Second Interim Evaluation Report of Aboriginal Healing Foundation Program Activity

284 Pages·2004·1.28 MB·English

JOURNEY AND BALANCE
Second Interim Evaluation Report of
Aboriginal Healing Foundation
Program Activity
Journey and Balance
Second Interim Evaluation Report of
Aboriginal Healing Foundation
Program Activity
Prepared by Kishk Anaquot Health Research
September 2002

Table of Contents
Preface.........................................................................................................................................VII
Definitions...................................................................................................................................VIII
Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................IX
1. Introduction.................................................................................................................................1
1.1 The Aboriginal Healing Foundation.........................................................................1
1.1.1 Activities.......................................................................................................1
1.1.2 Anticipated Outcomes..................................................................................2
2. Methods.......................................................................................................................................5
2.1 Evaluation Objectives...............................................................................................5
2.2 What is the Big Picture? (conceptual issues).............................................................5
2.3 What are the Details? (technical issues).....................................................................9
2.4 Community Support Coordinators’ Commentary...................................................18
3. Context and Participant Characteristics.....................................................................................20
3.1 Participant Characteristics.......................................................................................24
4. Performance Report....................................................................................................................27
4.1 Impact on Individuals.............................................................................................27
4.1.1 Awareness and Understanding of the Legacy................................................30
4.1.2 Healing.......................................................................................................31
4.1.2.1 Establishing Safety.........................................................................32
4.1.2.2 Remembrance and Mourning........................................................33
4.1.2.3 Reclamation...................................................................................34
4.1.3 Capacity to Heal.........................................................................................37
4.2 Influencing Communities.......................................................................................38
4.2.1 Stage One: The Journey Begins...................................................................43
4.2.2 Stage Two: Gathering Momentum ..............................................................46
4.2.2.1 Awareness and Understanding of the Legacy...................................47
4.2.3 Stage Three: Hitting the Wall.....................................................................48
4.2.3.1 Increasing Capacity to Facilitate Healing.......................................50
4.2.3.2 Establishing Partnerships and Ensuring Sustainability....................51
4.2.3.3 Strategic Planning..........................................................................54
4.2.4 Stage Four: Transformation.........................................................................54
4.3 Managing Program Enhancement...........................................................................55
4.3.1 Outputs versus Outcomes...........................................................................56
4.3.2 Individuals versus Communities..................................................................59
4.3.3 Suggested Measurement Strategies and Tools...............................................60
4.3.4 Suggested Evaluation Designs.....................................................................62
4.4 Accountability to Community and Survivors..........................................................64
III
4.5 Addressing the Need...............................................................................................68
4.6 Lessons Learned......................................................................................................69
4.6.1 Team Characteristics.....................................................................................69
4.6.2 Gender and Healing.....................................................................................70
4.6.3 Culture as Good Medicine...........................................................................72
4.6.4 Programs and Services..................................................................................73
4.7 Best Practices..........................................................................................................76
4.7.1 Legacy Education.........................................................................................76
4.7.2 Team Characteristics.....................................................................................76
4.7.3 Creating a Healing Environment..................................................................77
4.7.4 Therapeutic Approach..................................................................................78
4.7.5 Project Administration..................................................................................79
4.7.6 Networks and Partnerships...........................................................................80
4.8 Challenges..............................................................................................................82
4.8.1 Resistence and Denial...................................................................................85
4.8.2 Inadequate Resources....................................................................................85
4.8.3 Responding to the Need...............................................................................86
4.8.4 Healers and Healing.....................................................................................86
5. Conclusions................................................................................................................................89
5.1 Explaining Results...................................................................................................91
6. Recommendations....................................................................................................................95
7. Summary of Case Studies...........................................................................................................99
Hamlet of Cape Dorset: Healing and Harmony in Our Families
(AHF Project # CT-411-NT/32-NT)............................................................................................104
Urban Native Youth Association: Two-Spirited Youth Program
(AHF Project # CT-302-BC).........................................................................................................113
George Manuel Institute: Honouring Residential School Survivors: A Theatrical Production
(AHF Project # HH-88-BC).........................................................................................................121
Tsow Tun Le Lum Society: Qul Aun Program
(AHF Project # HC-36-BC)..........................................................................................................130
Shining Mountains Living Community Services: Tawow Healing Home
(AHF Project # 1397-AB).............................................................................................................142
IV
Building A Nation Family Healing Centre Inc.:
Healing the Multi-generational Effects of Residential School Placement
– Urban Access Program
(AHF Project # CT-2429-SK/1256)..............................................................................................154
Willow Bunch Métis Local #17: Willow Bunch Healing Project
(AHF Project # 1176-SK)..............................................................................................................166
Kikinahk Friendship Centre: Kikinahk Parenting Program
(AHF Project # RB-67-SK)...........................................................................................................175
Nelson House Medicine Lodge: Pisimweyapiy Counselling Centre
(AHF Project # CT-373 MB)........................................................................................................184
Centre for Indigenous Sovereignty: I da wa da di
(AHF Project # RB -268- ON)......................................................................................................194
Odawa Native Friendship Centre: When Justice Heals
(AHF Project # 1291-ON)............................................................................................................203
Council of the Atikamekw Nation: Koskikiwetan
(AHF Project # 1311-QC)............................................................................................................215
Big Cove First Nation: “Our Youth, the Voice of the Future”
(AHF Project # RB-175-NB)........................................................................................................225
8. Appendices...............................................................................................................................237
Appendix A) Criteria Used to Select Case Studies.......................................................................239
Appendix B) Process Evaluation Methods..................................................................................241
Appendix C Satisfaction Rating of Group and Individualized Treatment Approaches
(Qul Aun Program)..............................................................................................243
Appendix D) Respondents’ Attitudes about Change in Big Cove................................................244
Appendix E) Specific Learning Outcomes Targeted by Legacy Education...................................245
Appendix F) How to use Project Performance Reviews for Evaluation Suggested
Revisions for Greater Utility..................................................................................246
Appendix G) Informed Consent.................................................................................................251
Appendix H) California Healthy Kids Survey - Section B............................................................252
Appendix I) Sense of Coherence Scale.......................................................................................255
Appendix J) Sample Community Wellness Report Card............................................................259
V
Maps
1) Case Study Sites..........................................................................................................................13
List of Figures
Figure 1) Aboriginal Healing Foundation: The Logic Model....................................................4
Figure 2) Within Group Comparison or Repeated Measures Design.......................................14
Figure 3) Post Test Only Design.............................................................................................15
Figure 4) Healing Participation by Target Group....................................................................26
Figure 5) A Survivor’s Journey................................................................................................29
Figure 6) Enduring Achievement of Personal Goals (Qul Aun)...............................................36
Figure 7) Community Healing Journey..................................................................................42
Figure 8) Focussing Efforts on Change...................................................................................57
Figure 9) Post Project Only Design.........................................................................................63
Figure 10) Post Project Only Equivalent Comparison Design...................................................63
Figure 11) Post Project Only Non-Equivalent Comparison Design...........................................63
Figure 12) Post Program Only Comparing Different Healing Approaches................................64
Figure 13) Factors Influencing the Decision to Engage in the Healing Journey..........................93
List of Tables
Table 1) Primary Evaluation Questions...................................................................................7
Table 2) AHF Performance Map.............................................................................................8
Table 3) Information Sources, Types and Collection Methods...............................................10
Table 4) Case Studies Selected for the Impact Evaluation of AHF-Funded Activity................12
Table 5) Project Descriptions................................................................................................22
Table 6) Social Indicators......................................................................................................23
Table 7) Stages and Indicators of Community Healing..........................................................41
Table 8) Key Questions for Measuring Performance..............................................................58
Table 9) Suggested Intake and Follow Up Information on Individuals...................................60
Table 10) Evaluation Questions and Possible Indicators in Assessing Individual
Progress...................................................................................................................61
Table 11) Overview of Accountability and Survivor Engagement in Case Study
Projects...................................................................................................................66
Table 12) Lessons Learned......................................................................................................75
Table 13) Best Practices..........................................................................................................81
Table 14) Challenges..............................................................................................................88
VI
Preface
Quotes from case studies are not referenced according to standard recognized citation style to
protect the anonymity of informants.
VII
Definitions
This glossary of terms has been provided as a way of ensuring clarity
throughout the document.Please read through these definitions and
refer to them as needed.
best practices - activities that appear to work best (n = x) · this refers to the number of responses
and feel right for Survivors and their families. received on a survey item.
capacity-building · increased ability, skill or outcome · intended or unintended result.
knowledge on the part of healers, project adminis-
trators, volunteers and community members. output · product or service delivered.
greatest need · where AHF-selected indicators of program · or project are used interchangeably and
mental health and family functioning (e.g., physical refer to the action taken at the community level that
and sexual abuse, incarceration, children in care and is grant specific. In other words, many communi-
suicide) show that the group is at greatest risk, as ties have several grants from the AHF; however,
well as behavioural indicators (e.g., addictions and each grant is considered a distinct project.
violence) reveal to community members which indi-
viduals and families are at greatest risk. short-term · refers to the kinds of results that are
immediately apparent and most often refer to cogni-
healing efforts · refer to all activities whether they tive change (e.g., changes in attitudes, motivation,
are program, home, institution or centre based. ideas, knowledge) and realistic within the lifespan of
the project.
holistic healing · healing of the mind, body, spirit
and emotions. Survivors · primarily, this term refers to those who
attended residential school; however, for stylistic
individual healing · is focused upon personal simplicity, this term is often used to denote those
growth and not community development. that attended residential school as well as those
impacted intergenerationally.
intergenerational impacts · refers to the effect that
residential school has had upon the children and sustainability · an indication of longevity beyond
grandchildren of those who have attended residen- the limits of the Aboriginal Healing Foundation
tial schools. either through the financial contributions of others
or through voluntary effort.
long-term · refers to the results that are realistic in
10-15 years. the Foundation · refers to the program activity of
the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.
median · the median is a measure of central ten-
dency (or the "middle") used in statistics and repre- the Legacy · refers to the enduring effect of the
sents the "half-way" mark. In other words, half of physical and sexual abuse suffered in residential
all values fall below and above the median. schools including intergenerational impacts.
VIII
Executive Summary
Methods
This report discusses the contribution made by AHF-funded project activity in realizing the desired
and unintended short-term outcomes as a way of being accountable to various primary stakeholders
and to provide valuable, relevant information for users and decision makers. Case studies (13 in
total) were used to examine selected priorities in depth and included representation from all
Aboriginal groups, special need categories and communities, as well as a full range of project types.
Community Support Coordinator’s (CSCs) were enlisted to complete case studies under the guid-
ance of an external evaluator. Over time, it became clear that tracking project influence on community
rates of incarceration, children in care, physical and sexual abuse or suicide were not sufficiently sen-
sitive to detect the early contributions of AHF-funded project activity. Rather, it makes more sense
to track individuals over time; however, no direct measurement of change in participants was con-
ducted due to ethical concerns. In particular, each case study addressed the project’s impact on indi-
viduals and communities as well as issues related to sustainability, partnerships, addressing need,
best practices, challenges and lessons learned. To secure several lines of evidence, the results of a
document review of 36 files and the national process evaluation survey were also used to supple-
ment case study information.
Context and Participant Characteristics
Thirteen sites were selected, at least one per region (British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan,
Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Atlantic and the North). There are striking differences in the social,
economic and cultural environments in which projects operate. Yet, patterns can appear even across
such diversity, including poor economic conditions, unemployment and housing shortages.
The following table provides a summary of the case study projects, including community size and
target groups.
IX