Evaluation of Government Assisted Refugees (GAR) and Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP)

3. Key findings: RAP

3.1 Relevance

Summary of Findings – RAP Relevance

  • Based on UNHCR criteria, use of resettlement as a durable solution for GARs requires that government fully support GARs. The Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP) is the mechanism through which the Government of Canada provides such support to this refugee group.
  • Challenges facing refugees arriving in Canada after the introduction of IRPA have become more pronounced, indicating that the need for RAP has increased in the past 10 years.
  • RAP helps address two of the three UNHCR criteria to ensure resettlement is a durable solution (economic self-sufficiency and development of social-cultural connections).

3.1.1 Continued need for RAP

In general, stakeholders interviewed as part of the evaluation strongly support the maintenance, if not expansion, of the Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP). In particular, stakeholders noted that, based on UNHCR criteria, use of resettlement as a durable solution for GARs required: permanent status, support to become economically self-sufficient, and supports to help establish social-cultural connections. RAP is consistent with UNHCR guidelines that note the importance of such services:

In the early resettlement period, resettled refugees will need to access a range of resources such as housing, employment, income support payments and health care, as well as to learn about the culture, conventions and routines of the receiving society. They are required to accomplish these tasks in an unfamiliar environment, often with limited fluency in the language of the receiving country.

Providing support at this time can help to reduce anxiety and assist resettled refugees to gain a sense of control and independence. Importantly, support providers can help to ensure that resettled refugees have equitable access to the resources they will require for their resettlement (UNHCR, 2002).

Based on UNHCR criteria, the services provided to GARs under RAP appear to be consistent with the supports deemed necessary by CIC. As detailed below, the RAP program aligns well with the resettlement services deemed important by the UNHCR.

UNHCR identified resettlement services RAP services
Housing
  • housing upon arrival (temporary accommodation)
  • help finding permanent accommodation
  • housing supplements provided
Employment
  • GARs provided with limited employment counselling
Income support
  • CIC provides income support for one year set at provincial social assistance rates
  • CIC also provides other allowances for one time purchases
Health care
  • health care provided under IFHP pending access to provincial/territorial health care plans
Social orientation
  • orientation services provided in the first 4 to 6 weeks under RAP

A key finding of the research suggests that, if anything, the challenges facing refugees arriving in Canada after the introduction of IRPA have become more pronounced, indicating that the need for appropriate settlement-related supports has, in fact, likely increased, and not decreased, in the past ten years. As highlighted in Table 3-1, the profile of GARs arriving in Canada is considerably different from the profile of GARs who arrived prior to the introduction of IRPA. As detailed in the table, there has been a marked increase in the proportion of GARs who would be expected to have integration challenges due to lack of knowledge of an official language, limited education and age.

Table 3-1: Percentage change in the proportion of GARs resettled in Canada with barriers to integration
Barrier to Integration Proportion in 2000 Proportion in 2009 Change
No official language skills 66% 75% +9%
No formal education (all GARs) 25% 32% +7%
No formal education (adults only) 7% 20% +13%
65 years or older 1% 3% +2%
Have more than one barrier* 20% 30% +10%
Cases of single parents families 8% 9% +1%

Source: FOSS Data, *Barriers identified to derive this variable were: having no formal education, no official language skills and being 65 years of age or more at landing.

3.1.2 Alignment with government objectives and priorities

As noted previously, with the introduction of IRPA, Canada adopted a position that the need for protection should be the main criteria for selecting refugees for resettlement. In this context, Canada has witnessed a considerable shift in the type of refugees arriving in Canada, as there has been a marked increase in the proportion of clients with barriers (see Table 3-1). In this context, it can be expected that the services required by refugees are now even greater than was the case prior to 2002.

The Resettlement Assistance Program is a key program available to the Department to assist and promote the integration of Government Assisted Refugees in Canada, and aligns with departmental strategic outcomes and priorities. As noted on the CIC website, the Government of Canada is committed to fully supporting Government Assisted Refugees as noted below:

Government-assisted refugees are Convention Refugees Abroad and members of the Source Country Class whose initial resettlement in Canada is entirely supported by the Government of Canada or Quebec. This support is delivered by CIC-supported non-governmental agencies.

Support can last up to one year from the date of arrival in Canada, or until the refugee is able to support himself or herself, whichever happens first. It may include:

  • accommodation;
  • clothing;
  • food;
  • help in finding employment and becoming self-supporting; and
  • other resettlement assistance. (CIC, 2010e)

3.1.3 Consistency with respect to federal role and responsibilities

Currently the Federal Government plays an important role as the funder of the RAP program, and utilizes third-party service providers (Service Provider Organizations) to actually deliver the programs and services. In addition to providing funding to SPOs, the Federal Government also manages the payment of income support to GARs.

In general, key informants (CIC and SPOs) were supportive of the current RAP service delivery structure in which third party service providers provide the actual programs/services to GAR clients, with funding and oversight provided by CIC. Key informants cited several advantages of this model, including:

  • SPOs have developed the necessary skills to work with GARs, and due to SPOs often having other contacts with provincial/other organizations, they are able to provide a wide range of services that would not typically be available if the service was provided solely through CIC RAP funding (e.g., RAP leverages other SPO supports/infrastructure);
  • SPOs have a good understanding of the local community, as they are seen to be closely linked with community services; and
  • CIC stakeholders also felt that SPOs could deliver the RAP programs/courses more efficiently than would be the case if CIC delivered the program internally (CIC, 2009).

It should also be noted the delivery of RAP is consistent with the use of SPOs for other CIC programs (including language programs and settlement programs). Nevertheless, key informants did provide insight into possible other federal roles with respect to the RAP program delivery. These suggestions included:

  • Improving the monitoring of program outcomes;
  • Establishing mechanisms to support information sharing and innovation among stakeholders; and
  • Reviewing programs with a process to periodically update the program on a regular basis (e.g., funding levels, service gaps, other).

3.2 Pre-arrival information

Summary of Findings – Pre-Arrival Information

  • SPOs are adequately notified of GAR arrival dates and times.
  • Pre-arrival information on GARs lacks detail and quality.
  • Errors and omissions in pre-arrival information compromise SPOs ability to meet the immediate and essential needs of all GARs.

During the key informant interviews, SPOs reported that Matching Centre and CIC adequately informed them of the dates and times that GARs would be arriving. Any oversights or errors, with respect to arrival times or dates, were viewed as outside the control of either CIC or Matching Centre. Overall, the majority of SPOs surveyed are satisfied that NATS (Notification of Arrival Transmission System) are timely (very 68%; somewhat 26%) and contain the necessary information to enable them to meet GAR’s immediate needs (very 63%; somewhat 32%).

Despite satisfaction with information provided on arrival times, SPOs expressed concerns over the quality of the GAR information obtained prior to their arrival. During site visits, key informant interviews, and focus groups, SPOs reported that the information provided in advance of GAR arrivals is incomplete and does not enable them to adequately prepare to meet the immediate and essential needs of all GARs. In particular, medical and family information were at issue:

  • Medical information was lacking, making it difficult to address any immediate or long-term medical needs (e.g., urgent medical conditions, refilling prescriptions); and
  • Family composition was not always clearly indicated, sometimes forcing last minute changes to arrangements for temporary accommodations.

