National Anti-Drug Strategy Evaluation

Appendix E: Evaluation Instruments

General Interview Guide for Federal Government Representatives Footnote 117

On behalf of the Department of Justice, Ference Weicker & Company, a management consulting firm, is conducting an evaluation of the National Anti-Drug Strategy (the Strategy). As part of this process, we are conducting interviews with senior representatives from departments that have been involved with the Strategy. The information we collect from you will be held confidential and will be reported only in summary form with the responses of other representatives whom we interview.

CONTACT INFORMATION

  • Name
  • Position
  • Organization
  • Region
  • Phone Number

A. RELEVANCE

1. In which of the three action plans have you been involved in a significant way?

  • Prevention Action Plan
  • Treatment Action Plan
  • Enforcement Action Plan
  • Other
  • None of the plans
  • Not sure

Confirm the appropriateness of the interview guide.
If not appropriate, change to the appropriate guide or to the general guide if involved in more than one action plan.

2. What has been your role with respect to the National Anti-Drug Strategy?

3. How many years have you been involved with the Strategy?

4. The specific objectives of the Strategy are:

  1. To support efforts to prevent youth from using illicit drugs by enhancing their awareness and understanding of the harmful social and health effects of illicit drug use and to develop and implement community-based interventions and initiatives to prevent illicit drug use;
  2. To support effective treatment and rehabilitation systems and services by developing and implementing innovative and collaborative approaches; and,
  3. To contribute to the disruption of illicit drug operations in a safe manner, particularly targeting criminal organizations.

Are the objectives of the Strategy consistent with the strategic outcomes and the priorities of your department and the Government of Canada?

Departmental priorities

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know

Government of Canada

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 4a. Why do you say that?
  • 4b. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding departmental or government-wide priorities related to the activities of the Strategy?
  • 4c. In what respects, if any, is the Strategy inconsistent with the current departmental or government-wide priorities?

5. Do you view the National Anti-Drug Strategy and its associated activities as aligning with the roles and responsibilities of the federal government?

Federal government

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 5a. Why do you say that?
  • 5b. How do you see the role of the federal government relative to the role of provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders?

B. EFFECTIVENESS

1. Overall, on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all successful, 3 is somewhat successful and 5 is very successful, how successful do you think that the Strategy has been to date in:

  • Raising awareness and understanding of the harmful social and health effects of illicit drug use, particularly among youth, and in developing prevention strategies
    • Success in achieving objectives of the plans
      • 1. Not at all successful
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat successful
      • 4.
      • 5. Very successful
      • N/A
    • Why do you say that?
    • In what areas has significant progress been made?
    • In what areas has less progress been made to date that might have been expected?
  • Supporting effective treatment and rehabilitation systems and services
    • Success in achieving objectives of the plans
      • 1. Not at all successful
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat successful
      • 4.
      • 5. Very successful
      • N/A
    • Why do you say that?
    • In what areas has significant progress been made?
    • In what areas has less progress been made to date that might have been expected?
  • Contributing to the disruption of illicit drug operations
    • Success in achieving objectives of the plans
      • 1. Not at all successful
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat successful
      • 4.
      • 5. Very successful
      • N/A
    • Why do you say that?
    • In what areas has significant progress been made?
    • In what areas has less progress been made to date that might have been expected?

2. What other impacts, positive and negative, have been generated by the activities of the Strategy?

3. What major factors have contributed to the success of the Strategy to date?

4. What do you see as some of the factors that may have constrained its success to date?

5. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding outcomes relevant to the Strategy (e.g. recent performance reports or stakeholder surveys)?

C. EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY

1. How familiar are you with the cost efficiency of the Strategy or any of these three action plans? (by cost efficiency, we mean the cost of resources used approximates the minimum amount of resources needed to complete a task and achieve expected outcomes)

  • Not familiar at all = 1 / 2
  • Somewhat familiar = 3 / 4
  • Very familiar = 5

2. (If select 3 and above) On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all cost-efficient, 3 is somewhat cost-efficient, and 5 is very cost-efficient, how cost-efficient would you say each component of the National Anti-Drug Strategy has been to date in producing its expected outputs and outcomes?

