1. The Evolution of the Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP) – 1998-2007
Presented By:
Ron Parent
Manager, Refugees Program Delivery
Citizenship & Immigration Canada
NHQ
Good morning, my name is Ron Parent and I am the Manager of Refugees Program Delivery with Citizenship and Immigration Canada. I am also the chair of the RAP Working Group.
The objective of this session is to have some of the members of the RAP WG provide an overview of the changes to the Resettlement Assistance Program that have taken place since RAP was created in 1998, and the impact that these changes have had: on the service providers that support the refugees in their early days in Canada, on the CIC officers involved in delivering the program, on the other settlement services, on other levels of government, and on the receiving communities as well as on the clients themselves.
Along with my colleagues on the RAP WG, we will try to set the stage for the days to come by talking about the developments and impacts over the last few years.

2. Overview of Developments
1998 RAP created, replaces AAP
2002 IRPA Introduced
2005 New RAP Ts & Cs
2006/07 Additional Funding for RAP
RAP creation: RAP was created in 1998 following two rounds of the Settlement Renewal Consultations that the Department held with Canadians on immigration issues. Originally defined as “the process that will change the way newcomer settlement and immigration services are managed in this country”, the intent was for CIC to withdraw from the direct administration of settlement services and funds. The federal government would, however, continue to provide funds for this purpose.
That said, the consultations with stakeholders revealed that most participants felt that the income support system for refugees should be managed separate from any social assistance delivery system and that refugee needs were different for most immigrant groups. It became clear through two rounds of consultations that CIC would retain the responsibility for the direct administration of income support and immediate essential services for GARs, and stakeholders asked CIC to achieve greater consistency in the range of services and method of funding to meet the short term needs of resettled refugees. Following further consultations and the establishment of a Resettlement WG in 1996, the new program (RAP) was created to replace the Adjustment Assistance Program. It is important to note as well that RAP was developed and funded when refugee selection was largely from eastern Europe.
IRPA: The introduction of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) in 2002 was probably the single most significant development that has impacted RAP. Pre-IRPA, Canada was criticized for taking the “cream of the crop” of resettled refugees. We were focused heavily on “settlement potential selection criteria” and did not accept many refugees with medical problems. With IRPA, we have essentially “modernized” the system for selecting refugees for resettlement – bringing it in line with the humanitarian objectives of the program.
IRPA introduced new selection criteria for refugees; emphasized protection needs over integration potential; introduced softer criteria for assessing language, education and employment skills.
The impact of these changes will be a source of discussion all week.
Ts & Cs: The RAP evaluation of 2003/04 identified that the program required more flexible terms and conditions to respond to the changing environment of refugee resettlement. As you may know, the program Ts & Cs for RAP were revised in 2005 and the changes allow for a more flexible framework, including overseas service providers, an emphasis on blended programs and B stream funding which makes way for funding to be directed towards projects or initiatives that support program delivery (research, conferences, etc.).
New Funding: Over the course of the current fiscal year and for future years, additional RAP funding has been received that is being invested both in both income support and service delivery.

3. How the Context has Changed
1998
2007
Supported 5300 refugees
Now supports refugees
2% refugees from Europe
40% refugees from Africa
66% refugees from Europe
11% refugees from Africa
CONTEXT
Many refugees from protracted camp-based situations with larger families, limited life-skills, lacking education and work experience, poor health
Many urbanized refugees and those in camps for relatively short periods

4. Impacts Service delivery Communities and community services, e.g.:
Health
Education
Social services
Other settlement services
CIC staff involved in program delivery
Refugees themselves
The changed client profile has created significant pressures for program administrators and front line service delivery, including:
Increased pressure on the dedicated workers, both SPO and CIC, involved in front-line service delivery and trying to meet the significantly higher needs of the refugees
Service provider administration – trying to deliver programs for a higher needs clientele with, until recently, a fairly static funding situation
Impacts on the provinces and communities that receive GARs and the health, education, and social services in these jurisdictions
Impacts on the other settlement services – ISAP, LINC, and Host
And of course, impacts on the refugees themselves that are trying to settle, adapt and integrate into life in Canada but face challenges in doing so.
My colleagues on the RAP WG, Chris Friesen and Elizabeth Gryte, will speak further to the impacts of the major developments in RAP and then Robb Stewart will speak to some of the work of the Working Group over the last two years and some of the progress we have made during that time. Fariborz Birjandian will talk about the RAP WG from a SPO perspective.

5. RAP Working Group - Progress Update -
Background
Mandate
Representation
Originally formed in 1998 as joint CIC-SPO advisory body on RAP matters
Group ceased to meet in 2001
SPOs advocated for revitalization of WG – was noted in 2002 RAP evaluation
CIC committed in 2003 to restart group and preliminary meetings were held Dec04 and Feb05
First official meeting was June 05 where ToR and priorities were set
Mandate: advisory group to make recommendations to CIC management
Main goals: enhance outcomes of RAP, provide advice on new initiatives affecting GARs, facilitate info-sharing on national basis, recommend directions to obtain best results out of Stream B funding
RAP WG currently has about a dozen members: represented by 4 RAP SPOs – 1 from each geographic region selected by the Regional Office, a program advisor from each Regional Headquarters office plus a few from national headquarters (policy and ops sides). We intended to keep membership fairly static for first 2 years as we got the group firmly established. We’re now at the point where we want to consider revisiting the composition of the group --- local CICs, new SPOs, etc.

6. Priorities – 1st Year National RAP Conference RAP Inventory
Staff Training (CIC and SPO)
Overseas Orientation for GARs
GAR Health Needs
Redesign of RAP
Conference: we came close to holding this in 2006 but had to hold off due to election call – will talk more about the conference later on
2. Inventory: WG agreed that an inventory of the RAP program was needed. A snapshot in time – after 8 years, what does the program look like across the country. Was in-depth examination of every RAP SPO and local CIC…highlighted best practices, described individual service delivery models, measured frequency of and staff hours allocated to specific activities and identified key challenge areas. Many of the findings confirmed the anecdotal info coming in – however there were some surprises – for example – Contact with GARs: Interaction with GARs is 46% of officer time – more than income support & other duties. Volunteer Inputs: RAP benefits from very significant volunteer contribution. Average GAR family receives 33.2 hours of client services from volunteers. This is almost equal to # hours by paid staff. Volunteers make significant contribution to all aspects of RAP except financial orientation & POE services. Health Care Inputs: found that 61% of SPOs spend more than 5 hrs of health care support time per GAR family. Volunteers contribute another 5 hrs, making it the most resource-demanding activity even though it is technically not part of RAP. Note importance placed on this subject in conference where 7 of the 25 sessions deal with medical issues to a certain extent. Outside Funds: inventory asked SPOs to report non-RAP funds which were collected and allocated for programs/services for GARs. Over $1 million was reported - matching apprx 12% of SPO budgets at the time and this figure does not include any ISAP funds since it is well known that ISAP funding is used to support the burden and cost of initial RAP services but it is difficult to place a dollar figure on the amount.
3. Training: CIC and SPO members felt training was a key issue. We agreed 1st step was to conduct a training needs assessment to confirm need for training and to identify the nature and content of a training program. The assessment identified what type(s) of training CIC and Service Provider Organization (SPO) staff currently receive, what type of training is required, and what courses are available to meet the needs of SPO & CIC staff. The assessment also identified what gaps exist and made recommendations as to what types of courses need to be made available for staff. In terms of major findings, assessment revealed that managing client health issues was the #1 training concern for SPOs and #2 for CIC staff; techniques for managing unique client profiles (elderly, illiterate, etc.) was #3 for both CIC and SPO staff and the #1 issue for CIC RAP staff was training on case management skills and income support administration.
4. O/S Orientation: WG reported that info delivered o/s (formally & informally) has direct impact post-arrival. Important that o/s orientation for GARs be practical, consistent and accurate. In the course of looking at this it was discovered that COA no longer had a RAP component – our response was to work with IOM to build a RAP module back into the COA curriculum for GARs. This has now been implemented.
5. GAR health needs: while the WG recognized that health care delivery is certainly beyond the scope of RAP, the health needs of GARs was nonetheless considered a priority issue given that the RAP program is responsible for meeting their immediate & essential needs. therefore, we must push for enhanced access and service in this critical area. One immediate thing we were able to do was to add a “health services component” to the RAP inventory which gave us a good picture of the various systems in place at SPOs to support early health & medical interventions. And as I already mentioned, the inventory revealed that addressing the clients’ health condition is the most time and resource-intensive aspect of RAP delivery. As you can appreciate, improving health care delivery is a complex challenge – whether you’re dealing with funding, infrastructure, the supply of practitioners or the layers of jurisdictions involved. However, this program has many success stories to share in this area – and in every case, cooperation and coordination, was one of the keys to success.
6. Redesign of RAP: lastly one large effort that commenced in 2005 was the thinking around the redesign of RAP. 1st step was to complete the inventory which would provide a good overhead view of the program. Since then a lot of material has been put to paper and this has allowed us to provide decision-makers with what we believe are sound options and recommendations. The next major piece in our examination of the design of RAP is the first dedicated study of RAP’s income support system. As many of you know, SPARC, the social planning and research council of BC and CISSA-ACSEI – the national umbrella organization for settlement agencies is conducting the study at this time. The report will assess the comparability between RAP and provincial social assistance programs as well as provide an in-depth examination of the adequacy of RAP income support to provide for the needs of GAR clients. The final report is expected by the end of May.

7. Workplan – Year 2 Increase Client Services within RAP
National Roll-Out of Life Skills Program
Services for Children & Youth
Hold RAP Conference
Communicable Diseases Training
Address Health Services for GARs
The RAP WG met in Hamilton last June to map out its workplan for the coming year. The following 6 items were the major tasks we assigned ourselves for year 2 of the group.
1. Client services: the national RAP inventory report confirmed what the WG was saying: the funding for client services within RAP was woefully inadequate given the needs of the clients, the time constraints imposed by the current program design and the expected outcomes. The WG recommended a significant increase to funding allocated for client services. This was approved by CIC management and implemented this past November.
2. Life Skills: coupled with this increase in funding for client services, the WG recommended the national roll-out of the life skills program – also for November Thursday’s plenary session will cover this important initiative in detail but i would like to acknowledge the leadership of Ontario region in developing this concept and sharing it with the rest of us.
3. Children/youth services: as many of you know, the largest demographic within the GAR population is children and youth between 0 and 18 years of age. They make up more than 50% of all GARs and yet RAP services primarily target their parents. Recognizing this disparity between the program’s design and its clientele, the WG recommended that a report be commissioned to document the specific needs of GAR children and youth and to develop a recommended national strategy for improving their settlement outcomes through a series of targeted activities. Kappel Ramji Consulting Group is currently working on this project and it is expected to be completed by the end of June. They will be conducting breakout session #16 on Thursday morning where their initial findings will be reviewed and participants will have the opportunity to help imagine and build options for a potential national GAR children/youth strategy.
4. RAP Conference: many of you will recall the last RAP conference that was held – I believe it was the year 2000 in Calgary. The WG strongly felt that so much had gone on in RAP in the last 6 or 7 years and that the operating and policy environment had changed so much that a national symposium was in order. Well here we are and thank you all so much for not only attending but for the contribution you will make to the success of this conference. And by success, I’m not thinking of the short-term logistics of a well-run event – although I’m certainly hoping for that. A truly successful RAP conference will reap dividends long after we’ve returned home to our jobs as service providers, program administrators or policy makers. Success will be measured in terms of improved outcomes for GARs and a program design and policy framework that is responsive to the needs of today’s refugee clientele.
5. Communicable Diseases Training: the 2 last items on our workplan are related. One of the key training needs identified in last year’s national training needs assessment was in the area of handling the reality of communicable diseases among the refugee population. While systems are in place to prevent the entry of immigrants and refugees with serious communicable diseases, it does happen and we need to be better prepared. In the next few months, work will commence on the development of a training program that will take RAP agencies and local CIC offices through a practical step by step course on how to be prepared in the event of an outbreak, how to limit further exposure, who to contact and what to do. Once developed, the training program will be offered across the country.
6. GAR Health Services: the WG came up with a series of recommendations and plans to make improvements in the area of immediate and essential health services for GARs. I’ve put this item last on the list because much of the work remains undone and we still have a long way to go in this area…as does Canada’s health care system in general. I am pleased, however, with the level of attention being given to this issue at the conference and am confident that we have a good opportunity here to leverage those local and regional best practices into improvements on a national scale.
Thank you

8. RAP Working Group – CIC Perspective
Ron Parent
As Robb and Chris have noted, we have made progress in a number of key areas over the last two years.
RAP WG recommendations have helped lead to increased funding for client services, the nationalization of the life skills initiative, the upcoming communicable disease training, increases in income support and or course this conference.
The RAP WG is a model for such group and provide an example of a collaborative working effort between service providers, CIC regions and NHQ.
We wish to continue with sector engagement as we move towards redesigning the program; Rick Herringer and Jackie Holden will speak to the client centred approach and we would like to see the RAP WG play a leading role in further developing this concept.

9. RAP National Conference 2007
This week provides all of you with the opportunity to:
Expand skills and increase knowledge
Share best practices
Influence the future of RAP – program design
Celebrate the successes of the program
Over the course of the next four days, all of you will have the opportunity to discuss the program, its issues and challenges, to learn and to provide feedback and input to the future of RAP.
While it is apparent that there are many challenges, it is also equally apparent that there are numerous successes that we will celebrate this week.
The people in this room are contributing greatly to one of our country’s proudest humanitarian traditions – to protect refugees and resolve refugee problems worldwide and to assist resettled refugees in rebuilding their lives in Canada.
We look forward to a very positive week.