Final Report
July 12, 2011
Previous page | Table of Contents | Next page
| Evaluation Question | Achieved | Progress Made; Attention Needed |
Little Progress; Priority for Attention |
Not Applicable |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ~ Due to insufficient evidence, a complete assessment cannot be carried out. | ||||
| Relevance: | ||||
1. a)
Did the Vehicle Scrappage Program respond to an identified need? What was that need?
|
✓ | |||
1. b)
Is there a continued need for the program?
|
✓ | |||
2.
Did the program complement or duplicate other related federal and/or provincial government programs (e.g., Transport Canada programs, provincial emission testing programs, etc.)?
|
✓ | |||
3.
Was the Vehicle Scrappage Program aligned with departmental and federal government priorities?
|
✓ | |||
4.
Was the Vehicle Scrappage Program consistent with the Department’s mandate and with federal roles and responsibilities?
|
✓ | |||
| Performance: Design and Delivery | ||||
5.
Were the objectives of the program realistic and adequately defined?
|
✓ | |||
6. a)
Was the design of the Vehicle Scrappage Program appropriate for achieving expected program results?
|
✓ | |||
6. b)
Was the funding of the program commensurate with its objectives and the needs identified?
|
✓ | |||
7. a)
Were participants satisfied with the administration of the program by both the Department and the not-for-profit organizations?
|
✓ | |||
7. b)
Were participants satisfied with the incentives provided to reward them for scrapping their vehicle (type and value)?
|
✓ | |||
8.
Were the achievements of the Vehicle Scrappage Program effectively and efficiently captured and disseminated to appropriate audiences (i.e., key stakeholders and the general public)?
|
✓ | |||
9.
Have appropriate performance data been collected, captured and safeguarded? If so, has this information been used to inform senior management / decision makers?
|
✓ | |||
10. a)
What are the lessons learned (both strengths and weaknesses) from the program?
|
✓ | |||
10. b)
Are there follow-up activities or programs that could build on the success achieved by this program?
|
✓ | |||
| Performance: Effectiveness | ||||
11.
To what extent have the intended outcomes been achieved as a result of the Vehicle Scrappage Program?
Short-term outcomes 11. a)
Canadians in all provinces have access to incentives to reward them for removing older vehicles from the road
|
✓ | |||
11. b)
Increased awareness by the public of the program and the environmental impacts of older vehicles
|
✓ | |||
11. c)
Increased awareness by recyclers of environmentally safe recycling practices
|
✓ | |||
Medium-term outcomes 11. d)
Fewer older, high-polluting personal vehicles on the road
|
✓ | |||
11. e)
More sustainable transportation modes being used for personal transportation
|
✓ | |||
11. f)
Environmentally safe practices in use for recycling of vehicles scrapped through the program
|
✓ | |||
Long-term outcomes 11. g)
Air pollutants are reduced
|
✓ | |||
11. h)
GHG emissions are reduced
|
✓ | |||
11. i)
Release of harmful and toxic substances into the environment is prevented
|
✓ | |||
12.
Did this program lead people to make use of other related federal and provincial government programs or vice-versa?
|
~✓ | |||
13.
Were there any external factors outside of the Vehicle Scrappage Program that influenced (positively or negatively) the success of the program?
|
✓ | |||
14.
Were there any unintended positive or negative outcomes of the Vehicle Scrappage Program?
|
✓ | |||
| Performance: Efficiency and Economy | ||||
15. a)
Did the Vehicle Scrappage Program undertake its activities and deliver its products in the most efficient manner?
|
✓ | |||
15. b)
Was federal funding leveraged to the extent planned?
|
✓ | |||
15. c)
How could the efficiency of the program’s activities be improved?
|
✓ | |||
15. d)
Are there alternative, more efficient ways of delivering the program?
|
✓ | |||
16.
Did the Vehicle Scrappage Program achieve its intended outcomes in the most economical manner?
|
✓ | |||