  • Prevention Action Plan
    • Success in achieving objectives of the plans
      • 1. Not at all cost-efficient
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat cost-efficient
      • 4.
      • 5. Very cost-efficient
      • N/A
    • Why do you say that?
  • Treatment Action Plan
    • Success in achieving objectives of the plans
      • 1. Not at all cost-efficient
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat cost-efficient
      • 4.
      • 5. Very cost-efficient
      • N/A
    • Why do you say that?
  • Enforcement Action Plan
    • Success in achieving objectives of the plans
      • 1. Not at all cost-efficient
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat cost-efficient
      • 4.
      • 5. Very cost-efficient
      • N/A
    • Why do you say that?

3. How could the cost efficiency of the Strategy have been improved?

4. In what manner and to what extent does the design of the delivery mechanisms and the governance structure contribute to effective and efficient program delivery?

  • 4a. What changes, if any, would you recommend?

5. Apart from what we've discussed, do you see alternative approaches, structures or strategies that might be more effective or efficient in achieving the intended results? If yes, please explain.

6. If the budget for the Strategy were to be increased, in what areas would you recommend this additional funding be invested?

  • 6a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

7. If the budget for the program were to be reduced, in what areas could expenditures be decreased while having the least negative impact on the program?

  • 7a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

8. Looking back over the Strategy, what do you see as some of the (other) key lessons that have been learned and best practices that have been developed?

9. Do you have any additional comments you would like to make regarding the Strategy?

10. Are there any other organizations or individuals you would recommend we contact to get feedback on the Strategy (e.g. funding recipients, provincial/territorial/municipal or other partners, etc.)?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!


Interview Guide for Prevention Action Plan

On behalf of the Department of Justice, Ference Weicker & Company, a management consulting firm, is conducting an evaluation of the National Anti-Drug Strategy (the Strategy). As part of this process, we are conducting interviews with senior representatives from departments that have been involved with the Strategy. The information we collect from you will be held confidential and will be reported only in summary form with the responses of other representatives whom we interview.

CONTACT INFORMATION

  • Name
  • Position
  • Organization
  • Region
  • Phone Number

A. RELEVANCE

1. In which of the three action plans have you been involved in a significant way?

  • Prevention Action Plan
  • Treatment Action Plan
  • Enforcement Action Plan
  • Other
  • None of the plans
  • Not sure

Confirm the appropriateness of the interview guide.
If not appropriate, change to the appropriate guide or to the general guide if involved in more than one action plan.

2. What has been your role with respect to the National Anti-Drug Strategy?

3. How many years have you been involved with the Strategy?

4. The specific objectives of the Strategy are:

  1. To support efforts to prevent youth from using illicit drugs by enhancing their awareness and understanding of the harmful social and health effects of illicit drug use and to develop and implement community-based interventions and initiatives to prevent illicit drug use;
  2. To support effective treatment and rehabilitation systems and services by developing and implementing innovative and collaborative approaches; and,
  3. To contribute to the disruption of illicit drug operations in a safe manner, particularly targeting criminal organizations.

In your opinion, are the objectives of the Strategy consistent with the outcomes and the priorities of your department and the Government of Canada?

Departmental priorities

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know

Government of Canada

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 4a. Why do you say that?
  • 4b. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding departmental or government-wide priorities related to the activities of the Strategy?
  • 4c. In what respects, if any, is the Strategy inconsistent with the current departmental or government-wide priorities?

5. Do you view the Prevention Action Plan and its associated activities as aligning with the roles and responsibilities of the federal government?

Federal government

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 5a. Why do you say that?
  • 5b. How do you see the role of the federal government relative to the role of provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders?

6. In your opinion, what is the role of the federal government relative to the role of the provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders with respect to prevention?

7. What, if any, other programs are implemented by federal and/or provincial/territorial departments, the non-profit and/or private sector that share similar objectives with the Prevention Action Plan?

IF NONE IDENTIFIED, SKIP TO SECTION B

8. In what manner and to what extent does the Prevention Action Plan of the Strategy complement these other programs and services?

9. In what manner and to what extent does the Action Plan overlap or duplicate these other programs and services?

B. EFFECTIVENESS

1. Overall, on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all successful, 3 is somewhat successful and 5 is very successful, how successful do you think that the elements of the Prevention Action Plan have been to date in achieving its objectives?