Local CIC officers agreed with SPOs that the lack of medical information created challenges in meeting the immediate needs of GARs. In addition to a lack of information, information quality was also a concern. SPOs noted during key informant interviews and focus groups that inaccuracies in GAR documentation prepared abroad (e.g., misspelling of names, different spelling of name on different documents, incorrect birthdays, incorrect birth years) created problems with accessing services in Canada and were challenging and time consuming to correct.

3.3 Quality of matching

Summary of Findings – Quality of Matching

  • The evaluation reported mixed findings regarding the quality of the matching.
  • Although SPOs and CIC reported appropriate matching, approximately one-fifth of GARs surveyed reported moving away from the community to which they have been matched.
    • Secondary migrants are most commonly seeking employment, family reunification, ethnic community or access to health or education services.
  • The longer a GAR has lived in Canada the more likely they are to have moved from their matching city.

During the interviews, it was generally reported by SPOs and CIC that GARs were appropriately matched to communities. Thus, GAR needs were said to be placed at the forefront of the matching process. The GARs surveyed confirmed the opinions of SPOs, with most being satisfied with the community with which they have been matched. In the GAR Survey, the majority (85%) of GARs reported being happy with the town or city to which they had been sent. It is also important to understand that the Matching Centre has GAR targets and must work to meet GAR targets in 23 different centres. The high level of GAR satisfaction does suggest that the Matching Centre has managed to balance both GAR needs and the requirements to distribute refugees across a number of communities in Canada.

Despite the reported satisfaction, there appears to be an opportunity for improved matching as 16% of GARs are not at all or only “somewhat or a little bit” happy with matching and secondary migration is occurring for one-fifth (18%) of the GARs. When they reported having moved away from their destined community, GARs did so, on average, 11 months after arriving in the new community (39% of those who moved relocated in the first 5 months). As shown in Table 3-2, the longer they had been living in Canada the more likely GARs were to have moved away from their city of intended destination. The movement reflected a need to seek employment and/or to reunite with family/friends or find a larger ethnic community.

Table 3-2: Proportion of GARs who moved since arrival for landing years 2005-2009
Year of entry 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Reporting Period
GARs surveyed (n=443) 33% 22% 14% 12% 9% 18%

Source: GAR Survey QA7

In key informant interviews, SPOs also noted that levels of secondary migration (within the first year) had decreased in recent years. In general, SPOs cited a number of reasons for GARs leaving their original community included:

  • reunification with family and/or friends;
  • perceived economic opportunities;
  • perception of better programs and services;
  • access to ethnic community; and
  • weather.

While opinions were mixed about the effectiveness of the Matching Centre’s consultations with local communities to determine capacity levels during the key informant interviews, it was noted that this process had improved over the past few years. To facilitate the matching process, the Matching Centre conducted an SPO Capacity Survey to better understand the resources of SPOs across Canada. Additionally, SPOs reported that local CIC officers appeared better positioned to relay requests and concerns to the Matching Centre about local capacity. This improved communication was felt to have improved the quality of GAR matching to appropriate communities. Despite improvements in the matching process, key informants noted that issues with matching were more pronounced among those GARs with high medical needs, GARs that were not consulted in the matching process, and GARs that were not sent to communities where family or friends resided.

An examination of the characteristics of secondary migrants supports the findings from key informants. GARs with no ability in either of Canada’s official languages are significantly less likely than GARs with official language ability to move away from their destination community. Thus, 77% of those with no official language remained, compared to 66% of those with language ability. In addition, GARs matched to small or medium-sized communities were more likely to move than those who were located in a larger urban centre (small – 30% mobility, medium – 31%, large – 14%).

In line with survey results, analysis of IMDB data on interprovincial mobility of GARs showed that GARs were more likely to move out of their province of intended destination in the first years after arrival, as 11% moved by the end of the landing year, and 22% by their second full year in Canada. However, retention varied across the country (see Table 3-3), with the highest retention rate in Alberta (89%) in 2007, followed by Ontario and British Columbia (83%). The Atlantic provinces had the lowest retention rate (between 48% and 34% depending on the province), along with Saskatchewan (46%).

Table 3-3: Summary statistics of interprovincial mobility for GARs in 2006 (2000 to 2007 cohorts)
Provinces Intended destination Out-migration In-migration Net change Net change (%) Turnover rate Retention rate
Newfoundland  485 290 20 -270 -55.67 0.07 40.21%
P.E.I 225 135 15 -120 -53.33 0.11 40.00%
N.S. 675 350 70 -280 -41.48 0.20 47.76%
New Brunswick 610 400 30 -370 -60.66 0.08 34.43%
Ontario 10,715 1,800 1,710 -90 -0.84 0.95 83.20%
Manitoba 1,975 790 220 -570 -28.86 0.28 60.00%
Saskatchewan 1,550 835 160 -675 -43.55 0.19 46.13%
Alberta 3,580 400 2,520 2,120 59.22 6.30 88.83%
B.C. 3,510 590 480 -110 -3.13 0.81 83.19%

Source: IMDB

Analysis of GAR mobility obtained through the IMDB was also compared to mobility patterns of other immigrant and/or refugee groups. For example, CIC research (CIC 2010f) indicates that among all immigrants who landed in Canada between 1991 and 2006, approximately 14% had moved from their original destination province. While not directly comparable as the reference period for both analyses is different, it does suggest that GARs are slightly more mobile than other immigrant groups.

3.4 Temporary accommodation

Summary of Findings – Temporary Accommodation

  • Although the number of days GARs spend in temporary accommodation varies, SPOs report that the limited time available for GARs to stay in temporary accommodation results in the selection of inappropriate housing and impacts GAR absorption of information presented during orientation

During the inland case studies, it was found that temporary accommodations vary across Canada. Some SPO sites rent hotel rooms for GARs as needed, while other sites permanently rent apartments to temporarily house GARs. Finally, some sites have a reception house that temporarily houses multiple GAR families. GARs are provided with clothing, linens, food (or a food allowance) and an incidental allowance when they arrive at temporary housing.

According to interviewees during the inland site visits, the number of days that GARs reside in temporary accommodation varies but is in part dictated by the rental market in the community of destination (Kappel Ramji Consulting Group, 2006). In 2009, average temporary accommodation stays were longer in the Prairies and Ontario (Table 3-4), in part reflecting higher rental rates in Calgary and Toronto (Source: iCAMS). Reflecting difficulties locating accommodation, the length of stay in temporary accommodation has increased for single GARs by 1.9% to an average of 17.8 days in 2009 from 17.5 days in 2005 (Source: iCAMS).

Table 3-4: Overall average: Number of days per GAR served in temporary accommodation by region
Temporary accommodation 2005 Days/GARs 2009 Days/GARs
Atlantic  9.16 11.93
Ontario 15.17 16.06
Prairies 21.36 23.25
British Columbia 19.93 13.19
Canada 17.49 17.56

Source: iCAMS

SPOs reported that the stay in temporary housing was too short and that the short length of the stay in temporary accommodations impacted both the delivery and absorption of RAP services. SPOs were required to start providing services immediately, without allowing GARs the opportunity for rest. This situation was particularly problematic for GARs who crossed multiple time zones and were jet-lagged upon arrival. GAR fatigue was noted to negatively impact their ability to absorption of the orientation information.

Currently, the RAP Policy Manual (IP 3) and the Resettlement Assistance Program Delivery Handbook do not have formal guidelines outlining the provision of temporary accommodation. Thus while temporary accommodation is mentioned, neither document outlines the type of accommodation required nor the length of stay allowed. SPOs have generally taken the lack of information to mean that they should encourage the shortest length of stay as possible. Owing to this belief, interviewed SPOs commented that they needed to rush through basic orientation and programming to ensure that GARs would be able to live safely in their own apartment. SPOs noted, however, that having GARs in a reception house eased transportation issues when providing services. As well, SPOs were pressured to find permanent housing for GARs. The time pressure could result in selection of inappropriate housing that was too expensive or too far from required services.

3.5 RAP services

Summary of Findings – RAP Services

  • SPOs and GARs report that RAP met the immediate and essential needs of GARs. However, the increase in the number of GARs with “barriers” has been a growing issue which places considerable strain on SPO staff and resources.
  • Unbalanced arrival patterns of GARs negatively impact service provision.
  • Service timeframes and available service hours negatively impact service provision and skill uptake in GARs.
  • SPOs report limited flexibility in what services are provided to clients. SPOs would like increased flexibility in numbers of hours per client, services offered and length of time over which services are offered.
  • Gaps in service included childminding, youth and senior services, and employment services.
  • SPOs suggest case management and a “one-stop shop” approach to service provision could improve GAR outcomes.

As detailed in the RAP Handbook, GARs are to receive a basic orientation to Canada, life skills training and financial orientation, assistance finding permanent accommodation, and referrals to other settlement programs within the first 4 to 6 weeks of their arrival in Canada (CIC, 2010b). Commonly, SPOs will complete an intake assessment or interview to determine GAR needs. This may be followed by the development of a service plan which may include assistance applying for such things as provincial health care insurance, social insurance number, Child Tax benefit, and GST credit. Clients will also undergo a RAP orientation, in which they are provided with an orientation package.

Orientation is divided into basic orientation and financial orientation. A large portion of the orientation is provided while GARs are housed in temporary accommodation. Orientations may be provided by a single assigned RAP counsellor or by multiple counsellors. Interpreters may be used when required; however, SPOs strive to hire staff with necessary language skills. Non-financial orientation covers a wide range of topics, such as renting, leases, health care coverage and schooling. Financial orientation typically includes banking, bank machines, budgeting and paying bills.

It is during the temporary accommodation stay that the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) certificate is issued, the RAP agreement is reviewed, family members are identified and verified, and start-up cheques are issued. In some SPOs, other settlement programs such as settlement and adaptation services and language instruction for newcomers are available; however, at others a formal referral is made to a second agency for these services. In SPOs where all services are provided, a blended model of service provision may occur, with the same worker providing RAP and other CIC settlement services. Footnote 14 A core service of RAP is assistance finding and securing permanent housing. In most SPOs, the housing search begins immediately after the GARs arrive. To facilitate the move into permanent accommodation, SPOs assist GARs with apartment viewings, signing leases, setting up utilities as required, delivering household start-up furniture, purchasing household start-up goods, and orientation to the neighbourhood. Additionally, SPOs will provide life skills training in the GAR’s permanent accommodation as required. Broadly, the areas covered by Life Skills include personal health, safe and secure personal dwelling, building safety, access to community services, appointments, public transportation, money management, shopping wisely, and reinforcement of information provided during RAP orientation (Kappel Ramji Consulting Group, 2005).

In discussions with SPOs, it was noted in many instances, SPOs have continued to provide support such as guidance and counselling to GARs well past the initial 4 to 6 week period as prescribed under RAP. While RAP is designed to be a short-term program for GARs, given the development of a close relationship between the GAR and SPO, it was felt that RAP should be modified to allow SPOs to provide on-going support (referral, guidance) to GARs for a much longer period of time (12 months was identified as an approximate length of time to provide such support). Given the increase in the number of “barriered” GAR clients since the introduction of IRPA, there would be justification to extend RAP services to account for additional service needs of this client group.

3.5.1 Immediate and urgent needs

Data regarding the medical needs of GARs suggest that there is considerable fluctuation in the number of hours required by SPOs to address emergency medical situations. Although iCAMS data suggests that there has been little change in the average number of hours per GAR to attend to emergency cases, analysis of the pattern on a year by year basis suggests that there is considerable variation in the level of service provided for emergency medical needs. SPOs were of the opinion that medical conditions of GARs were becoming more pervasive (i.e. SPOs were seeing more GARs with medical conditions) and that their conditions were more challenging. It should be noted that SPOs also reported seeing more cases that required specialized medical care, including victims of trauma and/or those with mental health conditions.

Table 3-5: Average number of hours per GAR assistance in emergency medical situations by region
Emergency medical assistance 2005 Hours/GAR 2009 Hours/GAR 2005-2009 Change
Atlantic  5.40 5.80 +0.40
Ontario 3.84 3.80 -0.04
Prairies 6.00 4.82 -1.18
British Columbia 4.88 4.31 -0.57
Canada 4.96 4.57 -0.39

Source: iCAMS

The majority of GARs surveyed confirmed that RAP is meeting their immediate and essential needs; 85% reported that the SPO was helpful in meeting their initial needs. The majority of GARs reported receiving food (89%), clothing (64%), and toiletries (64%) and being taken to see a doctor (72%) immediately upon their arrival. In the focus groups GARs also noted that SPOs addressed their initial needs in a comprehensive and helpful manner and that the services provided were relevant to their situation (GAR Focus Groups).

Although SPOs believe they are meeting the immediate and urgent needs of GARs, stakeholders also noted that SPO resources and staff were currently at maximum capacity. It was mentioned during the interviews that this is due to both the short time frame in which to provide services and the level of need of some GARs. More specifically, those with high medical needs, including mental health needs, require that SPOs provide considerable assistance accessing healthcare. Further, GAR arrival patterns can overburden SPOs if large numbers arrive in a short time frame.

SPOs noted that GAR arrivals are often clustered in a few months instead of consistently flowing over the course of the year. Between 2005 and 2009, GARs more frequently arrived in the months of June, July, September and November, with fewer arrivals in December and January.

It is not uncommon for communities to receive a large number of GARs in a short time period. During the reference period, 2005 to 2009, all SPOs, excluding Edmonton, had received 20% or more of their annual target in a single month. This is over twice what they would have received if GAR arrivals were evenly distributed throughout the year. For 43% of SPOs, 20% or more of their annual target was received in one month every year from 2005 to 2009 (Table 3-6).

Table 3-6: Number of years SPOs received 20% or more of annual target in one month, landing years 2005-2009
Number of years 20% or more annual GAR target received in one month Percentage of SPOs
None 4%
One 17%
Two  13%
Three 22%
Four 0%
Five 43%

Source: FOSS

Balancing GAR arrivals with overseas field requirements is challenging. For example, in some regions, movements of refugees are influenced by weather (i.e. IOM reports that they prefer to move refugees from Southeast Asia during non-monsoon periods). Similarly, in other regions, groups of refugees are moved in a large group to reflect transportation challenges (i.e. in some areas, IOM charters a plane to move large number of refugees at once). Notwithstanding these issues, SPOs report that they could improve the quality of services provided if GAR arrivals were staggered throughout the years.

3.5.2 Orientations

Overall, GARs felt that the orientations and skills taught by the SPOs were useful to them. In the GAR survey, the majority agreed that the SPO had taught them a wide range of skills and that the information provided was useful (Table 3-7).

* Excludes those who said they already knew to how to complete the task
** Useful or Very Useful

Table 3-7: GAR agreement that SPOs taught skills and skills were useful
Knowledge or skill Taught skill* Agreement skill useful**
Open bank account 93% 92%
About rights and laws in Canada 85% 82%
How to find a doctor 83% 90%
Rent accommodation (Lease) 83% 83%
Use public transportation 82% 88%
Use Canadian money 79% 87%
Look for accommodation 78% 83%
Budgeting 76% 83%
Set up utilities 76% 88%
Use appliances 72% 88%
Source: GAR Survey, n = 340 to 491

SPOs surveyed and interviewed also reported that RAP orientations helped GARs develop the skills they needed to live safely and independently. Footnote 15 However, SPOs qualified their responses, noting that the information was preliminary or basic and that additional reinforcement or teaching would be required before some GARs would fully master these skills. It was suggested that additional programs and services were needed to build on these basic resettlement skills.

During the reporting period, SPOs spend the greatest number of hours providing basic orientation to GARs, followed by hours spent making GARs aware of Federal and Provincial government programming (Table 3-8). Overall, the number of hours for all orientation services, excluding orientation to federal and provincial programs, has increased from 2005 to 2009, probably due to the increase in high needs GARs with the introduction of IRPA. The greatest percentage change in hours spent per client is seen in the areas of assessment and referrals (+36%) and income support orientation (+12%). Regionally, SPOs located in the Prairie and Atlantic regions spend more time per GAR on basic orientation than those in other regions (2005 to 2009).

Table 3-8: Overall average: Number of hours per GAR in providing orientation service (by service)
Orientation service 2005 Hours/GAR 2009 Hours/GAR 2005-2009 Change
Assessment and referrals 2.25 3.00 +36%
Information about income support 2.84 3.21 +12%
Basic orientation 4.72 5.08 +6%
Client aware federal/provincial program 4.15 3.86 -6%
Financial orientation 2.96 3.10 +5%

Source: iCAMS

Despite an increase in hours, SPOs felt that the short time frame in which orientations are delivered undermines absorption of the information among GARs. SPOs stressed during the interviews that information absorption is increasingly challenged by the changing GAR profile, as more GARs arrive without any experience living in a Western country. The GAR survey confirms the lack of Western living skills among GARs. Only a small proportion of GARs surveyed reported prior knowledge of such things as household appliance use (12%), budgeting (5%), public transportation use (3%), and opening a bank account (1%).

SPO also stressed during the interviews and inland site visits that skills that were relevant and practical to the GARs were more readily absorbed from the orientations (e.g., banking, public transportation, shopping). However, more abstract material that may not be directly or immediately relevant to GARs was harder to teach, such as budgeting, navigating social services, and laws and rights in Canada.

During the inland case studies, SPOs also noted that they felt that the services provided to GARs should be better tailored to reflect the specific needs of each GAR. Rather than utilizing a “one size fits all” approach, whereby each GAR receives the same services and/or orientations, SPOs felt that the number of hours of service provided to GARs should vary based on the specific needs of the GAR. SPOs noted that the orientation/information that should be provided to an Iraqi middle class educated professional would not be the same as required by a Somali single mother who had lived her whole life in a refugee camp for example. It should be noted that the CIC Delivery Handbook, does appear to be prescriptive, as it provides a “checklist” of items/issues that workers are expected to explain to GARs. SPOs advocate that a more effective approach would be to tailor the actual level or amount of service based on the specific needs/requirements of the GAR. In this model, higher need GARs could be provided with additional service hours while GARs with lesser needs could be provided with fewer hours of service. In this context, it may be necessary to re-examine the flexibility of the Rap funding model to permit a more flexible service delivery model.

Interviewees noted gaps in the provision of orientations to GARs in three specific areas: child-minding, youth and senior services, and employment services. The lack of child-minding services was said to negatively impact service accessibility for mothers (caregivers), and, since 44% of GARs cases arrive with minors, this constitutes a significant barrier to service provision.

Lack of programming and orientations specifically for youth and seniors was also noted as a key service gap. Whenever possible, SPOs included youth in service provision; however, the skills and services required by these two groups are different from those currently offered (Kappel Ramji Consulting Group, 2007). In the reference period, 41% of GARs arriving were under the age of 18 and 2% were over the age of 65. For youth in particular, SPOs felt there was a strong need to provide further support in order to prevent poor outcomes in school and future involvement in the criminal justice system. Rossiter & Rossiter (2009) note that resettlement requires significant effort from refugee parents, leaving them with diminished capacity to address risk factors in refugee youth, such as mental health issues, addiction and poor school integration. The provision of youth-centered programming is said to be a method by which protective factors can be introduced to support these youth at risk (Rossiter & Rossiter, 2009).

Lack of employment services was cited by GARs during the focus group as a significant gap in the services currently provided. Because their focus sometimes differed from that of the service providers, GARs expressed significant interest and desire to work and felt that an important place to begin preparing GARs to work in Canada should be during the RAP. Further, GARs with qualifications or education expressed frustration with their inability to have qualifications and previous work experience recognized. In the GAR survey, 57% of all GARs indicated that one of the greatest difficulties they have experienced since arriving in Canada has been finding employment. An additional 33% noted that their lack of Canadian education or work experience had been a significant barrier to employment. SPOs also noted that the claw-back of income support for GARs who did find employment in the first year in Canada sometimes discouraged GARs from finding employment.

3.5.3 Linkages to community services

SPOs mentioned during the inland site visits that they had good working relationships with other CIC and provincial and community services. SPOs were well-connected and able to refer GARs to needed services. Where services were available in the community and accessible, GAR focus group attendees stated that they were being referred to these services, also mentioned during the key informant interviews. The majority of GARs surveyed agreed they had been referred to language training (80%), health care services (66%) and information and orientation services (66%). In 2006, Kappel Ramji Consulting Group noted that in some RAP-SPO delivery models, other CIC settlement services are available within the same service provider or are co-located with the service provider. This finding was confirmed in the data collected from the SPO survey. In these models GARs may not identify themselves as being referred to additional services by the SPO. Despite strong linkages some challenges, associated with referral and access, were identified by key informants:

  • Smaller communities noted that some services were not available (e.g., trauma counselling, specialized medical services).
  • Some provincial services were only available to individuals on provincial social assistance, so GARs did not qualify for them (e.g., child care and education access).
  • Some community service organizations viewed GARs as a Federal Government responsibility and were hesitant to provide services.

As well, community services may lack the capacity to meet the unique needs of GARs. During the inland site visits and interviews, SPOs noted that there were no language/interpretation resources for GARs’ first languages at many community services and, in particular, health services. Insufficient understanding of the sensitivities concerning GARs (e.g., traumatizing experiences, protracted stays in refugee camps) was also said to negatively impact service provision by community providers. Lack of official language skills and knowledge of how to navigate social services therefore made many GARs reliant on the SPO to access community services.

With respect to health services, key informants identified restrictions of the IFHP limit GAR access to appropriate medical care. IFHP is designed to cover medically required, medically necessary and supplemental care for a period of up to one year prior to refugees receiving provincial/territorial health insurance coverage (Medavie Blue Cross, 2005). Gaps in coverage in the areas of mental health, dental care, prosthetics, physiotherapy, and transportation to and from health care services (in small communities) were of significant concern to stakeholders consulted for this evaluation. Key informant interviewees noted reluctance or refusal on the part of physicians and pharmacies to accept IFHP, in part due to the length of time required for IFHP to compensate for services provided, was also said to limit GAR access to health care (Wales, 2010). Limited access or inequalities in health care provision can result in treatable conditions being neglected in refugees (Wales, 2010) (Swinkels et al. , 2010). Key informants stressed the need to adapt health care provision to better meet GAR needs and prevent health issues going undiagnosed or untreated.

A common theme identified in discussion with SPOs was the benefit of having almost all services available to GARs in one place – essentially a “one stop shop” for the various services or supports that GARs would require – either during the time of receiving RAP services, or for a period of time after RAP. Location of RAP program delivery in close proximity to language, employment and housing support services was seen as a best practice that should be adopted where possible to enhance GAR access and utilization of such services. Reflecting the need for interpretive services, in all regions, except B.C. there has been an increase in requests for interpretive services from GARs from 2005 to 2009: Ontario 46%; Prairies 38%; and Atlantic 21% (source: iCAMS).

3.6 Income support and housing

Summary of Findings – Income Support and Housing

  • Stakeholders agree income support is insufficient to meet the basic necessities of GARs.
  • The majority of GARs’ income (upwards of 56%) is used for housing, placing them in core housing need.
  • Single and large GAR families are least able to find adequate housing on current income support levels.
  • The transportation loan adds to GARs’ financial stress and increasingly puts them at risk for poor integration.

Administered by CIC, RAP income support is provided to the Principal Applicant (PA) and accompanying dependants for up to 12 months or until the GAR is self-sufficient whichever occurs first (CIC, 2010b). Non-accompanying dependents receive assistance 12 months from their arrival date. Extensions are rare and occur only under exceptional circumstances.

The amount delivered is based on provincial social assistance rates (CIC, 2010b), which vary by province. During the period of income support receipt, GARs are expected to work towards becoming self-sufficient and start repaying all loans (e.g., transportation loan). Income assistance is composed of a number of monthly allowances, supplements and one-time allowances. The core allowances are the Basic Allowance (covering food and incidentals) and the Shelter Allowance (covering rent and in some provinces utilities). A complete description of all allowances and one-time payments is included in Appendix E.

The majority of key informants noted that income support is insufficient to meet the basic needs of GARs. These findings are supported by current literature. In a 2007 study of RAP income support, Siggner, Atkey, & Goldberg found that RAP fell below Human Resources and Skills Development Canada’s (HRSDC) Market Basket Measure (MBM) and Statistic Canada’s Low Income Cut-Offs (LICOs) in 15 resettlement locations across Canada. Footnote 16 Even when government benefits were factored in, such as the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CCTB), the Goods and Services Tax/Harmonized Sales Tax (GST/HST) Credit, and the Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB), income supports still fell short of the MBM and LICO in all settlement locations studied except Halifax.

The authors concluded that RAP did not meet current measures of adequate incomes for all household types in all locations and that living in poverty may adversely impact settlement and integration (Siggner, Atkey, & Goldberg, 2007). The National Council of Welfare (2010) also concluded that welfare incomes, on which RAP is modeled, remain inadequate and are consistently far below socially accepted measures of adequacy. The situation of inadequacy was even more pronounced in single GARs whose incomes are slightly lower than those on social assistance and who have fewer resources available to them. Thus key informants stressed that utilizing social assistance benchmarks as the benchmark for RAP income support may not be appropriate given most GARs arrive with little or no assets, and have considerable costs to buy necessary items such as clothing, furniture and/or other assets (see Table 3-9).

** Not including housing supplement up to $75/month

Table 3-9: CIC RAP monthly rates compared to social assistance rates in 7 sample RAP cities in 2009 – Single person
  Social assistance
(including applicable allowances)
CIC RAP
Single person
(Sample RAP Cities)
Basic needs
(food and incidentals)
Shelter Total Basic needs
(food and incidentals)
Shelter** Total
Vancouver, BC 235 375 610 235 375 610
Calgary, AB 260 323 583 254 303 557
Regina, SK 255 459 714 255 416 671
Winnipeg, MN 207 285 492 207 285 492
Toronto, ON 216 356 572 211 349 560
Saint John, NB 338 199 537 338 199 537
St John’s, NL 472 249 721 472 249 721

Source: CIC, Internal Communication

It should be noted that numerous reports highlight the insufficiency of social assistance rates relative to low income cut-off (LICO) or other measures across Canada. For example, as highlighted in Table 3-9, examining social assistance rates, CIC assistance levels and estimated low income cut-off rates for Toronto, Calgary, and Vancouver underscores the gap in annual income between social assistance, CIC RAP and LICO requirements (see Table 3-10).

*Other benefits include other social assistance benefits, GST credits, other provincial tax credits
**Monthly support for single (See Table 3-8), includes $75.00 housing supplement

Table 3-10: Social assistance income, CIC RAP income support vs. low income cut-off (LICO) levels 2009 – Single employable
  Social assistance
(including applicable allowances)
CIC RAP LICO % of LICO
Single
person
(Sample cities)
Basic social assistance Other benefits* Total Basic support** Other benefits (Non-RAP)* Total   Social assistance CIC RAP
Toronto, ON 6,877 624 7,501 7,620 624 8,244 18,421 41% 45%
Vancouver, BC 7,320 458 7,778 8,220 458 8,678 18,421 42% 47%
Calgary, AB 6,996 245 7,241 7,584 245 7,829 18,421 39% 43%

Source: National Council on Welfare, Welfare Incomes 2009, Appendix Table A-6, Table 2

Given that the Government of Canada is committed to the full support of government assisted refugees, it is debateable as to whether utilization of provincial social assistance rates is an appropriate measure in that it may not provide for full support.

The challenge GARs face on income support is reflected in the GAR survey. Approximately, one-third (29%) of GARs indicate their income support does not cover basic necessities (food, housing, clothing, etc. ) and over one-half (57%) have used food banks to meet their basic food needs. In addition, for one-third (33%) of GARs surveyed, one of the greatest difficulties in resettlement is coping with financial constraints.

One of GARs’ greatest challenges, while on income support, is finding acceptable housing. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) defines acceptable housing as housing that is adequate in condition (no repairs required), suitable in size (enough bedrooms for household make-up), and affordable (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation [CMHC], 2010). Affordable housing should represent less than 30 per cent of before-tax household income. For renters, shelter costs include rent and any payments for electricity, fuel, water and other municipal services. When households are residing in accommodation that does not meet one or more of the three criteria and they would have to pay more than 30 per cent of before-tax household income to obtain such housing they are said to be in core housing need.

Key informants noted that the high cost of housing necessitates that the majority of the GAR income support be used for shelter. This places many GAR households in core housing need. GARs’ susceptibility to becoming in core housing need is highlighted in the 2007 study of GAR income support. The study found that in 15 CIC resettlement locations GARs would need to spend more than 30% of their total income on shelter, and in some cases over 50%, to afford the average rent for a two bedroom apartment (Siggner, Atkey, & Goldberg, 2007). Furthermore, it has been shown that immigrants and refugees are significantly more likely to live in households with crowding (greater than one person per room) (Haan, 2010). By immigrant class, refugees in fact experience the highest rates of crowding (Hiebert, 2010).

According to CMHC, core housing need results from lack of affordability instead of poor quality housing, and most households with affordability issues are renters (CMHC, 2006). During the evaluation reference period, vacancy rates remained relatively low in Canada, although there was a slight increase in 2009 (Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, 2011). Low vacancy rates are directly related to difficulties finding rental units and to rent increases. These trends are exacerbated in urban one-person households and in low-income households. One-person households are increasing and as more people look for shelter they are more vulnerable to the difficulties of finding acceptable housing (CMHC, 2007a) (Statistics Canada, 2007).

Key informant noted that, among GARs, singles are most negatively impacted by the costs of housing as they lack someone to share the fixed costs of housing and do not have ready access to other sources of government support (e.g., Child Tax Benefit – CTB). According to key informant interviewees, for those GARs with children, the Canada Child Tax Benefit (CTB) is used to supplement the household income and cover rental costs. Table 3-11 shows that in seven of the sites visited for the evaluation, single GARs must use 60% or more of their basic income to cover the cost of a bachelor apartment based on average market rental rates. It should be noted that the cities presented are for illustrative purposes only and represent the range in terms of the proportion of income that would be used for housing based on average rental rates for the identified communities in 2007.

Table 3-11: Sample of income support rates for a single adult and average housing costs (2007)
City Monthly budget 2006 Average rent – Bachelor % Income Average rent – 1 bedroom % Income
Vancouver $510.00 $702.00 138% $817.00 160%
Winnipeg $521.00 $421.00 81% $560.00 107%
Kitchener $548.00 $567.00 100% $693.00 126%
Toronto $548.00 $743.00 136% $897.00 164%
Edmonton $557.00 $562.00 100% $667.00 120%
Saskatoon $645.00 $395.00 61% $498.00 77%
St. John’s $693.00 $503.00 73% $567.00 82%
Halifax $784.00 $581.00 74% $652.00 83%
Source: Community Profile; CMHC Housing Market Information: CHS-Rental Market Survey 2007 Report
Note: an income supplement was introduced in 2006 which allowed up to $75 a month for singles and $100 a month a month for families. In addition, as noted in Table 3-9, GARs could qualify for other income such as child tax benefits and GST credits.

Key informant interviewees noted that costs of housing are also problematic for large families, as they are restricted in the housing options available to them. Limited numbers of three- and four-bedroom rental units reduces larger family’s access to affordable housing (CMHC, 2007b) (Carter et al. , 2009). As well, the problem of insufficient access to housing for larger families is more pronounced among refugees, as the average size of refugee families is larger than other immigrant classes. Refugee families are also more likely to include single parent families (Murdie, 2010). As  Table 3-12 shows in seven of the sites visited for the evaluation, large-family GARs (4 or more children) must use 56% or more of their income to cover the cost of a three-bedroom apartment. Single-parent large family GARs are in greater need as in most cases, they use 60% or more of their monthly income for a 2 bedroom apartment.

Table 3-12: Sample of income support rates for a single adult with 3 children or couple with 4 children and average housing costs (2007)
City Monthly budget 1 adult / 3 children Average rent– 2 bedroom % Income Monthly budget 2 adults / 4 children Average rent – 3 bedroom % Income
Vancouver  $916.00 $1,047.00 114% $1,061.00 $1,222.00 115%
St. John’s $1,048.00 $651.00 62% $1,089.00 $646.00 59%
Saskatoon $800.00 $609.00 76% $1,095.00 $636.00 58%
Edmonton  $1,015.00 $808.00 80% $1,285.00 $906.00 71%
Winnipeg $1,192.00 $712.00 60% $1,507.00 $848.00 56%
Kitchener $1,342.00 $830.00 62% $1,564.00 $945.00 60%
Toronto  $1,342.00 $1,065.00 79% $1,564.00 $1,259.00 80%
Halifax  $1,346.00 $799.00 59% $1,685.00 $1,009.00 60%

Source: Community Profile; CMHC Housing Market Information: CHS-Rental Market Survey 2007 Report

The information presented in Table 3-11 and Table 3-12 is intended to highlight the considerable challenges faced by GARs in terms of finding affordable housing given the current CIC RAP housing allowances. The disparity between allocated housing allowances and actual average housing rates underscores the difficulties reported by SPOs in terms of assisting GARs to secure appropriate and affordable housing.

It was generally felt by key informants that if housing costs could be addressed, income support levels would not be as problematic. Acknowledging that there are political reasons for aligning income support with social assistance, key informants questioned the appropriateness of this noting that:

  • GARs lack the support structures;
  • GARs have multiple barriers to integration and employment;
  • GARs lack the assets that social assistance clients may have accumulated including both physical assets as well as other non-financial assets such as their community connections; and
  • Social assistance is designed to deter people from receiving it.

3.6.1 Transportation loan

Key informants noted that the fact that the transportation loan and medical costs are not calculated into the monthly budget adds to GARs’ financial challenges. These items further tax GARs’ incomes. The travel loan is approved to cover the cost of medical examinations abroad, travel documents and transportation to Canada (CIC, 2010d). A memorandum of understanding signed between CIC and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) allows CIC to direct funds to IOM on behalf of the loan recipient (GAR) to cover transportation services, medical services, and the IOM service fee covering administrative costs related to delivery of services to the recipient. Footnote 17 The completed travel loan (IMM0500 – Immigration Loan) is provided to IOM by CIC. Loans are authorized with expectation of full repayment of principal and related interest. Accordingly, if a fixed repayment schedule is not feasible or if repayment is conditional on some future event, a loan may not be issued. Instead some other form of financial assistance, such as repayable contributions, should be considered. (Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, 2010).

The operations manual (OP 17) notes that certain categories of refugees selected abroad (like single parents, large refugee families, women at risk and disabled refugees), who apply for an immigration loan may have access to the contribution fund from the RAP. When issuing a loan, visa officers have to assess the potential ability to repay the loan as well as any contributing factors. Therefore, they have to assess the applicant’s ability to earn income, other financial obligations he or she may have, his or her capacity to use one of the official languages, the employment skills and any need for training in order to successfully compete in the labour market, and whether the applicant’s employability is restricted because of a medical condition. In addition, they can also consider other factors potentially affecting income potential such as age: level of education; employment history; receipt of social assistance; number of family members; size of loan requested and current debt load. Given the profile of recent GARs, where a significant proportion of adults report not knowing Canada’s official languages (69%) and who have no education (18%) upon landing (see section 2.4.1), and that a significant proportion of GARs have difficulty securing employment in the years following resettlement to Canada (see section 4.7), it would be expected that many GARs would meet the conditions for having their loans converted to contributions.

Although the operations manual (OP 17) notes that the CBO can convert a loan to a contribution for refugees in the host country who would be deemed to have difficulty repaying the loan, in practice this knowledge does not appear to be well known or utilized among CBO staff. This could reflect a lack of understanding or guidance provided to CBOs in terms of how this provision could be applied. This could also reflect limited communication to CBOs located in the CVOA of the experiences/challenges faced by GARs in Canada. As of 1999, the contribution fund provided for a total of $400,000 annually. The Resettlement Division estimates that this fund can reasonably accommodate between 40 to 50 refugee families per year. As available contribution dollars are limited, in reviewing each request, several options may be pursued by the Resettlement Division (SRE) before access to the fund is authorized Footnote 18. The amount spent in overseas contributions fluctuated from year to year. For example in the fiscal year 2008-2009, it was estimated that $339,611 would be spent in overseas contributions; in 2007-2008, it was estimated that $109,126 would be spend that year.

On average, GARs entering Canada between 2005 and 2009 had a loan of $2,809 dollars; however, the size of the loan varied by family composition. Between 2005 and 2009, the average loan was as high as $9,030 for a family of nine, but more typically averaged $2,821 for one person, $3,947 for a couple, or $5,138 for a family of three.

Table 3-13: Average loan by case size for GARs admitted to Canada between 2005-2009
Number of people in case Percentage of cases Mean loan amount
One 25% $2,845
Two 27% $3,964
Three 22% $5,150
Four 12% $6,008
Five 7% $7,195
Six 4% $6,959
Seven 2% $7,277
Eight 1% $6,217
Nine Less than 1% $9,030
Source: Loans Database
Note: Excludes Quebec

The repayment period for the loan begins 30 days after landing in Canada and GARs have up to six years to repay a loan. Loans may remain in interest-free status for one to three years after landing. Should GARs have difficulty making payments, they may request a deferral. At that time a local CIC officer may apply to National Headquarters (NHQ) to have the loan, or a portion of the loan, converted to a contribution. Contributions are difficult to receive, with priority placed on Joint Assistance Sponsorship (JAS), GARs on RAP income support, and GARs who are within one year of leaving income support. In addition, priority is based on seniors, single parents with five or more dependents, two-parent families with seven or more dependents and those with (or who have family members with ) serious long-term physical or mental illness.

Focus groups with GARs found that GARs take pride in paying off the transportation loan and will make payments on their loan at the expense of other basic necessities. While repayment of the transportation loan is a source of pride among GARS, payments add to their monthly financial stress and exacerbate the risk factors for poor integration (Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community Services, 2009). In the GAR Survey, the majority of those surveyed (91%) had a transportation loan. Of those, 61% reported having difficulties repaying their transportation loan.

Despite difficulties with payment, over one-half (56%) of the 2005 to 2009 GAR cohorts are in the process of paying or have paid off their transportation loan and a small minority (1%) have had the loan deferred. The remaining GARs from those cohorts are either not paying (36%) or the loan has been written off (8%) Footnote 19. Among those who are repaying, it was impossible to tell, from the data available, how long they had been repaying their loan, if the repayment went over the period assigned to the loan, and how long it took to fully repay loans.

The appropriateness of the transportation loan would be further assisted by an analysis of the net repayment rate for such loans. Although data were unavailable, it would be appropriate to assess the utility of the loan on the basis of the net cost/benefit of the loan. For example, there are significant costs associated with the administration of the loan (CIC internal costs were reported to be $1.6 million per year). Footnote 20 If the repayment rates are calculated to be low (i.e. if the total GAR repayment rate per each dollar of loan is only 20¢ or 30¢ per dollar) maintenance of the transportation loan may actually generate a low net financial return to CIC. Given the financial difficulties of GARs, if this net return is low the elimination of the transportation loan would be appropriate.

3.7 GAR outcomes

Summary of Findings – GAR Outcomes

  • Since arrival in Canada, GARs have shown a steady increase in language acquisition, employment and earnings.
  • GARs were reliant on social assistance, especially in the first years following arrival.
  • Although most of the GARs were able to secure employment, a significant share (about 40%) were not employed past three years in Canada, and for those who were employed, their earnings remained fairly low.

Successful integration of refugees is said to be linked to achievement and access in a number of key domains (Ager & Strang, 2008). These domains include employment, housing, and social services like education and health. Also important is social connectedness both with their cultural community and the community at large. Integration would also encourage the attainment of permanent citizenship and an understanding of the rights and responsibilities associated with the country of resettlement.

3.7.1 Language acquisition

Mastery of a country’s official language underpins full participation in that society. Without sufficient language competency, refugees are barred from social interaction and full employment. Beiser and Hou (2000) noted the important role of language proficiency in unemployment and labour force participation in the long term. Furthermore, language competency also supports the refugee’s ability to access appropriate social and health services.

All of the GARs surveyed had taken some form of English language training. The majority of GARs surveyed in the reference period reported improved English (93%) language skills. Assessing their own mastery of English, just over one-half of all GARs surveyed indicated that they could now speak (62%), write (55%), or read (55%) very well, well or fairly well, although this improvement cannot be solely attributed to English language training.

Table 3-14: Ability to speak, read and write Canada’s official languages (self declared)
  Very Well Well Fairly Well Poorly Not At All
Speak English 8% 28% 34% 22% 7%
Write in English, even if it is just a few words 11% 25% 30% 25% 9%
Read English, even if it is just a few words 18% 31% 24% 18% 9%
English n=436, 
Source: GAR Survey 
Note: Totals may not add to 100% due to rounding.

As highlighted in Figure 3-1, it appears that GAR acquisition of language skills markedly improve after landing. For example, based on FOSS data, in 2009, only 25% of GARs reported ability to function in either official language upon arrival. As highlighted in the chart, the proportion of GARs who reported that they thought that they could function well or very well (in English) increased from 42% after one year in Canada to 59% after five years in Canada.

Figure 3-1: GARs reporting official language skills (% reporting reading English well/very well)

Figure 3-1: Government Assisted Refugees reporting official language skills (% reporting reading English well/very well)

Source: FOSS (upon arrival), GAR Survey (after 1 to 5 years)
n = 436 for GAR Survey

3.7.2 Employment and education

Employment is the most commonly measured indicator of refugee integration because employment allows the refugee to achieve economic independence and self-reliance (Ager & Strang, 2008). Given the difficulty refugees experience having previous qualifications (education, if any) and work histories recognized, any examination of employment should also factor in under-employment. Educational outcomes are equally important as education provides skills and competencies that support subsequent employment.

Analysis of the employment outcomes of GARs surveyed provides the following insights (survey results):

  • 42% of GARs reported that they were employed at the time of interview;
  • 21% of GARs reported that they were studying (in school);
  • 14% reported that they were unemployed and looking for work;
  • 7% reported that they were staying at home to care for parents/children;
  • 7% reported that they were not working due to a disability; and
  • 9% reported being unemployed due to other reasons (too old, not looking for work, etc. ).

Highlighted in Table 3-15 is the proportion of GARs employed by year of arrival. As highlighted in the table, employment rates increased significantly after the first year in Canada, but did not change appreciably after the third year in Canada.

Table 3-15: Rate of employment by gender, for landing years, 2005-2009
Category Years since landing Average
(All years)
1 2 3 4 5
Sample size 117 91 90 99 102 500
Male 39% 46% 57% 66% 56% 52%
Female 17% 28% 27% 29% 39% 29%
Total 31% 40% 46% 51% 47% 42%

Source: GAR Survey, n=500 

Given that a significant proportion of GARs are not seeking employment, a more telling statistic as to the employment outcomes of GARs is to measure unemployment rate over time. Using the Labour Force definition Footnote 21, it appears that the current unemployment rate among GAR survey respondents was calculated to be 25%. As highlighted in Figure 3-2, unemployment rates among GAR clients declined the longer that GARs were in Canada. Caution should be exercised in the interpretation of the data given the small sample sizes.

Figure 3-2: GARs unemployment rate – GARs by length of time in Canada

Figure 3-2: Government Assisted Refugees unemployment rate – Government Assisted Refugees by length of time in Canada

Source: GAR Survey, n=281

Among those who had a job, almost two-thirds (63%) worked full time (more than 30 hours a week). The remaining GARs (37%) worked less than 30 hours a week. The majority of those who work are paid hourly, and usually earn between $10.00 and $15.00 per hour (Table 3-16). Annual salaries are also low.

Table 3-16: Hourly wages and annual salary of employed GARs, landing years 2005 to 2009
Hourly wages
(n=180)
% Annual salary
(n=16)
%
Under $10.00/hr 9% Under $10,000 6%
$10.01 to $15.00/hr 49% $10,000 to $20,000 25%
$15.01 to $20.00/hr 21% $20,001 to $30,000 25%
$20.01 to $25.00/hr 4% $30,001 to $40,000 19%
$25/hr or more 11% $40,001 to $50,000 19%
Don’t Know/No Response 6% $50,001 or more 6%

Source: GAR Survey, n=196

Current employment is usually unrelated to a GAR’s previous education. Over two-thirds (68%) of GARs in the survey said that there was little or no relationship between their current employment in Canada and their previous education, suggesting that those with education are under-employed.

The findings of the GAR survey align with the analysis of employment and earning trends available from the IMDB. Table 3-17 presents the incidence rate of both employment earnings and receipt of social assistance benefit as well as the average employment earnings of GARs who landed between 2000 and 2007 by years since landing Footnote 22. Results indicated that the proportion of GARs in receipt of social assistance benefits was high (around 66%) for the year of landing and first full year in Canada, which reflects the fact that most of them received RAP income support for up to a year after landing. After two years in Canada, 46% of GARs reported receipt of social assistance benefits, and the proportion who reported such benefits steadily decreased with time in Canada. As the proportion of GARs who benefit from social assistance decreased, the proportion of GARs who reported employment earnings increased. One year after landing, 45% of GARs reported employment earnings upon completion of their tax return and 59% of GARs did so three years after landing. Employment earnings Footnote 23 of GARs also increased over time. One year after landing, they earned on average $11,700, while two years later, they earned 58% higher earnings than they did on the first year after landing.

Table 3-17: Incidence rate of employment and social assistance benefits and average employment earnings by years since landing Footnote 24
  Years since landing
Category 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Incidence rate – employment earnings (%) 14.5 44.7 53.7 58.5 60.0 60.5 60.0 61.1
Average – employment earnings ($) 6,500 11,700 16,000 18,500 20,100 21,700 24,400 26,400
Incidence rate – social assistance benefits (%) 66.8 66.0 45.6 37.2 31.3 26.9 23.5 21.3

Source: IMDB. Earnings are in constant dollars. Base: 2007

IMDB data indicated that while GAR incomes were below that of PSRs Footnote 25 in the years after landing, the gap between employment earnings in the two groups declined markedly over time, such that by the 6th year in Canada GAR earnings had caught up to those of PSRs. However, even though earnings for GARs and PSRs were similar, PSRs reached this earning level considerably faster than GARs. Thus at one year post landing, 76% of PSRs declared employment earnings as compared to only 45% of GARs. While GAR incomes and the proportion of GARs who had employment earnings rose faster than that of PSRs, after 5 years in Canada, the proportion of GARs who reported employment earnings was still 8 percentage points below that of PSRs (61% vs. 69%). In addition, even though the incidence rate of social assistance decreased over the years for GARs, it remained above that of PSRs. For further details, please refer to Appendix H.

Regressions were conducted to identify the determinants of having employment earnings and the amount of employment earnings earned. Both sets of regressions looked at the employment situation for GARs at four different points in time: 1 year, 2 years, 3 years and 5 years after landing and took into account the effect of gender, age, education, knowledge of official languages, marital status, country or region of birth and province of residence. As the results were consistent over the years, only results for the third year after landing will be discussed. Full regression results are presented in Appendix I.

Logistic regression models were run to identify the factors associated with being employed. The likelihood of employment three years after landing was associated with all socio-demographic characteristics included in the regressions as well as with the province of residence. Factors that increase the likelihood of having employment earnings are gender (being male), country or region of birth (when comparing GARs to their counterparts coming from Afghanistan), knowledge of at least one of Canada’s official language, any level of education (as opposed to having no education). On the other side, factors that decrease the likelihood of being employed were age (with the GARs from younger age groups performing better), marital status and province of residence.

An additional set of regressions was run to identify the factors influencing the amount earned by GARs. Similar to the factors affecting the probability of being employed, employment earnings were positively associated with gender (male), the knowledge of at least one of Canada’s official languages, country or region of birth and having a formal trade certificate or apprenticeship or a non-university certificate or diploma. Province of residence negatively impacted employment earnings. As for the effect of age, GARs who were between 30 and 39 years of age when they landed had higher earnings when compared to GARs who landed at between 18 and 29 years of age; landing at 50 and above was associated with lower earnings.

Additional regressions were also done to compare the effect of the immigration category (GAR federal, PSR federal, and GAR Quebec) to see if it had an impact on employment outcomes. Once the socio-demographic characteristics of refugees, as well as province of residence were controlled for, the results indicated that PSRs were more likely to report employment earnings and, when they did, to report higher earnings than GARs (federal). GARs (federal) were also more likely to report employment earnings and to have higher earnings than GARs destined to Quebec.

Another important indicator of economic integration is the reliance on social assistance. To better understand how GARs moved towards the achievement of self-sufficiency, event history analysis was conducted to see how GARs moved out of a first continuous episode of social assistance, and what factors influenced transitions out of social assistance over time. As shown on Figure 3-3, GARs, both destined to Quebec and to the rest of Canada, had a similar rate of moving out of social assistance. Two years after the beginning of the social assistance spell, 50% of them had moved out of social assistance, and after 4 years, it is expected that about 75% will have done so. However, PSRs were slower to come out of social assistance. After two years on social assistance, 42% had stopped receiving social assistance, while 30% were still on social assistance by the seventh year.

Figure 3-3: Exit from social assistance for the first spell of social assistance

Figure 3-3: Exit from social assistance for the first spell of social assistance

Another regression was done to compare GARs (federal) transitions out of social assistance to the transitions of PSRs (federal) and Quebec GARs. When controlling for the socio-demographic characteristics and province of residence, the differences that initially appeared were no longer significant, showing similar transition rates for all groups.

As factors associated with moving out of social assistance were similar for GARs to those found when considering all types of refugees (GARs federal, PSRs federal and GARs Quebec), and because the evaluation focuses specifically on experiences of GARs adjusting to the Canadian society, the following will concentrate on the results associated with the federal GAR population only.

The exit from the first social assistance spell experienced by GARs was most affected by age, marital status and country of origin. The following details, by order of importance, are the factors that affected transitions out of social assistance:

  • Age: The older the GARs were when they landed, the lower chances they had to exit social assistance rapidly. When compared to GARs who were between 18 and 29 years old upon landing, GARs in other age groups all had significantly less chances to exit social assistance rapidly, with the disadvantage increasing with age.
  • Marital status: When compared to GARs who reported being single on their tax file, GARs who were married or in a common law situation were able to move more quickly out of social assistance. However, GARs who were either divorced, widowed or separated saw their exit delayed when compared to those who were single.
  • Province of residence: When compared to GARs living in Alberta, those who lived in Atlantic, Quebec, Ontario and Saskatchewan moved out of social assistance at a slower pace. No significant difference was found for the other provinces.
  • Country/region of birth: When compared to GARs from Afghanistan, all GARs from countries other than Iraq and the Democratic Republic of Somalia transitioned more rapidly out of social assistance. No significant difference in the transition rates was found for Iraq and the Democratic Republic of Somalia.
  • Education: Having education facilitated the transition out of social assistance, with the greatest impact being for GARs who had achieved schooling beyond the secondary level.
  • Gender: Men moved more quickly towards self-sufficiency than women.
  • Knowledge of official languages: Knowledge of at least one of Canada’s official languages upon landing facilitated movement out of a first social assistance spell.

Page details

Date modified: