Evaluation of the Provincial Nominee Program

Research and Evaluation Branch
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada

November 2017

Technical Appendices are available upon request to Research-Recherche@cic.gc.ca.

Ci4-75/2017E-PDF
978-0-660-24278-1

Reference Number: E1-2015

On this page

• List of acronyms
• Executive summary
• Evaluation of Provincial Nominee Program (2011-2015) - Management Response Action Plan
• 1. Introduction
  • 1.1. Purpose of the Evaluation
  • 1.2. Brief Program Profile
    • 1.2.1. PT Stream Profile
    • 1.2.2. Characteristics of PNs admitted to Canada between 2010 and 2015
• 2. Methodology
  • 2.1. Questions and Scope
  • 2.2. Data Collection Methods
  • 2.3. Limitations and Considerations
• 3. Key Findings: Relevance
  • 3.1. Continued Need for the PNP
    • 3.1.1 Complementarity between PNP and Federal Economic Programs
  • 3.2. Alignment with Government Priorities and Federal Role
    • 3.2.1 Alignment with Government Priorities
    • 3.2.2 Appropriateness of Federal Role
• 4. Key Findings: Performance – Management Outcomes
  • 4.1. Shared Understanding of Program Objectives
  • 4.2. Previous Evaluation Recommendations
  • 4.3. Express Entry and PNP
• 5. Key Findings: Performance – Program Outcomes
  • 5.1. Processing Times, Inventories and Approval Rates
    • 5.1.1. Processing Times of PN Applications
    • 5.1.2. Year-End Inventories
    • 5.1.3. Approval Rates
  • 5.2. Consistency and transparency of PNP decisions
    • 5.2.1. Consistency
    • 5.2.2. Transparency
  • 5.3. Profiles of PNs Admitted – 2010 to 2015
  • 5.4. Transition from Temporary Resident to Permanent Resident Status
  • 5.5. PNP Contribution to Official Language Minority Communities
  • 5.6. Retention of PNs in PTs
  • 5.7. Economic Establishment
    • 5.7.1. Labour Market Participation
    • 5.7.2. Use of Social Assistance
    • 5.7.3. Earnings Profile
    • 5.7.4. Average Employment Earnings
    • 5.7.5. Employment Types and Skills Match
  • 5.8. Starting a Business
    • 5.8.1. PN Business Stream
• 6. Key Findings: Performance – Resource Utilization
  • 6.1. Program Cost
  • 6.2. Alternatives to PNP Design and Delivery
• 7. Conclusions and Recommendations
• Appendix A: List of Evaluation and Audit Reports Conducted by PTs
• Appendix B: Logic Model for the Provincial Nominee Program

List of tables and figures

• Figure 1: Economic Class Admissions by Category (2006 – 2015) – Principal Applicants, Spouses and Dependants
• Table 1: PNP Levels Target, Admissions, Inventory and Processing Time (2010-2015)
• Table 2: PNP Processing Results (2010-2015)
• Table 3: Number of PNP Applications and Admissions (2010-2015)
• Table 4: Socio-demographic profile of PN, FSW and CEC principal applicants (excluding QC cases)
• Table 5: NOC skill level and type of intended occupation of PN, FSW and CEC principal applicants (excluding QC cases)
• Table 6: PN PA Retention Rates by Province of Nomination between 2002 and 2014
• Figure 2: Incidence of Employment Earnings and/or Self-Employment by Years Since Admission and Immigration Category, 2002 to 2014 Admissions
• Table 7: Incidence of Employment Earnings and/or Self-Employment by Years Since Admission and Province/Territory of Intended Destination, 2002 to 2014 Admissions
• Table 8: Incidence of Social Assistance by Years since Admission and Immigration Category, 2002 to 2014 Admissions
• Table 9: Earnings profile of PN PAs who declared taxes by years since admission, 2002 to 2014 Admissions (%)
• Table 10: Average Employment Earnings by Years since Admission and Province/Territory of Intended Destination, 2002 to 2014 Admissions
• Figure 3: Average Employment Earnings by Years since Admission and Immigration Category, 2002 to 2014 Admissions
• Table 11: Share of PN PAs Holding a Job Commensurate with Skill Level of Intended Occupation – At Time of the Survey

List of acronyms

Executive summary

This report presents the findings of the evaluation of Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada’s (IRCC) Provincial Nominee Program (PNP). The evaluation was conducted in fulfillment of requirements under the 2016 Treasury Board Policy on Results, and considered issues of relevance, effectiveness and efficiency. The evaluation covered the period from 2010 to 2015.

Overview of the Provincial Nominee Program

The Provincial Nominee Program is a jointly administered immigration program which provides provinces and territories with an opportunity to address their specific economic development needs while distributing the benefits of economic immigration across all provinces and territories. There are currently bilateral agreements with 11 jurisdictions^{Footnote 1} regarding the administration of the PNP which provide the authority for provinces and territories to nominate immigrants destined to their jurisdictions by establishing their own criteria for provincial nomination. Once nominated by a province, a nominee applies to IRCC for permanent residence, at which time the Department determines client’s eligibility and admissibility based on IRPR and federal admissibility standards. IRCC retains authority over the final selection decision.

Summary of Conclusions and Recommendations

Overall, the main expected outcomes for the program are being met, including outcomes related to economic establishment and the retention of PNs in their nominating PTs, as well as management outcomes. The evaluation found that the vast majority of PN principal applicants have become established economically, with high employment rates and employment earnings that increase over time after admission. Compared to other economic programs, PNs have higher employment earnings than FSWs until the eighth year in Canada, but significantly lower than CEC immigrants. In addition, most PNs surveyed indicated that their first employment in Canada was in a high skilled occupation and three-quarters reported this occupation as commensurate with their skill level or higher.

Although there were some regional differences, a mobility analysis demonstrated that overall, retention^{Footnote 2} was very high, though relatively lower in the Atlantic Provinces. PNP retention rate was comparable to the FSW program and somewhat lower than the CEC and Business class programs.

PNP objectives and roles and responsibilities are well understood by both IRCC and PTs, who have also worked together effectively to improve the alignment of the PT PN programs with the federal economic immigration priorities, and collaborated to increase program integrity.

Some areas for program design improvements have been identified, and as such, this evaluation report proposes two recommendations.

Complementarity of federal economic and PT PN programs

The evaluation found a growing potential for overlap between the PNP and federal economic programs, as they appear to be increasingly attracting and selecting candidates with similar profiles, including skill levels. PT PN programs have evolved to become closely aligned with the federal economic programs with greater emphasis on human capital criteria, while the federal programs have evolved to introduce pathways for lower skilled immigrants that used to be exclusive to PT programs.

Contribution to the development of OLMCs

The evaluation found that little progress has been made via the PNP towards enhancing the vitality of francophone minority communities in Canada, with only 1% of PNs admitted under this program over the last six years having been French-speaking. As such, the PNP has provided a limited contribution to meeting the Government of Canada commitment to increase the annual proportion of all Francophone economic immigration outside of Quebec to 4% by 2018.

Information sharing

Several potential areas for improving program design, efficiency and delivery were noted by key informants, most notably in the area of information sharing between IRCC and PTs related to program integrity.

Recommendation 1

In light of the evolving policy and program context at both the PT and federal levels, including the growing role of the Express Entry system, IRCC should review the PNP to examine:

1. The role and expected outcomes of the PNP in relation to other federal economic programs;
2. The OLMC requirements under the PNP; and
3. Information sharing with PTs.

Management of application intake

IRCC has faced challenges in managing the intake of PNP base applications. The higher number of applications compared to PNP allocations under the immigration levels space has led to longer processing times and increased inventories. While IRCC is meeting its service standards for all its Express Entry PNP applications, services standards for base PNP applications are not being met.

Recommendation 2

In collaboration with PTs, IRCC should review its application intake approach and implement measures to ensure timely processing of PNP applications.

Evaluation of Provincial Nominee Program (2011-2015) - Management Response Action Plan

Recommendation 1

In light of the evolving policy and program context at both the PT and federal levels, including the growing role of the Express Entry system, IRCC should review the PNP to examine.

1. The role and expected outcomes of the PNP in relation to other federal economic programs;
2. The OLMC requirements under the PNP; and
3. Information sharing with PTs.

Response 1

IRCC agrees with this recommendation.

The Provincial Nominee Program is critical to spreading the benefits of immigration across the country and supports regional economic development. The evaluation confirms that this key objective of the program is being met. IRCC agrees with the finding that the PNP is selecting some candidates with profiles that appear to be similar to those qualifying under federal economic programs. However, candidates with apparently similar human capital and skill profiles, who could qualify under either federal or provincial programs, can still differ significantly on relevant matters, including their planned activities in Canada and intended place of residence. In light of recent policy and program changes across economic programs, it is timely to consider the complementarity of programs in this context and in relation to their respective objectives. As such, the Department will undertake initiatives in consultation with internal program stakeholders to identify whether changes are required to enhance the complementarity of the PNP and federal economic programs.

The actions identified will support and align with related initiatives looking more broadly at Federal economic class programs, including Express Entry and Annual Levels Planning processes.

IRCC continues to encourage the development of PNP streams that promote French-speaking immigration. IRCC has worked closely with several jurisdictions to develop streams which focus on attracting French-speaking immigrants, including Ontario which launched two Express Entry streams targeting French-speaking immigrants in 2016. Commitments regarding French-speaking nominees have already been included in the immigration strategies of Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as the Northwest Territories.

IRCC is finalizing the implementation of umbrella information-sharing Memoranda of Understanding with all provinces and territories allowing the addition of program-specific chapters, as needed. An Express Entry Chapter will incorporate new data elements negotiated as part of changes that will be introduced to the Express Entry system in Fall 2017 while Provincial Nominees Chapters are being negotiated to share personal information for program integrity purposes, as provincial nominee annexes are revised.

Action 1a1

Complete a policy analysis of the profile and associated implications of provincial nominee applicants qualifying under both the PNP and federal programs. The findings and next steps from this policy analysis will be presented to IRCC Policy Committee for consideration.

Accountability: Immigration Branch. Support: Research and Evaluation Branch, Strategic Policy and Planning Branch, Immigration Program Guidance Branch Completion Date: Q2 2018/19.

Action 1a2

Develop the Performance Information Profile (PIP) for the PNP (which will articulate the PNP’s key strategic and program results and objectives as well as indicators).

Accountability: Immigration Branch. Support: Research and Evaluation Branch, Strategic Policy and Planning Branch, Immigration Program Guidance Branch Completion Date: Q3 2017/18.

Action 1b

Establish a new FPT Working Group on Francophone immigration to deliver on the FPT Ministers Responsible for Immigration’s commitment plan to attract, receive, integrate and retain Francophone immigrants.

Accountability: International and Intergovernmental Relations Branch. Support: Settlement and Integration Policy Branch, Immigration. Completion Date: Q4 2017/18.

Action 1c

Complete negotiations on Provincial Nominee chapters.

Accountability: International and Intergovernmental Relations Branch. Support: Settlement and Integration Policy Branch, Immigration. Completion Date: Q3 2018/19.

Recommendation 2

In collaboration with PTs, IRCC should review its application intake approach and implement measures to ensure timely processing of PNP applications.

Response 2

IRCC agrees with this recommendation.

IRCC recognizes that processing times for PNP base applications have increased due to the misalignment between PNP admissions space and nomination allocations, and will work with PT partners to develop an approach to resolving this misalignment to ensure timelier processing is achievable.

Action 2a

With provinces and territories, review current processing times, procedures and inventories to identify a strategy to better align the allocation of PNP nomination allocations with PNP admissions within the levels plan.

Accountability: Strategic Policy and Planning Branch. Support: Immigration Branch/Immigration Program Guidance Branch. Completion Date: Q2 2018/19.

1. Introduction

1.1. Purpose of the Evaluation

This report presents the results of the evaluation of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s (IRCC) Provincial Nominee Program (PNP). The evaluation was conducted from February 2016 to March 2017. The evaluation was conducted in fulfillment of requirements under the 2016 Treasury Board Policy on Results. As per the Treasury Board Secretariat Directive on Results, the evaluation considered issues of relevance, effectiveness and efficiency.

1.2. Brief Program Profile

Jurisdiction over immigration in Canada is a joint responsibility outlined in section 95 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Effective collaboration between the federal government and provinces and territories (PTs) is essential to the overall successful management of the country’s immigration program.

The Provincial Nominee Program is a jointly administered program which provides provinces and territories with an opportunity to address their specific economic development needs while distributing the benefits of economic immigration across all provinces and territories.

Section 87 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (IRPR) establishes a provincial nominee class of persons who may become permanent residents on the basis of their ability to become economically established in Canada. There are currently bilateral agreements with 11 jurisdictions^{Footnote 3} regarding the administration of the PNP, some of which are stand-alone agreements and others as elements of more comprehensive federal/provincial/territorial immigration agreements. The agreements provide the authority for provinces and territories to nominate immigrants destined to their jurisdictions by establishing their own criteria for provincial nomination. The primary objective of the PT PN programs is to enhance the economic benefits of immigration to provinces and territories. Other objectives are also identified by PTs including the need to encourage the development of official language minority communities and encourage regional development. Manitoba is the only province with a stated objective for the PNP of increasing the social benefits of immigration to the province.

PTs are responsible for the design, management and evaluation^{Footnote 4} of their respective PN programs, which must be in accordance with the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), IRPR and the bilateral agreements between the PT and IRCC. Each PT has its own streams^{Footnote 5} and develop nomination criteria intended to assess the applicant’s ability to become economically established and their intention to reside in the nominating PT. PT streams must be reviewed by IRCC to ensure they are consistent with IRPA and national immigration policy.

Under the PNP, participating provinces and territories nominate foreign nationals whom they believe will meet particular regional labour market needs and who intend to settle in their province. Once nominated by a province, the nominee applies to IRCC for permanent residence, at which time the Department determines client’s eligibility and admissibility based on IRPR and federal admissibility standards. IRCC retains authority over the final selection decision.

PNP nomination allocations are determined by IRCC on an annual basis. The PNP is now the second largest economic immigration program; in 2014, 47,628 PNs (including principal applicants, spouses and dependants) were admitted. When the PNP was introduced in 1996, 233 PNs were admitted under this program, representing less than 0.2% of the total economic immigration. Since then, the proportion of PNs admitted to Canada steadily increased. In 2014, this proportion reached 29% of the total economic immigration and almost one fifth of all admissions to Canada.

Express Entry and the PNP

On January 1, 2015, IRCC introduced Express Entry, the federal government’s new system for managing applications to permanent residence under the Federal Skilled Worker Program, the Federal Skilled Trades Program, and the Canadian Experience Class. PTs that operate a PNP can recruit candidates from the Express Entry system through their PNP to meet local labour market needs. Under this system, foreign nationals interested in coming to Canada as economic immigrants create a profile online, and those who meet the minimum criteria for one or more of the designated programs are entered into a pool, assessed and ranked using the Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS). Individuals with the highest scores are drawn from the pool and issued an Invitation to Apply, according to a schedule reflecting IRCC’s immigration levels targets and processing capacity.^{Footnote 6}

Only a portion of the PNP is subject to Express Entry. PTs can retain their total number of PN “base nominations” (representing roughly 24,000 nominations in 2014) to serve as a “base” which they are able to use as they see fit under their current PNP criteria and procedures. Although PTs are welcome to use Express Entry to find candidates for their base nominations, there are no requirements for PTs to do so for this portion of their allocation space. Additional PN allocations are available to PTs interested in using Express Entry as a source of “enhanced nominations”. In 2016, this enhanced allocation represented roughly 7,000 nominations over and above the approximate 25,500 base.

A key feature of the PN agreements is the federal commitment to priority processing within the Economic Class of applications for permanent residence. In addition to this commitment within PTs’ immigration agreements, in September 2011, IRCC implemented a service standard for all base applications under the PNP. IRCC’s goal is to process 80% of base applications under the PNP within 11 months.^{Footnote 7}  A six-month standard exists for all applications processed through Express Entry.^{Footnote 8}

1.2.1. PT Stream Profile

Each jurisdiction is responsible for the design and management of their respective PNP program. PTs play an active role in choosing immigrants that are destined for their province or territory and develop their own streams to meet their labour market demands and economic needs. Although the streams vary across jurisdictions, the main types of stream under which applicants can apply can be grouped under the following: workers with job offers, workers without job offers, business, international student, family-assisted and community-identified. The two worker streams have been merged for analysis purposes throughout the report.

Although some PTs previously had family support streams, only one jurisdiction (New Brunswick) still has an active family support stream. While all PTs have a stream for workers with a job offer, only three jurisdictions (Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta) have a stream for workers without job offers.^{Footnote 9} Within the worker streams, eligibility requirements vary among PTs, including National Occupational Classification (NOC) level, language,^{Footnote 10} education and experience requirements. While there are similarities between the business streams across jurisdictions, particularly with respect to criteria and application assessment, differences are seen in PNP business streams as a reflection of the unique situations and needs of the PT.

1.2.2. Characteristics of PNs admitted to Canada between 2010 and 2015

A total of 247,796 PNs (including spouses and dependants) were admitted to Canada between 2010 and 2015, representing 25% of the total economic class for that time period.

Of all PNs admitted, 43% were principal applicants. The following characteristics of the provincial nominee principal applicants admitted between 2010 and 2015 were observed:

• Gender: The majority of PNs were male (66%).
• Age: 5% of PNs were between 18 and 24 years of age; 81% of PNs were between 25 to 44 years of age; and 14% were 45 years of age or more.
• Education: Approximately half of PNs (54%) had a university degree.
• Country of citizenship: Top five countries of citizenship were Philippines (27%), India (19%), China (13%), Republic of Korea (4%) and British citizens (3%).
• Knowledge of official languages: The vast majority of PNs reported knowing English (90%), very few reported some knowledge of French (0.2%), 3.2% reported some knowledge of both official languages. A total of 6.6% reported no knowledge of official languages.
• Intended province of destination: The majority of PNs intended to reside in Manitoba (24.2%), Alberta (22.4%) and Saskatchewan (19.0%).
• Intended occupation by NOC level: The majority of PNs (69.5%) intended to work in a high-skilled occupation (NOC level 0 12.6%, NOC A 21.4% and NOC B 35.5%). A smaller proportion (26.4%) intended to work in a semi-skilled or low-skilled occupation (15.1% in NOC C and 11.3% in NOC D). The remainder 4.0% were individuals for which no skilled level was specified, primarily representing new workers and students.
• Skill types: The majority (56.4%) of PNs intended occupation fell into the following three NOC skill types: Sales and service occupations (28.3%); Natural and applied sciences and related occupations (14.1%); and, Trades, transport and equipment operators and related occupations (14.0%).
• PN streams: The majority of PNs were nominated under the PTs’ worker stream (46.1%) followed by the International Student stream (9.9%), and the Family-assisted stream (9.8%). Fewer PNs were nominated under the Business, Community-identified or Other streams (3.0%, 0.4% and 2.4%, respectively). For a significant proportion of PNs (28.4%), the stream was not stated.^{Footnote 11}
• Temporary status: The majority of PNs had previous temporary resident status in Canada (64.7%). The majority had received a work permit (64%) and/or had received a study permit (23%).

Comparing the profile of PN PAs with PAs admitted under other economic programs, PN PAs have a profile similar to the FSW profile in terms of their age, gender and knowledge of official languages. Greater differences were observed in relation to the level of educated and intended province of destination. PN PAs tended to be less educated and more widely distributed across the country compared to FSW and CEC PAs (detailed profile analyses are presented in section 5.3).

2. Methodology

2.1. Questions and Scope

The evaluation scope and approach were determined during the evaluation planning phase, in consultation with IRCC branches involved in the design, management and delivery of the PNP. The evaluation assessed the issues of relevance and performance of the PNP for the period between 2010 and 2015, and was guided by the program logic model, which outlines the expected immediate and intermediate outcomes for the program (see Appendix B).

The evaluation was conducted by the IRCC evaluation team with the support of an external contractor. The evaluation questions are presented below.

PNP Evaluation Questions

Relevance

1. Is there a continuing need for the Provincial Nominee Program?
2. Is the PNP aligned with IRCC and Government of Canada priorities?
3. Is the federal government role in the delivery of the PNP appropriate?

Performance

4. To what extent has IRCC addressed the program recommendations identified in the previous PNP evaluation (2011) and OAG audit (2009)?
5. Do program design and policies effectively support delivery, decision making and due diligence?
6. To what extent do PNP stakeholders share a common understanding of program objectives and roles and responsibilities?
7. To what extent is there effective and responsive governance and administration of the PNP within IRCC and between IRCC and PTs?
8. Have IRCC decisions been timely, consistent, and transparent?
9. To what extent are accountability and program integrity measures in place and effective?
10. To what extent do PNs take up residence and find work in their nominating PT?
11. To what extent do PNs establish economically, remain, and meet the evolving labour market and economic needs of PTs?
12. To what extent does the PNP contribute to the development of Official Language Minority Communities (OLMC)?
13. Are the program’s resources managed effectively to facilitate the achievement of outcomes?
14. Are there alternatives to the current design and delivery of the Provincial Nominee Program that would improve efficiency or economy?

2.2. Data Collection Methods

Data collection and analysis for this evaluation took place from April 2016 to March 2017 and included multiple lines of evidence that gathered qualitative and quantitative data from a wide range of perspectives, including IRCC, PT, other stakeholders and clients. The different lines of evidence supporting the evaluation are described below.

Line of Evidence: Document Review

Description

Relevant program documents were reviewed to gather background and context on the PNP, as well as to assess its relevance and performance. Documents reviewed include: government documents (such as Speeches from the Throne, Budget Speeches, and Reports on Plans and Priorities), documents related to policy changes and the management of the program, and documents from PTs.

Line of Evidence: Interviews

Description

A total of 54 interviews were conducted with six stakeholder groups, including: IRCC Immigration Branch (4); IRCC Immigration Program Guidance Branch representatives (4); IRCC Immigration Program Mangers and Centralized Processing Region representatives (7); PT representatives (17); external stakeholder representatives including industry/employer associations, sector councils and national and PT regulatory bodies (14); and employers (8).

Line of Evidence: PN Survey

Description

A mixed-mode (online/telephone) survey was administered to PNs who received their permanent residence between 2010 and 2015. A total of 5,818 PNs completed the survey, including 514 who completed it by telephone and 5,304 who completed it online, with an overall response rate of 15.1%. This represents a margin of error of ± 1.25%, using a confidence interval of 95%.

Line of Evidence: Program Data Analysis

Description

Available performance data and financial data from IRCC’s Global Case Management System (GCMS), Longitudinal Immigration Database (IMDB) and IRCC’s Cost Management Model (CMM) were collected and used to provide profile, performance and financial information on the program.

2.3. Limitations and Considerations

There were a few limitations, although overall, they did not have a significant impact on the evaluation findings:

• Key informants interviewed for this report may have a vested interest in the program. To mitigate this potential bias, interviews with external stakeholders less connected with the Program were also conducted.
• Express Entry was only introduced in 2015. As such, data was available on a limited period of time, making it difficult to fully assess the impact of the introduction of Express Entry on the PNP.

Overall, the evaluation design employed numerous qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The different lines of evidence were complementary and reduced information gaps, and generally, the results converged towards common and integrated findings. The triangulation of the multiple lines of evidence, along with the mitigation strategies used in this evaluation are considered sufficient to ensure that the findings are reliable and can be used with confidence.

3. Key Findings: Relevance

3.1. Continued Need for the PNP

The documentation reviewed and key informants suggest a continuing need for the PNP. The majority of IRCC and PT respondents affirmed there is a continued need for the PNP, considering its ability to fill particular PT labour market needs, the flexibility afforded to the PTs through the program and its regionalization of economic immigration. The program spreads the benefits of immigration beyond major cities and helps fill local employment gaps. Further, the program’s design provides PTs with a mechanism to nominate specific candidates and meet particular labour needs.

Historically, economic immigrants have tended to settle in Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec. In 1995, 87% of the economic immigrants have settled in these three provinces. From 2010-2015, 76% of the PN admitted to Canada intended to settle outside those three provinces, indicating that PNP is helping with a greater regionalization of economic immigration across Canada.

The PNP is a key component of PTs economic and demographic strategies and now represents the majority of economic immigrants for seven PTs. In 2015, the PNP accounted for the large majority of the economic immigration in Prince Edward Island (96%), Manitoba (93%), Saskatchewan (89%), Yukon (89%), New Brunswick (86%), Newfoundland and Labrador (72%) and Nova Scotia (59%). As further discussed in section 5.6, the overall retention rate of PNs was generally high and comparable to the retention rate of the skilled worker immigrants. Over the years, the PNP had grown from a niche program to representing a significant proportion of economic immigration to Canada (10% in 2006 to 26% in 2015).

Figure 1: Economic Class Admissions by Category (2006 – 2015) – Principal Applicants, Spouses and Dependants

Source: Facts and Figures, 2015

3.1.1. Complementarity between PNP and Federal Economic Programs

In a 2002 Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement, the Government of Canada stated that the “Regulations allow a person nominated by a provincial government under a PNP agreement between that province and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to be issued an immigrant visa without having to meet the pass mark that is required for Skilled Worker immigrants. The intent of these regulations is to enable provinces to support the immigration of persons who have expressed an interest in settling in their province and who the province believes will be able to contribute to the economic development and prosperity of that province and Canada.”^{Footnote 12} In other words, the intent of the PNP was to allow PTs to nominate individuals who meet their economic needs. As such, PNP constitutes an alternative pathway to permanent residency where the PNP complements FSW program. The PNP also has an objective of encouraging the settlement of immigrants in Canada to communities and regions outside the country’s three largest urban centres.^{Footnote 13}

IRCC interviewees were split when discussing the extent to which PNP complements or overlaps with federal economic programs. Some interviewees felt that the PNP complements other economic streams, stating that complementarity is preserved only when other federal economic program and PNP are recruiting at different skill levels (e.g. low-skilled versus high-skilled workers) or niche labour market needs. Overlap between the PNP and federal economic programs was noted when both programs are selecting candidates with the same skill levels.

Many PT interviewees felt that the program was complementary, stating that the PNP was successful in addressing specific labour market needs that would not be filled by immigrants from other federal programs. In addition, many of the employers interviewed lauded the PNP for its good client service, PTs maintaining an open line of communication with them, PTs attention to employer needs, and PTs’ knowledge of the local labour market.

Document analysis suggested an increased potential for overlap for the selection of applicants under the PNP and other federal economic programs. Originally, the PNP was putting a greater emphasis on selecting immigrants who would not have been selected under the FSW as PTs were targeting shorter-term, occupational and specific labour needs, whereas IRCC’s Federal Skilled Worker program was putting a greater emphasis on high human capital criteria in order for immigrants to adapt to changing labour market conditions. In addition, IRCC had committed to processing PNP applications as a priority within the economic class applications for permanent residence. The 2009 Federal Skilled Worker Program Evaluation indicated that given the differences in the selection of candidate, limited competition was observed.

However, in the last few years, many policy changes, both at the PT and federal levels, have taken place and caused a departure from one of the two main program objectives. As described below, PT PN programs have evolved to become closely aligned with the federal economic programs with greater emphasis on human capital criteria, while the federal programs have also evolved to include pathways for lower skilled immigrants that used to be exclusive to PT programs. More specifically, these policy changes include the introduction of:

• An increased focus by PTs on human capital selection criteria for the nomination of candidates. PTs have introduced language requirements as well as their own points system and Express Entry.
• The Federal Skilled Trades Program. Launched in January 2013, this program helps to facilitate the immigration of skilled tradespeople to Canada. This program places more emphasis on practical training and work experience rather than on formal education.
• The Canadian Experience Class. Launched in 2008, this programs aims at attracting and retaining highly skilled workers and international graduates who have demonstrated their ability to integrate into the Canadian labour market.
• The Express Entry system. As indicated previously, this new intake management system was introduced in 2015. Candidates who have a PT nomination can also apply under Express Entry as long as they are also meeting the requirements of at least one of the immigration programs covered under Express Entry.^{Footnote 14} In addition, the six-month processing standard for all applications processed through Express Entry eliminates the incentive to apply under the PNP program for a faster processing. The Express Entry process was also viewed by interviewees as creating potential overlap in that all PNs who apply through Express Entry must qualify for at least one federal program in addition to receiving a nomination certificate for the PNP. However, PNP applicants receive points^{Footnote 15} for applying under the PN program and therefore may not have been picked from the pool without the additional points.

In 2015, no Invitations to Apply were issued to candidates with a CRS score below 450. An analysis of the CRS scores of the 294 PN PAs admitted through Express Entry in 2015 (excluding points for receiving a provincial/territorial nomination) shows that the majority (92%) of PNs had less than 450 points; 8% had 450 points or more. This may suggest that most PNs using the Express Entry would not have been selected without having the bonus points given for having a PT nomination certificate. It should be noted that this is not specific to PNP, as this may also apply to Express Entry candidates who have received additional points for having a job offer.^{Footnote 16}

The potential overlap between the PNP and other economic programs in terms of selecting candidates with similar profiles raises questions of whether the PNP need is being filled by other economic programs (or vice versa). This is particularly an issue for PTs already receiving high share of economic immigrants. Nevertheless, PNP contributes to the achievement of the ultimate program outcome of distributing the benefits of economic immigration across all provinces and territories.

3.2. Alignment with Government Priorities and Federal Role

3.2.1. Alignment with Government Priorities

The evaluation found that the PNP is aligned with departmental and government-wide priorities. The main objectives of the PNP directly support IRCC’s Strategic Outcome related to strengthening Canada’s economy through migration of permanent and temporary residents by admitting immigrants who contribute to the Canadian labour market. The PNP also aligns with Canada’s 2016 Immigration Plan^{Footnote 17} by supporting economic growth and prosperity and supports broader Federal Government priorities related to regional development and ensuring the benefits of immigration are shared across all regions.

3.2.2. Appropriateness of Federal Role

Although mix views were expressed regarding the appropriateness of the federal role in the assessment of PNP applications, the evaluation found that the federal government’s role in the delivery of the PNP is appropriate. Immigration is a shared responsibility between the federal and PT governments. The federal government plays a role in both the policy and operational aspects of the PNP related to admissibility screening of applicants and final selection of PNs ensuring that immigrants have the skills needed and the capacity to establish economically in Canada. At the same time, PT governments are well positioned to determine the eligibility of applicants, the specific economic needs of their jurisdictions and the capacity of the applicants to establish economically.

While the final selection decision on an application rests with the federal government, it is customary to accept the recommendation of the nominating PT. This becomes a challenge when a PN application is refused by IRCC. PTs feel they are better positioned to determine which application meet their specific labour market needs and also better positioned to determine the applicant’s capacity to establish economically.

4. Key Findings: Performance – Management Outcomes

4.1. Shared Understanding of Program Objectives

There is broad consensus among interviewees regarding the objectives of the PNP. The PNP was clearly viewed by interviewees as an economic immigration program, designed to flexibly address localized labour market shortages, to recruit and retain immigrants throughout Canada, and to grow regional economies.

IRCC has worked closely with most jurisdictions to ensure that PT program alignment with federal program objectives and priorities. In order to ensure that the PTs’ programs focus on meeting Canada’s labour market needs, efforts were made to eliminate streams that were outside the scope of the 2012 and 2013 Economic Action Plans. To meet these objectives and better respond to labour market demands, IRCC and PTs have re-focused the PNP by eliminating family and community streams, redirecting international students to the CEC and introducing human capital points grids to workers streams of several PTs.^{Footnote 18}

In addition, as new provincial immigration agreements are being signed with PTs, IRCC is currently making efforts to clarify roles and responsibilities as well as the program objectives. Overall, a review of the documents reveals that PNP stakeholders are provided with the necessary tools and information to share a common understanding of program objectives roles and responsibilities.

4.2. Previous Evaluation Recommendations

The 2011 Evaluation of the PNP included recommendations that resulted in 29 action items. The 2017 evaluation examined the work completed, planned or underway to address those previous recommendations. Some actions have been taken to address specific 2011 recommendations.

• Development of minimum standards regarding language ability:
  PTs have introduced minimum language requirements for their streams.
• Clarification of the roles and responsibilities for Canadian Visa Offices Abroad (CVOA) and PTs in terms of assessment of PN applicants’ ability to establish economically and fraud detection:
  IRCC has worked with PTs to increase PTs’ capacity to identify fraudulent documents and to design quality assurance mechanisms. As such, IRCC has provided fraud training sessions to PTs and the Federal-Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Anti-Fraud Working Group serves as a forum for IRCC and PT officials to share information on anti-fraud issues, anti-fraud tools, fraud trends and best practices. Most PTs also have developed policies, guidelines and manuals that support program integrity. In addition, most PTs have reference documents to conduct comparisons of suspected fraudulent documents, and many use online databases and other sources to verify educational credentials provided.^{Footnote 19}
• Development and implementation of a monitoring and reporting framework:
  IRCC and PTs have completed and implemented a monitoring and reporting framework that contains common PNP performance indicators. IRCC has begun collecting data and developing a report based on the new monitoring framework.

There has been limited progress towards the federal objective of strengthening the Official Languages Minority Communities (OLMC). This area is further explained in section 5.5 and forms part of this report’s recommendations.

4.3. Express Entry and PNP

PTs that operate a PN program can nominate candidates through the Express Entry pool, in addition to nominating foreign nationals to the existing base process.^{Footnote 20}

The Express Entry system has represented a significant shift for the PN program in terms of levels and process. While some concerns were raised (e.g., related to the speed of implementation, quality of the portal, poor communications),^{Footnote 21} it was largely seen to be a positive influence on the program in terms of increasing the total number of permanent residents nominated by PTs,^{Footnote 22} the faster processing of applications and a stronger caliber of applicants.

Compared to the base PN stream, which processed applications within 15 months on average during the time period under review (see section 5.1.1 for more details), Express Entry PN applications were processed in a timely manner, meeting departmental service standards. An analysis of 2015 Express Entry data found that 80% of Express Entry PNP applications were processed (representing 849 persons out of 1,061) within 4 months, which falls within the 6 month service standard. Whereas for the same time period, the non-Express Entry PNP applications took longer to process – 80% were processed within 15 months (representing 35,216 persons out of 44,020).

While PT key informants were generally positive about the Express Entry system, the following concerns were raised:

• Competition: PTs raised concerns about competition between the PNP and other federal economic immigration programs resulting from the introduction of Express Entry. Two types of competition^{Footnote 23} have been identified:
  • Foreign nationals who apply to the PNP and Express Entry simultaneously receive an invitation to apply for a federal program before the PT assesses the application and issues a nomination.
  • PTs select a foreign national from the Express Entry pool and send a notification of interest. The applicant completes an application for that PT’s PN stream. The foreign national is given an invitation to apply by a federal program before they are nominated by the PT.

Although competition between the PNP and other federal economic program existed prior to the introduction of Express Entry, it has not been raised as an issue by PTs given that the PNP applications were identified for priority processing. The issue of competition has emerged with Express Entry. Given the current processing times for the base PNP applications are higher than the service standards established for application processing under Express entry, the likelihood of applications being processed under a federal program rather than under the PNP has increased, amplifying the competition between the PNP and other federal economic programs for the same candidates.

• Duplication of effort: PTs also raised concerns about duplication of effort in processing PN applications under Express Entry. Interviewees noted that applicants need to be assessed by both the Express Entry process and the PT process. PTs believe that both levels of assessments are duplicative as the PTs apply similar selection criteria to those required and assessed by IRCC with Express Entry’s Comprehensive Ranking System.

While not directly related to Express Entry, foreign nationals may apply (PN base applications) to multiple PT programs at the same time. Therefore, there is both competition between PTs and potential duplication of effort on the base application too.

5. Key Findings: Performance – Program Outcomes

5.1. Processing Times, Inventories and Approval Rates

5.1.1. Processing Times of PN Applications

Surveyed PNs were asked how long it took to receive a nomination certificate from the PT in which they applied. The results suggest that PT processing times improved over the period under review (2010-2015). Specifically, the percentage of applications processed in 6 months or less increased from 28% (2010) to 48% (2015).

Overall, the majority of PNs (67%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the length of time it took to become a permanent resident. Those who were not satisfied often pointed to the federal processing of their application as a source of dissatisfaction. Many (65%) indicated that it took too long for them to receive their permanent residency once they were nominated by the PT, that finding out the status of their application was difficult (39%) and that it wasn’t clear how long the process would take (38%).

The departmental service standard to process PN base applications (i.e., the non-Express Entry) is 11 months. According to departmental data, for the 2010-2015 time period, the average IRCC processing time for 80% of base PN applications was approximately 15 months (see Table 1). Express Entry PN applications, in comparison, were processed within 4 months on average, below the 6 month processing service standard.

Source: IRCC, Book of Basics

5.1.2. Year-End Inventories

The total inventory of PN applications had increased by 15% between 2010 and 2015 (from 17,175 to 26,596 respectively). As a result, IRCC’s PNP processing time for base applications has also increased by 15%. Because the inventory of PNP base applications continued to grow faster than the number of PNs being admitted to Canada, processing time has continued to increase over the period under review. Even though the upper immigration target level for PNP has increased by 22% between 2010 and 2015, efforts have not been sufficient to reduce processing times and inventory growth.

The majority of PT and stakeholder interviewees noted challenges regarding timeliness. PT interviewees stated that, with the exception of Express Entry, PNP processing was not as timely as it should be based on service standards. They indicated this issue exacerbated by the prioritization Express Entry. As for the other stakeholders interviewed, they noted IRCC’s portion of the processing as a reason for the lengthy processing time, as well the fact that some PTs were dealing with backlogs of applications.

5.1.3. Approval Rates

As presented in Table 2, the approval rates^{Footnote 24} for PNP cases across all CVOA ranged from 94% to 97%^{Footnote 25} over the 2010-2015 time period. These high approval rates can be mostly explained by the initial nomination process, which is conducted by the PTs. The PTs do the initial assessment of PNP applications, once individuals are nominated by a PT, IRCC conducts a lighter eligibility assessment (i.e., IRCC assesses PNs capacity to establish economically and their intention to reside in the nominating province rather than assessing PNs against multiple criteria, such as university degree, language proficiency, etc.). IRCC still conducts a full admissibility screening.

Source: IRCC, Book of Basics

5.2. Consistency and transparency of PNP decisions

5.2.1. Consistency

IRCC interviewees generally felt that the processing of PN applications by IRCC Visa Offices was consistent, however, it was challenging to ensure that all visa offices processed applications exactly the same way, and that discrepancies did not occur. For example, differences were observed in the way intent to reside in the province was assessed. In addition, some PT respondents felt that consistency in processing was lacking, most frequently pointing to variations between visa offices and the different ways of assessing NOC code fit for PN applicants.

5.2.2. Transparency

Evidence did not indicate that there were specific issues with transparency in the decision-making process, with the majority of IRCC interviewees supporting this view. It was also noted that requirements for PN eligibility are publically available online. Most PT interviewees agreed, confirming that they are advised of reasons for nomination refusals.

5.3. Profiles of PNs Admitted – 2010 to 2015

In the six years under review (2010-2015), IRCC received 297,012 applications^{Footnote 26} for permanent residency under the PNP. As seen in Table 3, the number of applications ranged from 43,863 to 53,160 per year.

From 2010-2015, 106,894 PN principal applicants were admitted to Canada. During this time period, the total number of PN admissions increased annually to approximately 20,000 per year, where it has remained stable. From 2010-2015, IRCC admitted between 10% and 12% more principal applicants each year than the previous year. Including PN spouses and dependants, the total number of foreign nations admitted to Canada during this time period was 247,550. Further details are provided in Table 3.

Source: Book of Basics; Global Case Management System (GCMS)

Table 4 summarizes the socio-demographic characteristics of PAs admitted to Canada under the PNP between 2010 and 2015 compared to PAs who have been previously admitted as provincial nominees (2005-2009), federal skilled workers (2010-2015) and Canadian Experience Class immigrants (2010-2015).

The analysis of administrative data indicated that PNs and Federal Skilled Workers (FSW) had similar characteristics in terms of age (majority under 45), gender and knowledge of official language. A smaller proportion of PNs (54%) tended to have university degrees compared to FSWs (83%). The other main difference between the PNP and the Federal Skilled Worker program is the intended province of destination; PNs intended to settle in more PTs, whereas FSWs were more concentrated (62% intended to reside in Ontario).

When compared to Canadian Experience Class (CEC), PNs have similar characteristics in terms of gender, however differed in other profile elements. PNs are older (14% over 45 compared to 6% for CEC), fewer PNs have university degrees (54% compared to 61%), and more PNs reported no knowledge of either English or French (6.6% compared to 0.6%). The majority of CEC PAs were also destined to Ontario (55%), compared to PNs who were more distributed across other PTs.

When compared to PNs that were admitted from 2005-2009, PNs who were admitted between 2010 and 2015 had a similar profile in terms of education and country of citizenship to earlier PN cohorts. However, they differed with previous PN cohorts in that recent cohorts were younger (86% were under the age of 45 compared to 80% for previous cohorts) and had more knowledge of English (90% compared to 82% for previous cohorts), and a greater proportion of the newer cohorts were females (34% versus 26% for previous cohorts).

Source: Global Case Management System (GCMS)

Table 5 indicates that 70% of the PN PAs admitted between 2010 and 2015 were intending to work in a NOC 0, A or B position, and that 26% were intending to work in NOC C or D occupations. Comparatively, a higher share of PAs admitted under the FSW (97%) and CEC (98%) were intending to work in NOC 0, A or B occupations. PNs also differed from PAs admitted under the FSWs and CEC in terms of the skill type required for the job they intended to occupy in Canada. While intending to work in natural and applied sciences and related occupations was frequent across categories, a higher share of PNs admitted between 2010 and 2015 were intending to work in sales and services occupations and in trades, transport and equipment operators and related occupations, while more skilled workers indicated intentions to occupy management occupations or health occupations, and CEC PAs were more represented in Business, finance and administration occupations.

Source: Global Case Management System (GCMS)

5.4. Transition from Temporary Resident to Permanent Resident Status

The share of PN PAs with prior temporary resident status generally grew over the years, from 52% in 2010 to 76% in 2015, representing a 46% increase. In comparison, less than one fifth of FSW PAs admitted as permanent residents in 2015 had been in Canada before as a temporary resident (17%).

Of all PAs admitted under the PNP between 2010 and 2015, a large share (65%) have been in Canada as temporary residents prior to obtaining their permanent residence. More specifically, 64% of all PN PAs admitted between 2010 and 2015 had a previous work permit. In addition, 23% of all PN PAs admitted had received a previous study permit.^{Footnote 27}

There were, however, considerable differences between PTs in terms of the share of PNs who had a previous temporary resident status. Most of the PN PAs nominated by the Northwest Territories (98%), British Columbia (96%), Yukon (94%), Ontario (93%), Newfoundland and Labrador (88%), Alberta (84%) and Nova Scotia (75%) had a prior temporary resident status. Comparatively, Saskatchewan (61%), New Brunswick (40%), Manitoba (23%) and PEI (20%) had fewer nominees who were temporary residents prior to becoming permanent residents.

There were also differences by streams, with almost all PN PAs admitted through the student streams (99.5%), and most of the worker streams (82%) having been in Canada on a temporary resident basis prior to obtaining their permanent residency, while fewer of those admitted through the family-assisted stream (10%), the business stream (11%) and the community-identified stream (24%) had a previous temporary resident status in Canada.

5.5. PNP Contribution to Official Language Minority Communities

As stipulated in Federal-Provincial/Territorial immigration agreements, the PNP is expected to contribute to the development of Official Language Minority Communities (OLMC). All of the six PT interviewees who addressed this issue indicated that they have implemented activities and strategies targeted specifically at French-speaking immigrants or are in the process of doing so. Half noted that efforts to increase French-speaking immigrants are or were about to intensify (e.g. through the introduction of targets, the development of a new stream).

Although most efforts are not specific to the PNP, PT interviewees and the document review identified the following promotion and recruitment activities targeting French-speaking immigrants:

• Provision of information and services in French;
• Participation in Destination Canada;
• Development of a Francophone immigration strategy;
• Targeted recruitment in Francophone regions (e.g. through trips, presentations, and promotional materials); and
• Consideration of Francophone targets/quotas.

More specific to the PNP is the introduction of a French-speaking skilled worker stream in Ontario and targeted efforts to recruit French-speaking PNs through some provincial Express Entry systems.

In assessing the number of French-speaking PN PAs admitted to Canada between 2010 and 2015, the data showed that 1.1% of PN PAs either have French as their mother tongue or reported knowing French only, in terms of knowledge of Canada’s official languages at time of admission. This is consistent with the share of French-speaking PN PAs admitted between 2005 and 2009 (1%). Although no specific Francophone targets have been identified for the PNP, the Government of Canada publicly committed in 2013 to increase the annual proportion of all Francophone economic immigration outside of Quebec to 4% by 2018.

The share of French-speaking PN PAs admitted between 2010 and 2015 varies by province of nomination, with New Brunswick (6.4%), Yukon (4.5%), Nova Scotia (2.2%) being the PTs with the highest share of French-speaking PNs. In addition, the share of French-speaking PAs varies by stream, with the community identified stream (4.1%) having the highest share of French-speaking PNs and the business stream (0.1%) reporting the lowest.

5.6. Retention of PNs in PTs

Retention of PNs in their PTs of nomination can be assessed using different methodological approaches that can each provide a different perspective on the topic. For the purpose of this evaluation, the retention rate was assessed at specific point in time, rather than by years after admission. The evaluation used 2014, for all cohorts admitted since 2002 (giving a maximum of 12 years after admission). This implies that some PNs will have had more time to move than others. This method was used in order to assess the expected program outcome of PNs remaining in the PT to which they were nominated. This approach provides a longer view of retention, though does not allow for a retention trend analysis.

IMDB analysis indicated that of all PN PAs admitted to Canada between 2002 and 2014, 83% were still residing in their PT of nomination in 2014.^{Footnote 28} Comparing the province of intended destination to the province of residence in 2014, retention rates for PNP were found to be comparable to those of FSWs (83%) admitted during the same time period, but somewhat lower than for PAs admitted under the CEC (94%)^{Footnote 29} or the business class (90%).

Overall, retention rates within PTs vary (see Table 6). The highest retention rates were found in Alberta (95%) and Ontario (93%), followed by British Columbia (91%), Manitoba (82%) and Saskatchewan (82%). The Atlantic Provinces had lower retention rates varying between 27% for Prince Edward Island and 65% for Nova Scotia.

Source: IMDB 2014 – 2002-2014 admissions

Although looking at a different timeframe, PN survey results generally aligned with findings from the IMDB analysis. The vast majority of PN PAs (90%) indicated remaining in the province that nominated them once they became permanent residents. Few (7%) moved to other provinces, and even fewer (4%) indicated living outside of Canada after becoming permanent residents. Mobility differed by stream, with those admitted under the business stream having the highest mobility rates (21%) and those in the family-assisted stream the lowest (5%).

The survey also found that PNs who moved away from their nominating province noted economic reasons as a determinant (69%). More specifically:

• 35% indicated that they saw better job opportunities elsewhere;
• 26% indicated that they had a specific job opportunity in another PT or country;
• 12% reported their spouse was not able to find a job in the PT that nominated them;
• 9% indicated that their spouse had a job offer in another PT or country; and
• 6% said that they had an opportunity to open or buy a business somewhere else.

PN Retention over five years

Using a separate analysis approach to provide a picture of how retention can vary over time (depending on the length of time under observation), retention rates are also provided over a 5 year time period.^{Footnote 30}

The IMDB retention rates results presented above were compared to a previous mobility analysis also using the IMDB but focusing the analysis on a five year period (the status in 2013 for PNs admitted between 2008 and 2013). The mobility study found similar results (84%) suggesting that mobility takes place in the first few years following admission to Canada. The mobility study found consistent retention rates across all provinces where the retention rates was the lowest in Prince Edward Island (20%) and the highest in Ontario (96%), Alberta (96%) and British Columbia (93%).

5.7. Economic Establishment

The following section presents economic results of PNs who have been admitted between 2002 and 2014, on labour market participation, use of social assistance and their earnings profile. It also presents results on their employment earnings and the type of job they occupied.

5.7.1. Labour Market Participation

The primary indicator of a PN participation in the labour market is the reporting of employment or self-employment earnings. The IMDB data showed that, one year after admission, 92% of PN principal applicants have declared employment and/or self-employment earnings (see Figure 2). The share of PNs reporting one or both types of types of earning remained relatively stable over time (91% after 5 years and 91% after ten years in Canada).

PN spouses and dependants also reported a high incidence of employment and/or self-employment earnings, increasing over time from 72% in the first year after admission to 80% after 12 years.

Figure 2: Incidence of Employment Earnings and/or Self-Employment by Years Since Admission and Immigration Category, 2002 to 2014 Admissions

Source: IMDB 2014 – 2002-2014 admissions

Comparing PNs to other immigrants admitted under economic categories, results indicate that CEC PAs have slightly higher incidence of employment and/or self-employment in the first four years compared to PN PAs; however, this difference is never higher than 2 percentage point and PN PAs catch up to CEC PAs after 5 years in Canada. Compared to FSW PAs admitted over the same time period, PN PAs have higher incidence of employment and/or self-employment, especially in the first four years after admission. The gap between PNP and FSW decreases over time from 11 percentage points one year after admission to 2 percentage points after 7 years.

Although relatively high in most PTs, the incidence of employment and/or self-employment earnings varies by PT of destination. Incidence of employment in the first five years following admission^{Footnote 31} is generally higher than 90% in Yukon, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and British Columbia, and varies between 80% and 90% in Newfoundland and Labrador and Ontario. Labour market participation is the lowest in the Atlantic provinces, with the incidence generally varying between 70% and 80% in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia and between 55% and 62% for Prince Edward Island.

Source: IMDB 2014 – 2002-2014 admissions

5.7.2. Use of Social Assistance

A very small proportion of PN PAs received social assistance benefits. The highest incidence of social assistance was noted one year after admission (1.7%) and the share of PN PAs receiving social assistance benefits generally decreased over time (see Table 8).^{Footnote 32}

Source: IMDB 2014 – 2002-2014 admissions

Comparing to other economic programs, the incidence of social assistance was lower for PNs than FSW PAs, but higher than for the CEC PAs. With the exception of PAs admitted under the business class for whom incidence of social assistance increased over time to reach 4.9% after 12 years, incidence of social assistance was the highest one year after admission, representing 0.3% of PAs admitted under the CEC, 1.7% of PNs and 3.6% of skilled workers (gradually decreasing to represent about 2% after four years).

5.7.3. Earnings Profile

To better understand the incomes of PNs, the evaluation analyzed the different type of earnings or combination of types of earning an individual may declare in a given year. As seen in Table 8, the most prevalent earning profile among the PNP are:

• declaring employment earnings as the only source of earnings (over 50% of PNs).
• declaring employment and investment earnings (representing approximately 20% of PNs).
• declaring only self-employment earnings constitutes the earning profile with the highest growth over time (from 2.3% one year after admission to 9.9% 12 years after admission).

Source: IMDB 2014 – 2002-2014 PNP admissions

5.7.4. Average Employment Earnings

PN PAs earned approximately $48,000 on average one year after admission in Canada (see Table 10). PN PAs’ average employment earnings increased with the number of years spent in Canada: after three years, the average is $54,000 (representing a 12.5% increase compared to year one). Five years after admission the average is $61,000 (representing a 27% increase compared to year one).

Although average employment earnings consistently increased in all PTs over the five year period following admission considered, PN PAs employment earnings varied across PTs. Earnings were the highest in Alberta and British Columbia ($107,000 and $87,000 after five years, respectively), and the lowest in Prince Edward Island and Manitoba ($34,000 and $41,000 after five years, respectively).

Source: IMDB 2014 – 2002-2014 admissions

PN spouses and dependants made an average of $23,000 one year after admission, increasing to $32,000 after five years. The average employment earnings of PN PAs are generally higher than FSWs’ from year one until the eight year after admission, at which point FSW average earnings catch-up and surpass PN earnings. PAs admitted under the CEC declared higher employment earnings compared to all other economic classes. On average, CEC PAs earned approximately $20,000 more per year compared to PNs (from year one to year four since admission).

Figure 3: Average Employment Earnings by Years since Admission and Immigration Category, 2002 to 2014 Admissions

Source: IMDB 2014 – 2002-2014 admissions

Impact of individual characteristics on employment earnings

As indicated above, employment earnings vary by immigration category. As these differences are likely the result of individual’s characteristics, rather than immigration category in itself, further analyses^{Footnote 33} were conducted to isolate the impact of specific immigration categories as well as individuals’ characteristics including prior temporary resident status, level of education, intended occupation, etc. Analyses were conducted both on PN PAs alone, to better understand what are the factors within PNs that explain variations in earnings, and on economic PAs (PN, FSW and CEC) to better understand the differences in earnings between immigration categories. The impact of the various individual characteristics were similar for both types of analyses. Therefore, regression results on economic PAs will be presented, however highlighting where differences were observed when only considering PNs in the analysis.

Results of analysis on employment earnings in 2014 for PAs (including PN, FSW and CEC) indicate that:

• Employment earnings of the PNs were higher than those of the FSW, however lower than the ones for CEC;
• PAs intending to work in NOC 0 positions had higher employment earnings^{Footnote 34} compared to those intending to work in NOC A occupation, those while those who intended to work in NOC B, C or D occupations had lower employment earnings; and
• Economic PAs who held a temporary work permit prior to being admitted to Canada as a permanent resident had higher employment earnings than those who did not have this type of permit. Whereas those who have held a temporary refugee permit^{Footnote 35} or previous study permit had lower employment earnings than those who did not have such permits.

In summary, immigration categories continue to have an impact on principal applicant employment earnings, even after having controlled for factors such as years in Canada as a permanent resident, intended NOC skill levels and previous temporary resident status in Canada. These results call for more inquiry to better understand what differentiates PAs admitted under each category from the others.

A large proportion (86%) of PNs were employed at the time of the survey, with variations between streams. Although high across streams, PN PAs admitted under the student stream (89%), the worker stream (86%) and the family-assisted stream (85%) had the highest incidence of employment, while those in the community-identified (79%) and the business (77%) streams had the lowest.

Overall, 90% of PN PAs employed at the time of the survey indicated working full time. They also reported being satisfied with the position they were in at the time of the survey; 74% indicated the position they occupied at the time of the survey meets or exceeds the expectations they had prior to becoming a permanent resident.

5.7.5. Employment Types and Skills Match

The evaluation compared the NOC skill level of the intended occupation to that of the first job and current job PNs reported occupying at the time of survey. Results indicate that 75% of the PNs reported their first job in Canada at a skill level equal or higher than the skill level of their intended occupation. Similar to the first job held by PNs, 77% reported, at the time of the survey, being in a job at a skill level equal or higher than the skill level of their intended occupation (see Table 11). There were significant differences between PTs, with the highest proportion of PN PAs working in a job commensurate with the skill level of their intended occupation found in British Columbia and the Territories (89% respectively) and lowest found in Manitoba (59%).

Source: Survey of PNs

Survey results indicated that most (71%) of the PNs first employment were high skilled occupations and 28% were in the low skilled occupations. More specifically, 9% indicated working in a NOC 0 position (managerial), 30% in a NOC A position (professional), 32% in a NOC B position (skilled and technical), 16% in a NOC C position (Intermediate and clerical) and 12% in a NOC D position (elemental and labourers). The skill level distribution of jobs held by PNs at the time of the survey is similar to that of the first job.

In terms of the field in which PNs were working, most often, PNs surveyed reported working in ‘business, finance or administration occupations’ (14%) (NOC skill type 1), ‘sales or services occupations’ (14%) (NOC skill type 6), ‘health occupations’ (13%) (NOC skill type 3), and ‘trades, transport and equipment operators and related occupations’ (11%) (NOC skill type 7).

5.8. Starting a Business

5.8.1. PN Business Stream

Overall, 15% of PN PAs surveyed reported starting or purchasing a business in Canada, in which they are actively involved. According to survey findings, the majority of PN businesses were operating in British Columbia (23%), Alberta (22%), and the Atlantic (20%). PNs who started or invested in businesses tended to keep these businesses in that region, with the majority of PNs (89%) indicating that their business continued to operate in the same region the business was started.

The share of PNs who started or purchased a business in Canada varied by streams, with PNs admitted under a business stream reporting the highest incidence of such activities. Approximately 64% of Business stream PNs surveyed reported starting or purchasing a business in Canada, in which they were actively involved in at the time of the survey. The majority of PN PAs admitted through the business stream and who had started or purchased businesses in Canada revealed they faced difficulties in establishing their business (79%). These include: market downturn (55%), language skills (42%), difficulty in finding good workers (41%) and complex government regulations (37%).

The geographic distribution of businesses operated by PNs admitted under the business stream differed from that of all PNs. The majority of Business stream PNs reported operating businesses in the Atlantic (50%) and Manitoba (24%).

6. Key Findings: Performance – Resource Utilization

6.1. Program Cost

As the PNP is jointly administered by the federal and PT governments, both levels of government allocate resources to the program separately. This evaluation only examined the resources allocated at the federal level. According to an analysis of departmental financial information, the average yearly cost of the PNP program was approximately $31M between 2012/13 and 2014/15.

Canadian visa officers who process economic applications indicated spending less time on PNP applications compared to other economic application. They indicated that it takes generally less time to make a decision on a PNP application given that PTs are also assessing the candidate at the nomination process.^{Footnote 36} Other economics programs, such as CEC or FSW, require Canadian visa officers to assess a wider range of eligibility criteria, which adds time to the assessment process.

6.2. Alternatives to PNP Design and Delivery

Interviewees were generally satisfied with the current design and delivery model of the PNP; however, some interviewees indicated that efficiency could be improved. Most notably was the need for enhanced collaboration in the assessment of applications across PTs and IRCC. Greater information sharing between IRCC and PTs and between PTs was highlighted as an opportunity for improving efficiency. Specifically, interviewees felt efficiency would be improved if the following information would be shared between IRCC and PTs and between PTs:

• Which PN applicants have been processed before by another province;
• What information was reviewed and assessed by PTs prior sending the nomination to IRCC;
• Reasons for the refusal or withdrawal of an application; and
• Common drivers and trends regarding refusals due to fraud or misrepresentation.

7. Conclusions and Recommendations

The following section summarizes the overall conclusions from the evaluation and puts forward two recommendations.

Overall, the main expected program outcomes are being met. The evaluation found that the vast majority of PN principal applicants have become established economically, with high employment rates and employment earnings that increase over time after admission. Compared to other economic programs, PNs have higher employment earnings than FSWs until the eighth year in Canada, but significantly lower than CEC immigrants. In addition, most PNs surveyed indicated that their first employment in Canada was in a high skilled occupation and three-quarters reported this occupation as commensurate with their skill level or higher.

PNP retention rate was comparable to the FSW program and somewhat lower than the CEC and Business class programs. Although there were some regional differences, the mobility analysis demonstrated that overall, retention was very high, though relatively lower in the Atlantic Provinces.

PTs and IRCC have a shared understanding of PNP objectives and roles and responsibilities, IRCC and PTs worked together effectively to improve the alignment of the PT PN programs with the federal economic immigration priorities, and also collaborated to increase program integrity.

Areas for program design improvements have been identified, related to the growing potential for overlap between the federal economic and PT PN programs; the limited contribution of the PNP to the development of OLMCs; and the challenges associated with meeting IRCC’s service standard for PNP application processing. Given issues identified in these areas, this evaluation report proposes two recommendations.

The original intent of the PNP was to allow PTs to nominate individuals who meet their economic needs and who may not have been selected under other federal economic programs,^{Footnote 37} with the PNP aiming to complement other federal economic programs. Although the PNP contributes to the distribution of economic immigrants to communities and regions outside the country’s three largest urban centres, the evaluation found a growing potential for overlap between the PNP and federal economic programs, as they appear to be increasingly attracting and selecting candidates with similar profiles, including skill levels.

PT PN programs have evolved to become closely aligned with the federal economic programs with greater emphasis on human capital criteria, while the federal programs have evolved to introduce pathways for lower skilled immigrants that used to be exclusive to PT programs. This convergence between the PNP and other economic programs calls for additional analyses to better understand the fit between the PNP and other federal economic programs as well as the implications for the programs.

One expected outcome of the PNP is to support the Government of Canada’s commitment to enhance the vitality of the francophone minority communities in Canada. The evaluation found that little progress has been made towards this program outcome. Even though a recommendation was made in the previous PNP evaluation in this area, only 1% of PNs admitted under this program over the last six years have been French-speaking. As such the PNP has provided a limited contribution to meeting the Government of Canada commitment to increase the annual proportion of all Francophone economic immigration outside of Quebec to 4% by 2018. Only New Brunswick and Yukon have admitted a share of French-speaking PAs that was equal or higher than the 4% target.

In addition, several potential areas for improving program design, efficiency and delivery were noted by key informants, most notably in the area of information sharing.

Recommendation 1

In light of the evolving policy and program context at both at the PT and federal levels, including the growing role of the Express Entry system, IRCC should review the PNP to examine.

1. The role and expected outcomes of the PNP in relation to other federal economic programs;
2. The OLMC requirements under the PNP; and
3. Information sharing with PTs.

Recommendation 2

In collaboration with PTs, IRCC should review its application intake approach and implement measures to ensure timely processing of PNP applications.

Appendix A: List of Evaluation and Audit Reports Conducted by PTs

Evaluation Reports

• 2004 Alberta Provincial Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2009 Manitoba Provincial Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2010 Yukon Nominee Program Evaluation (Survey Report)
• 2011 BC Provincial Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2011 Nova Scotia Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2012 Prince Edward Island Provincial Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2013 Saskatchewan Immigrant Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2013 Northwest Territories Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2013 Opportunities Ontario: Provincial Nominee Program Evaluation
• 2017 Saskatchewan Immigrant Nominee Program Evaluation - underway

Audit Reports

• 2008 Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Nominee Program Audit
• 2008 Nova Scotia Nominee Program Audit
• 2009 Prince Edward Island Provincial Nominee Program Audit
• 2010 New Brunswick Provincial Nominee Program Audit
• 2013 Saskatchewan Immigrant Nominee Program Audit
• 2013 Manitoba Provincial Nominee Program for Business Audit
• 2014 Ontario Provincial Nominee Program Audit

Appendix B: Logic Model for the Provincial Nominee Program

Annex B illustrates the logic model for the Provincial Nominee Program at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, which serves as a visual representation of the activities, outputs and intended outcomes of the Program.

Program Activities

There are two main program activities expected to lead to outputs for the Provincial Nominee Program.

Program Activity 1

Program Design and Management, includes the Policy and Program Development and Partnership Management.

a) Policy and Program Development includes the following sub-activities:

• Develop & update policy and program components and prepare operational instructions and functional guidance
• Conduct research and evaluation
• Conduct program integrity and QA exercises
• Ongoing performance measurement
• Review and monitor FPT agreements
• Ensure PNP criteria are consistent with IRPA, IRPR and bilateral agreements
• Develop and publish public info (web, publications)

b) Partnership Management includes the following sub-activities:

• Conduct PT consultations and negotiations
• Hold regular meetings with PTs to discuss & resolve issues
• Collaborate with PTs on targeted joint promotion and recruitment activities
• Facilitate and coordinate IRPA training initiatives for and with PTs

Program Activity 2

a) Program Delivery, which includes the following sub-activities:

• Assess PNs against federal requirements for permanent residence
• Consult nominating province or territory on refusals, as required
• Assess Work Permit applications
• Respond to enquiries, complaints, litigation

Program Outputs

These program sub-activities are expected to lead to the following program outputs.

Sub-program output 1a) Policy and Program Development

• PNP policy
• Regulations
• Operational requirements/instructions and training
• Reports, studies, evaluations
• Briefing notes, memos, presentations, policy documents
• Provincial & territorial PNP program streams
• Public info (web, publications)

Sub-program output 1b) Partnership Management

• Information sharing arrangements
• PNP agreements
• Annual PT levels plans and reports
• Shared information and expertise
• Fed-Prov joint work plans
• Joint promotion & recruitment strategy, tools, and activities
• Joint training initiatives

Sub-program output 2a) Program Delivery

• Decisions
• Admissions
• Resolution of case-specific issues

Immediate Outcomes

These activities and outputs are expected to lead to a number of immediate outcomes.

Program outputs 1a lead to Immediate Outcome 1:

• Program delivery, decision making and due diligence effectively supported by policy and program development
• CIC and PTs have strong accountability and program integrity measures in place
• Alignment of PT PNP program streams with federal economic objectives
• Complementary federal economic and PT PN programs

Program outputs 1b lead to Immediate Outcome 2:

• Stakeholders have a common understanding of PNP objectives and roles and responsibilities
• Effective and responsive governance and administration between CIC and PTs
• Consistent eligibility criteria, applied in a transparent manner (within each PT)

Program outputs 2a lead to Immediate Outcome 3:

• Timely, consistent, and transparent CIC decisions
• PNs take up residence and work in nominating province/territory

Intermediate Outcomes

These immediate outcomes are expected to lead to the following Intermediate Outcome.

• Evolving labour market and/or business needs met through PNP
• Economic establishment of PNs in their intended activity:
  • Start/purchase a business
  • Commence employment
• PNs remain in nominating PT
• PNP contributes to the development of Official Language Minority Communities

Ultimate Outcomes

Together, these immediate and intermediate program outcomes lead to an Ultimate Outcome:

• PNP contributes to distributing the benefits of economic immigration across all provinces and territories

This ultimate outcome feeds into the following strategic outcomes:

• Strategic outcome 1: Migration of permanent and temporary residents that strengthens Canada’s economy Canada’s economy (SO1)