  • Not at all successful = 1 / 2
  • Somewhat = 3 / 4
  • Very successful = 5

1a. Why do you say that?

2. The activities of the Prevention Action Plan could potentially generate a variety of different types of impacts. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact at all in that area, 3 is somewhat of an impact, and 5 is a major impact, how much of an impact do you believe that the Strategy has had to date in terms of:

  • Helping youth and their parents better understand negative consequences of illicit drug use?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Helping youth to make informed decisions about illicit drug use?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Enhancing supports available for at-risk populations
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Enhancing knowledge in communities to address illicit drug use and its negative consequences?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Strengthening community responses to illicit drug issues?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?

3. What other impacts, positive and negative, have been generated by the activities of the Prevention Action Plan?

4. What major factors have contributed to the success of the Prevention Action Plan to date?

5. What do you see as some of the factors that may have constrained its success to date?

6. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding outcomes relevant to the Prevention Action Plan (e.g. recent performance reports or stakeholder surveys)?

C. EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY

1. What are the important characteristics to making a horizontal initiative like National Anti-Drug Strategy work well and efficiently?

2. In what manner and to what extent does the design of the delivery mechanisms and the governance structure contribute to effective and efficient program delivery? Why do you say that?

  • 2a. What changes, if any, would you recommend?

3. Apart from what we've discussed, what if any alternative approaches, structures or strategies that might be more efficient in achieving the intended results of the Prevention Action Plan?

4. If the budget for the Prevention Action Plan was to be increased, in what areas would you recommend this additional funding be invested?

  • 4a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

5. If the budget for Prevention Action Plan was to be reduced, in what areas could expenditures be decreased while having the least negative impact on the program?

  • 5a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

6. Looking back over the Strategy, what do you see as some of the (other) key lessons that have been learned and best practices that have developed?

7. Do you have any additional comments you would like to make regarding the Strategy?

8. Are there any other organizations or individuals you would recommend we contact to get feedback on the Strategy (e.g. funding recipients, provincial/territorial/municipal or other partners, etc.)?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!


Interview Guide for Treatment Action Plan

On behalf of the Department of Justice, Ference Weicker & Company, a management consulting firm, is conducting an evaluation of the National Anti-Drug Strategy (the Strategy). As part of this process, we are conducting interviews with senior representatives from departments that have been involved with the Strategy. The information we collect from you will be held confidential and will be reported only in summary form with the responses of other representatives whom we interview.

CONTACT INFORMATION

  • Name
  • Position
  • Organization
  • Region
  • Phone Number

A. RELEVANCE

1. In which of the three action plans have you been involved in a significant way?

  • Prevention Action Plan
  • Treatment Action Plan
  • Enforcement Action Plan
  • Other
  • None of the plans
  • Not sure

Confirm the appropriateness of the interview guide.
If not appropriate, change to the appropriate guide or to the general guide if involved in more than one action plan.

2. What has been your role with respect to the National Anti-Drug Strategy?

3. How many years have you been involved with the Strategy?

4. The specific objectives of the Strategy are:

  1. To support efforts to prevent youth from using illicit drugs by enhancing their awareness and understanding of the harmful social and health effects of illicit drug use and to develop and implement community-based interventions and initiatives to prevent illicit drug use;
  2. To support effective treatment and rehabilitation systems and services by developing and implementing innovative and collaborative approaches; and,
  3. To contribute to the disruption of illicit drug operations in a safe manner, particularly targeting criminal organizations.

Are the objectives of the Strategy consistent with the strategic outcomes and the priorities of your department and the Government of Canada?

Departmental priorities

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know

Government of Canada

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 4a. Why do you say that?
  • 4b. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding departmental or government-wide priorities related to the activities of the Strategy?
  • 4c. In what respects, if any, is the Strategy inconsistent with the current departmental or government-wide priorities?

5. Do you view the Treatment Action Plan and its associated activities as aligning with the roles and responsibilities of federal government?

Federal government

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 5a. Why do you say that?
  • 5b. How do you see the role of the federal government relative to the role of provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders?

6. In your opinion, what is the role of the federal government relative to the role of the provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders with respect to treatment?

7. What, if any, other programs are implemented by federal and/or provincial/territorial departments, the non-profit and/or private sector that share similar objectives with the Treatment Action Plan?

IF NONE IDENTIFIED, SKIP TO SECTION B

8. In what manner and to what extent does the Treatment Action Plan of the Strategy complement these other programs and services?

9. In what manner and to what extent does the Action Plan overlap or duplicate these other programs and services?

B. EFFECTIVENESS

1. Overall, on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all successful, 3 is somewhat successful and 5 is very successful, how successful do you think that the elements of the Plan have been to date in achieving these objectives?

  • Not at all successful= 1 / 2
  • Somewhat = 3 / 4
  • Very successful = 5

1a. Why do you say that?

2. The activities of the Treatment Action Plan could potentially generate a variety of different types of impacts. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact at all in that area, 3 is somewhat of an impact, and 5 is a major impact, how much of an impact do you believe that the Strategy has had to date in terms of:

  • Enhancing the capacity to offer a range of treatment services and programs?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
    • Can you provide some examples?
  • Improving collaboration on responses and knowledge on treatment issues?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Enhancing commitment of Provincial and Territorial governments to improve treatment systems in targeted areas of need?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Increasing availability of and access to effective treatment services and programs for targeted populations?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Improving treatment systems and services to address illicit drug dependency among target groups?
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?

3. What other impacts, positive or negative, have been generated by the activities of the Treatment Action Plan?

4. What major factors have contributed to the success of the Strategy to date?

5. What do you see as some of the factors that may have constrained its success to date?

6. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding outcomes relevant to the Treatment Action Plan (e.g. recent performance reports or stakeholder surveys)?

C. EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY

1. What are the important characteristics to making a horizontal initiative like National Anti-Drug Strategy work well and efficiently?

2. In what manner and to what extent does the design of the delivery mechanisms and the governance structure contribute to effective and efficient program delivery? Why do you say that?

  • 2a. What changes, if any, would you recommend?

3. Apart from what we have discussed, what if any alternative approaches, structures or strategies that might be more efficient in achieving the intended results of the Treatment Action Plan?

4. If the budget for the Treatment Action Plan was to be increased, in what areas would you recommend this additional funding be invested?

  • 4a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

5. If the budget for Treatment Action Plan was to be reduced, in what areas could expenditures be decreased while having the least negative impact on the program?

  • 5a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

6. Looking back over the Strategy, what do you see as some of the (other) key lessons that have been learned and best practices that have developed?

7. Do you have any additional comments you would like to make regarding the Strategy?

8. Are there any other organizations or individuals you would recommend we contact to get feedback on the Strategy (e.g. funding recipients, provincial/territorial/municipal or other partners, etc.)?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!


Interview Guide for Enforcement Action Plan

On behalf of the Department of Justice, Ference Weicker & Company, a management consulting firm, is conducting an evaluation of the National Anti-Drug Strategy (the Strategy). As part of this process, we are conducting interviews with senior representatives from departments that have been involved with the Strategy. The information we collect from you will be held confidential and will be reported only in summary form with the responses of other representatives whom we interview.

CONTACT INFORMATION

  • Name
  • Position
  • Organization
  • Region
  • Phone Number

A. RELEVANCE

1. In which of the three action plans have you been involved in a significant way?

  • Prevention Action Plan
  • Treatment Action Plan
  • Enforcement Action Plan
  • Other
  • None of the plans
  • Not sure

Confirm the appropriateness of the interview guide.
If not appropriate, change to the appropriate guide or to the general guide if involved in more than one action plan.

2. What has been your role with respect to the National Anti-Drug Strategy?

3. How many years have you been involved with the Strategy?

4. The specific objectives of the Strategy are:

  1. To support efforts to prevent youth from using illicit drugs by enhancing their awareness and understanding of the harmful social and health effects of illicit drug use and to develop and implement community-based interventions and initiatives to prevent illicit drug use;
  2. To support effective treatment and rehabilitation systems and services by developing and implementing innovative and collaborative approaches; and,
  3. To contribute to the disruption of illicit drug operations in a safe manner, particularly targeting criminal organizations.

Are the objectives of the Strategy consistent with the strategic outcomes and the priorities of your department and the Government of Canada?

Departmental priorities

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know

Government of Canada

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 4a. Why do you say that?
  • 4b. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding departmental or government-wide priorities related to the activities of the Strategy?
  • 4c. In what respects, if any, is the Strategy inconsistent with the current departmental or government-wide priorities?

5. Do you view the Enforcement Action Plan and its associated activities as aligning with the roles and responsibilities of the federal government?

Federal government

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other
  • Don't know
  • 5a. Why do you say that?
  • 5b. How do you see the role of the federal government relative to the role of provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders?

6. In your opinion, what is the role of the federal government relative to the role of the provincial/territorial governments and other stakeholders with respect to enforcement?

7. What, if any, other programs are implemented by federal and/or provincial/territorial departments, the non-profit and/or private sector that share similar objectives with the Enforcement Action Plan?

IF NONE IDENTIFIED, SKIP TO SECTION B

8. In what manner and to what extent does the Enforcement Action Plan of the Strategy complement these other programs and services?

9. In what manner and to what extent does the Enforcement Action Plan overlap or duplicate these other programs and services?

B. EFFECTIVENESS

1. Overall, on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not at all successful, 3 is somewhat successful and 5 is very successful, how successful do you think that the elements of the Plan have been to date in achieving these objectives?

  • Not at all successful = 1 / 2
  • Somewhat = 3 / 4
  • Very successful = 5

1a. Why do you say that?

2. The activities of the Enforcement Action Plan could potentially generate a variety of different types of impacts. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is no impact at all in that area, 3 is somewhat of an impact, and 5 is a major impact, how much of an impact do you believe that the Strategy has had to date in terms of:

  • Increasing capacity for drug enforcement and prosecution of illicit drug producers and distributors
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
    • Can you provide some examples?
  • Increasing capacity to gather, analyze/share intelligence and analyze evidence
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Increasing awareness of illicit drug and precursor chemical issues for enforcement officials
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Increasing safety in dismantling illicit drug operations
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Increasing capacity to control and monitor controlled substances and precursor chemicals
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Enhancing investigations, audits, charges laid, prosecutions, forensic accounting analyses and legal consequences
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Improving intelligence and evidence
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Increasing compliance/seizures and reduced risk of diversion of precursor chemicals
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Increasing dismantling and disruption of operations related to illicit drug production and distribution
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?
  • Reducing health, safety and security risks associated with illicit drug production
    • Rating of Impact
      • 1. No Impact
      • 2.
      • 3. Somewhat
      • 4.
      • 5. Major Impact
      • N/A
    • (if 3 or more) In what way? (if 2 or less) Why do you say that?

3. What other impacts, positive or negative, have been generated by the activities of the Enforcement Action Plan?

4. What major factors have contributed to the success of the Enforcement Action Plan to date?

5. What do you see as some of the factors that may have constrained its success to date?

6. Are there particular documents that you recommend we review regarding outcomes relevant to the Enforcement Action Plan (e.g. recent performance reports or stakeholder surveys)?

C. EFFICIENCY AND ECONOMY

1. What are the important characteristics to making a horizontal initiative like National Anti-Drug Strategy work well and efficiently?

2. In what manner and to what extent does the design of the delivery mechanisms and the governance structure contribute to effective and efficient program delivery? Why do you say that?

  • 2a. What changes, if any, would you recommend?

3. Apart from what we've discussed, what if any alternative approaches, structures or strategies that might be more efficient in achieving the intended results of the Enforcement Action Plan?

4. If the budget for the Enforcement Action Plan was to be increased, in what areas would you recommend this additional funding be invested?

  • 4a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

5. If the budget for Enforcement Action Plan was to be reduced, in what areas could expenditures be decreased while having the least negative impact on the program?

  • 5a. (If any identified) Why do you say that?

6. Looking back over the Strategy, what do you see as some of the (other) key lessons that have been learned and best practices that have developed?

7. Do you have any additional comments you would like to make regarding the Strategy?

8. Are there any other organizations or individuals you would recommend we contact to get feedback on the Strategy (e.g. funding recipients, provincial/territorial/municipal or other partners, etc.)?

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION!

Date modified: