review step ensures that all recommended gift values are substantiated in a manner consistent with best, current professional practices. This verification causes some gift applications to be withdrawn, while the majority advance to the next step with a recommended value that may be equal to, lower or higher than the submitted value. Administrative data shows a small variation between submitted and recommended fair market values for gifts that complete the process. Of a total 547 ecological gift valuations reviewed over the evaluated period, the panel confirmed the fair market value provided by 474 reports (87%), recommended a higher value for 12 reports (2%), and recommended a lower value for 61 reports (11%). Table 2 presents this information by ecological gift status.

Table 2: Appraisals reviews for ecological gifts

Ecological Gift application status	No change in value	Positive change in value	Negative change in value	Sum of original appraisal values	Sum of recommended values	Change from appraised to recommended values
Completed	404 (88%)	10 (2%)	43 (9%)	$364.5 M	$359.8 M	- $4.6 M (- 1%)
Not completed	70 (78%)	2 (2%)	18 (20%)	$64.5 M	$54.0 M	- $10.6 M (- 16%)
All	474 (87%)	12 (2%)	61 (11%)	$429 M	$413.8 M	- $15.2 M (- 4%)

Source: Administrative data was provided by the EGP.

Note: Ecological Gift applications are considered not completed if they were withdrawn, closed or otherwise not completed during the evaluated period and, as a result, no ecological gift tax benefit was realized.

For completed ecological gifts, data shows that the ARP review resulted in a downward adjustment of the total fair market value by one percent (- 1%). The procedure is very different for ecological gift applications which were not completed. In this case, the ARP recommended values that were 16 percent lower than the original appraisals (- 16%). According to program administrators, this indicates that the ARP is effective at preventing abuse and at supporting the responsible stewardship of public resources.

Overall, 87 percent of all ecological gift applications were recommended at the submitted fair market value. Panel reviews are successful in avoiding the determination of gift values which are not based on fair market valuation. However, this success is not without drawbacks. As discussed in section 2.3, the valuation process is considered to be the most challenging step in the EGP process by donors and recipients.

Based on administrative data and the 2023 report on federal tax expenditures, the total tax assistance for donations of ecologically sensitive land was 23 percent of the total fair market value of completed gifts over the evaluated period. Based on this ratio, the ARP reviews saved $1.1 M in total tax expenditures over the evaluated period (or 23% of $4.6 M). Over the same period, the program paid $3.0 M in professional fees and travel expenditures to members of the ARP.

2.4.2.   Ecological gifts are completed

Over the evaluated period, 516 ecological gifts were completed, thereby securing 57,907 hectares for conservation that are valued at over $378 M. For comparison, this area is larger than the Island of Montreal at 47,255 hectares. Table 3 presents summary results for the EGP.

Table 3: Results for the Ecological Gifts Program

Results	1995-1996 to 2017-2018 (23 years)	2018-2019 to 2023-2024 (6 years)	Total (29 years)
Number of completed ecological gifts	1,371	516	1,887
Total area secured (hectares)	190,197	57,907	248,104
Total fair market value of completed ecological gifts	$867,130,186	$378,400,508	$1,245,530,694

Source: Administrative data was provided by Ecological Gifts Program administrators.

The average program expenditure per completed gift is $14,142, which is equally split between salary and operating and maintenance costs. Based on the average salary cost per project, it took 15 full workdays or 0.06 full time equivalent to support the completion of a single gift, on average^{Footnote 5}. The average cost reported does not take active files into consideration (37 as March 31, 2024), potential gifts that were closed or withdrawn (85 gifts), or that were not officially submitted (not tracked), but that program administrators nevertheless spent time on.

A closer look at outcomes

Most properties donated under the EGP are relatively small. Two thirds (68%) of ecological gifts are 50 hectares or less and most properties (92%) are 200 hectares (two square kilometers) or less. According to recent research conducted on a global dataset of diversity and species abundance distributions, small properties have a disproportionately high conservation value compared to larger areas.

The largest 20 out of 516 properties donated (or 4%) during the evaluated period account for more than half (55%) of the total area secured for conservation. Of these 20 gifts, 18 are in Alberta and 16 are conservation easements. These large properties were donated by corporations (10), individuals (6), and jointly by corporations and individuals (4).

In the broader context of national biodiversity conservation, the EGP makes a small national contribution to habitat conservation by area. Over its 29 years of operation, the program conserved 0.22 percent of Canada’s private lands or 0.025 percent of Canada’s landmass. Table 4 puts the area secured by the EGP into context.

Table 4: Area secured by the Ecological Gifts Program, put into context

Area secured, and relevant context	1995-1996 to 2017-2018 (23 years)	2018-2019 to 2023-2024 (6 years)	Total (29 years)
Secured area (in square km)	1902	579	2481
Compared to the landmass of Canada (9,984,670 square km)	0.02%	0.01%	0.03%
Compared to the landmass of southern Canada (29% of total landmass, or 2,930,760 square km)	0.06%	0.02%	0.08%
Compared to the extent of private lands (11% of total landmass, or 1,098,314 square km)	0.17%	0.05%	0.22%
Current contribution to 25% by 2025 (2,496,168 square km)	0.08%	0.02%	0.10%
Current contribution to 30% by 2030 (2,995,401 square km)	0.06%	0.02%	0.08%

Source: Administrative data for area secured provided by Ecological Gifts Program administrators.

This contribution is nevertheless significantly relevant because it involves the southern Canada region, which is largely privately held and has significant fair market value. It also hosts a rich biodiversity and also happens to be the area where securing land for conservation is challenging due to competition for incompatible land uses. Figure 1 shows the location and relative size of all ecological gifts completed as of October 2022.

Figure 1: Location and size of completed ecological gifts

2.4.3. Ecological gifts are safeguarded

The ITA provisions require that ecological gifts be conserved in perpetuity. While recipients are responsible for monitoring and managing properties to maintain or improve their conservation value, EGP administrators are responsible for providing ongoing assurance that the full portfolio of ecological gifts is managed in accordance with ITA requirements.

Disposition

Over the evaluated period, 42 requests for disposition were submitted and most responses to requests for disposition were provided within 100 days (88%, or 37 out of 42). A little over half the responses were provided in 30 days or less (55%, or 23 out of 42). Over the evaluated period, only two requests for disposition out of 42 (or 5%) were not authorized. One unauthorized disposition of a portion of an ecological gift was done by a recipient to a private individual. Program administrators informed the recipient of their obligation to self-report to the CRA.

Change in use

Over the evaluated period, nine requests for change in use out of 124 (or 7%) were not authorized. A single change in use occurred after the recipient was notified that the activity was not authorized by program administrators. This refers to one property that underwent a change in use in 2020. In this case, program administrators informed the recipient of their obligation to self-report to the CRA.

Ecological gift status survey

In 2012-2013, the program conducted its first status survey of ecological gift properties. A follow-up survey was sent to all ecological gift recipients in 2021-2022. In addition to providing program administrators with updated information on each property, the survey was used to remind recipients of their responsibilities concerning the disposition and change in use of ecological gifts under the ITA.

Recipients provided 1,538 individual responses to the 2021-2022 survey, and each response was evaluated for accuracy and potential land stewardship issues. Specific actions were taken by program administrators to address each issue identified. The response feedback rate was 93 percent of all recipients, collectively responsible for managing 99 percent of all ecological gifts, and the small number of potential issues identified during the second status survey of ecological gifts represents a positive achievement for the program.

Land change monitoring

Periodic administrative reviews or site visits are conducted to assess whether effective conservation measures are in place to protect the land in perpetuity. While the program does not systematically track activities on ecological gifts, a total of 133 site visits were conducted over the evaluated period.

2.2.4. Output and outcome performance targets are met

The EGP has put in place the following two high-level performance indicators:

1. The total number of completed ecological gifts and
2. The total area of ecologically sensitive land secured through the program

These two indicators have been used to quantify cumulative outputs and direct outcomes since the inception of the program in 1995. Administrative data on annual outputs and outcomes are also available from program administrators upon request to support evaluation.

The annual performance targets for outcome indicators are calculated by adding a rolling three-year average to the previous year’s results. The 2023-2024 performance for the number of completed ecological gifts was set at 1,870 and was met as 1,887 gifts had been completed by year end. The 2023-2024 performance for the area of ecologically sensitive land secured was set at 2,308 square km and was met as 2,481 square km had been completed by year end.

Both performance targets are calculated by adding a rolling 3-year average to the previous year's results. According to program administrators, this target-setting method reflects the assumption that the EGP has no direct control over the decision of would-be donors to participate in the program. However, this assumption overlooks evidence that recipient satisfaction with the program is tied to the willingness to recommend participation in the program to donors and to the capacity to undertake additional land securement projects.

Targets based on past performance neither create incentives to qualify and quantify the program’s outcome potential nor to adjust design and delivery to improve progress towards achieving potential. As noted in section 2.1, the EGP could improve its alignment with and contribution to Canada’s ambitious area-based conservation targets.

Administrative data on program activities is also available to support evaluation. However, data completion time is not available for all steps in the EGP process and some steps do not have service standards, as discussed in section 2.3 and reported in Appendix B. Moreover, there is no evidence that client satisfaction is measured and that steps are taken to improve satisfaction, as per the GC delivery policy and best practices reported in section 2.2.

2.5. Efficiency

2.5.1. Securement costs are low for the Government of Canada

The EGP incurs two types of costs for the GC: program operation costs (described as actual program expenditures under Table 5) and tax assistance costs. The tax assistance cost is the opportunity cost of tax measures, whereby the GC forgoes tax revenue.

The total appraised value of gifts completed during the evaluated period is $378 M. Over this period, the cost of delivering the EGP is estimated at $92.3 M, of which $85.0 M is estimated total tax assistance costs and $7.3 M is related to program operation costs. In other words, the program enabled the securement of 57,907 hectares of land for conservation at a cost that is $285 M lower than direct land acquisition at fair market value. It follows that the value of properties secured for conservation through the EGP is more than four times larger (410%) than total GC investments. Compared to ECCC expenditures alone, conservation outcomes realized through the EGP are worth 52 times more than program operation costs.

On a per-hectare basis, the average securement cost of the EGP is $1,610 for the GC, of which $1,468 is related to total tax assistance cost and $142 is related to program operation costs. The EGP enabled the securement of ecologically sensitive hectares at a cost that is $4,918 lower than the average fair market value per hectare of $6,528.

It is worth mentioning that several ecological gift recipients have benefited from contribution funding managed by ECCC, which is allowed in cases of split-receipting. Close to 20 percent of securement projects funded by the Natural Heritage Conservation Program are ecological gifts. However, available information does not allow for a determination of how much contribution funding indirectly supported the securement of donated properties (or portion of properties) under the EGP over the evaluated period.

2.5.2. Increase in program delivery cost-effectiveness

The ongoing resources allocated to the EGP have been stable since 2016-2017, at approximately 6.5 full-time equivalent employees and $600 K in annual funding allocated to operations and maintenance. Over the evaluation period, the EGP spent $7.3 M to support its operations. Table 5 provides a breakdown of program expenditures per fiscal year and expenditure category.

Table 5: Ecological Gifts Program actual expenditures (dollars)

Expenditure category	2018-2019	2019-2020	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023	2023-2024	Total
Salary	377,621	438,120	504,052	572,537	765,674	610,029	3,268,033
Operations and Maintenance	522,015	574,462	597,307	639,250	553,422	703,270	3,589,726
Grants and Contributions	0	0	0	37,011	232,500	170,000	439,511
Total	899,636	1,012,582	1,101,359	1,248,798	1,551,596	1,483,299	7,297,270

Source: Financial data was provided by EGP administrators.

Note 1: Salary expenditures reported in this table are approximated based on the time spent on EGP administration by each employee in 2023, which varies between 60 and 100 percent of employee worktime. Salary expenditures do not include Employee Benefits Plans.

Note 2: Additional expenditures for corporate support services and for central charges are not reflected in this table.

Compared to the reference period, the average number of completed gifts per year and the average area secured per year both increased over the evaluated period. In addition, four out of the best five years for the program in terms of the number of completed ecological gifts per year are within the evaluated period: 2020-2021 (94 gifts), 2021-2022 (88 gifts), 2022-2023 (108 gifts), and 2023-2024 (81 gifts). Table 6 presents improvement in performance across all three metrics. The combination of improved performance metrics and stable resource levels demonstrates an increase in program delivery cost-effectiveness.

Table 6: Performance metrics for the Ecological Gifts Program

Performance metrics	1995-1996 to 2017-2018	2018-2019 to 2023-2024	Difference	Difference (%)
Number of completed gifts per year (average)	60	86	+ 26	+ 44%
Area secured per year (average number of hectares)	5,519*	9,561	+ 4,132	+ 75%
Value of hectare secured (average $ per hectare)	$5,476 per hectare*	$6,535 per hectare	+ $1,058 per hectare	+ 19%

Source: Administrative data was provided by EGP administrators.

Note 1: Value of hectares secured are provided in nominal Canadian dollars.

Note 2: The star symbol (*) denotes a metric for which 2008-2009 data is removed from trend analysis. Results for 2008-2009 are outliers and including them would yield a distorted measure of central tendency.

3. Recommendations, Management Responses and Action Plan

The following recommendations are directed to ECCC’s Assistant Deputy Minister of the Canadian Wildlife Service (CWS), responsible for the Ecological Gifts Program (EGP).

Management Response:

The Assistant Deputy Minister of the CWS agrees with the recommendation.

The EGP has made improvements since its inception, especially in response to amendments to the Income Tax Act, but a review of the program design and delivery would be helpful. It must however be noted that the primary role of EGP staff is to ensure consistent program delivery and integrity, in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The EGP relies on individuals or corporations completing a donation (willing donors and willing recipients) and it is not expected that the annual average area protected under the program will augment significantly without new tax benefits or complementary funding related to acquisition and management costs including appraisal fees, cash payments for split receipts, and on-going stewardship endowments.

In response to this recommendation the EGP National Secretariat proposes to develop a 10-year strategic plan built around enhancing program delivery and meeting client needs with existing resources. The EGP Strategic Plan (2013-2023) will serve as starting point for discussion. The new plan will consider the key findings of this evaluation, noting that donor willingness is beyond the program's control; and that CWS’s role is to approve certain aspects of the donation in accordance with the responsibilities of the Minister of the Environment under the Income Tax Act. The strategic plan will be developed jointly by EGP regional staff and the national secretariat. Recipients and other stakeholders will be consulted. Advice will be sought from Finance Canada, the CRA, the Department of Justice, and Public Services and Procurement Canada (Appraisal and Valuation Services).

Working with the Business Applications and Solutions Directorate, under the Digital Services Branch of ECCC, CWS will explore the feasibility of transitioning the EGP to a digital service delivery model, including the assessment of technical options and estimation of the implementation and on-going costs. The online system used by the Canadian Cultural Property Export Review Board for the applications for the certification of cultural property for income tax purposes may be a good model.

Action 1: Develop a 10-year Strategic Plan (2026-2036).

Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
Development of a 10-year Ecological Gifts Program Strategic Plan.	January 31, 2026	Director General, Protected Areas Directorate

Action 2: Review the Ecological Gifts Program processes.

Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
Report with recommendations, of a committee of experts on the determination of fair market value for the Ecological Gifts Program.	June 30, 2026	Director General, Protected Areas Directorate
Ecological Gifts Program Processes Review: Report presenting options and recommendations.	March 31, 2027	Director General, Protected Areas Directorate

Action 3: Assess the feasibility of transitioning to a digital service delivery model.

Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
Meeting minutes / correspondence with the Business Applications and Solutions Directorate.	September 30, 2026	Director General, Protected Areas Directorate

Management Response:

The Assistant Deputy Minister of the CWS agrees that information to support Indigenous organizations and communities interested in becoming recipients of ecological gifts should be made available as part of the program’s communication material.

Determining whether an Indigenous organization has the legal capacity to issue charitable receipts and to hold real property depends on several factors, including their constituting documents or by-laws and applicable federal and provincial legislation. All potential recipients of ecological gifts are encouraged to seek independent legal advice to understand their eligibility and the applicable rules around charitable receipting. While CWS cannot provide legal advice to potential recipients, the EGP does provide information on the eligibility and the process for completing ecological gifts under the Income Tax Act.

All EGP publications are available digitally and in paper form and future updates will take into account the specific information needs of Indigenous organizations and communities. In collaboration with ECCC’s Communications Branch, the program is currently updating the EGP website, and it will include information for Indigenous organizations and communities.

Additionally, CWS supported the development of the Land Trust Starter Guide through a funding contribution to the Alliance of Canadian Land Trusts. This guide provides information on fostering meaningful Indigenous engagement and considerations for potential Indigenous-led land trusts. Wherever possible, the EGP will continue to support non-governmental organizations that work with Indigenous communities engaged in private land conservation.

Action 1: Provide information for Indigenous organizations interested in becoming recipients of ecological gifts.

Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
Updated Ecological Gifts Program website.	March 31, 2026	Director General, Protected Areas Directorate

Action 2: Support Indigenous communities interested in becoming land trusts through a contribution agreement with a national non-governmental organization, subject to available funding.

Deliverable	Timeline	Responsible
Contribution agreement signed.	March 31, 2027	Director General, Protected Areas Directorate

4. Appendix A. Ecological Gifts Program process

Figure 2: Ecological Gifts Program process

5. Appendix B. Service standards

Table 7: Service standards

Step description	Current service standard	Average completion time	Performance against service standard
ECCC responds to a charity application to become an eligible recipient of ecological gifts	30 business days	Unknown.	Service standard was met for all 10 applications submitted between 2019-2020 and 2022-2023.
ECCC issues a Certificate of Ecologically Sensitive Land, Recipient Identification and Approval pursuant to the ITA of Canada	No service standard	Unknown for the EGP as a whole and difficult to measure given a lack of consistent process for this step.	Not applicable
ECCC issues the Notice of Determination of Fair Market Value of an Ecological Gift to the donor.	90 calendar days, but does not apply to appraisals which do not fully conform to the guidelines or for which the Appraisal Review Panel requests additional information	Unknown for the subset of applications to which the service standard applies.	Service standard was met for 270 out of 275 applicable applications submitted in 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2022-2023.
ECCC issues a Notice of Redetermination of Fair Market Value of an Ecological Gift.	60 calendar days	137 calendar days	Service standard was not met for the single request for redetermination.
ECCC issues a Statement of Fair Market Value of an Ecological Gift Pursuant to the ITA of Canada for the determined fair market value.	No service standard	16 calendar days	Not applicable

Source: Administrative data was provided by the EGP and the GC InfoBase. The 2021-2022 GC InfoBase data cannot be validated and are omitted in the table.

Note: In Québec, a “Visa pour dons de terrains ou de servitudes ayant une valeur écologique” [Visa for donations of land or easements of ecological value] is issued by le Ministère de l’Environnement, de la Lutte aux changements climatiques, de la Faune et des Parcs du Québec [Ministry of the Environment, the Fight Against Climate Change, Wildlife and Parks] instead of a Certificate. Timelines for the delivery of a Visa are not reflected in this table.