ARCHIVED - Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation

Archived information

This Web page has been archived on the Web. Archived information is provided for reference, research or record keeping purposes. It is not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards and has not been altered or updated since it was archived. Please contact us to request a format other than those available.

Date: April 2011
Project No. 1570-7/09090

PDF Version (252 Kb, 61 Pages)


The report's Executive Summary in Inuktitut.
The Terms and Conditions of the report in Inuktitut.


Table of Contents


List of Acronyms

CAF
Canadian Art Foundation

CICP
Cultural Industries Certificate Program

EPMRB
Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Branch

IAF
Inuit Art Foundation

IAQ
Inuit Art Quarterly

IIAC
Indian and Inuit Art Centre

INAC
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

NACA
Nunavut Arts and Crafts Association

PAA
Program Activity Architecture

PRA
Prairie Research Associates

RMAF
Results-based Management and Accountability Framework

TB
Treasury Board

Return to Table of Contents 

Executive Summary

The Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Branch (EPMRB) of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) undertook an evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). The purpose of the evaluation was to obtain a neutral perspective on the IAF's successes in achieving its intended outcomes, particularly over the period of 2005–2006 to 2009‑2010; its successes in developing partnerships to most efficiently meet artists' needs; as well as the extent to which the IAF's design and delivery aligns with government priorities in the North and established best practices for cultural arts organizations.

The Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation was undertaken to inform decisions respecting the continuance of the dedicated authority for the IAF: "Contributions to the Inuit Art Foundation for the purpose of assisting Inuit artists and artisans from the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Northern Quebec and Labrador in the development of their professional skills and marketing of their art". This authority is due for renewal on March 31, 2012.

The IAF is a non-profit, Inuit-led organization that has worked since 1989 to support Inuit artists and the development and appreciation of Inuit art. In doing so, the IAF seeks to increase Inuit capacity for social and economic development and Inuit governance. INAC provides the IAF with an annual contribution of $458,000 for core operating and administrative expenses.

The evaluation methodology included a document and file review; a literature review; interviews with INAC and IAF program staff, representatives of other federal, provincial/territorial, or regional government, educational institutions, arts organizations, studios, retailers, and artists; and site visits to communities in each of the four Inuit regions (Nunavut, Inuvialuit, Nunatsiavut and Nunavik). Additionally, interviews were conducted in Yellowknife, Iqaluit and Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Most of the data collection was conducted by EPMRB staff with the exception of a preliminary literature review that was conducted by TK Gussman Associates. Prairie Research Associates (PRA) assisted with interview analysis, findings triangulation, and the drafting of the final report.

Key findings and conclusions from the evaluation are as follows:

 Relevance

Inuit artists within and outside of Canada's North have many unresolved needs, from basic access to equipment to complex communication networks connecting the entire cultural industry. The IAF is aware of these needs and has objectives to address them in a manner beneficial to artists and appropriate to Inuit culture. In doing so, it aligns itself with the broader goals of the Government of Canada regarding cultural expression and economic development for Aboriginal peoples, and with many of INAC's goals for increased prosperity and well-being in the North.

Program design

The design of the IAF outlines the multiple approaches of a strategy to achieve its economic, social, and cultural goals for Inuit artists and their work, but has limited cohesion between activities, particularly in logically linking specific activities to the outcomes which they are expected to contribute. IAF activities over the last several years are all within the Foundation's mandate, but the IAF would benefit from a new overarching structure or long-term plan.

Stakeholders approve of the IAF as a foundation, operating independently from the Government, as this offers a wider range of potential funding sources, and may facilitate IAF activities in areas where the Government would be perceived as interfering with Inuit governance. The majority of stakeholders also agree that the IAF is operating from a unique position in the cultural industries, and any redundancy or duplication of programming is minimal. The IAF has collaborated on a temporary basis with a wide variety of other organizations – academic, artistic, cultural, commercial, and government – but has yet to develop many persistent partnerships. There are indications from IAF staff that this may be a focus for upcoming work.

A number of IAF activities and priorities align with identified best practices for organizations supporting art and artists, including production of the Inuit Art Quarterly (IAQ), emphasis on developing art and business skills, and support for artist-controlled centres of professional development and marketing.

Efficiency and achievement of outcomes

Measurement of impacts resulting from IAF activities is minimal. The Foundation lacks a framework of indicators that could be expected to illustrate its intended results. Little tracking data was available at the time of data collection, even for ongoing activities, including feedback about the Inuit Artists' Shop, specific sales data, or feedback on the Foundation's Cultural Industries Certificate Program (CICP). An absence of reliable and quantifiable data hinders the IAF in being able to make effective and efficient decisions or attract and engage potential partners and supporters.

Due to lack of data on the achievement of outcomes, there are no conclusive grounds on which to determine whether the IAF has made the most effective use of its available resources. The Foundation is still clearly dependent on INAC funding to maintain operations, and other income-gathering activities are unlikely to become profitable enough to change this scenario. However, the potential increases in income from a comprehensive fundraising strategy as used by other foundations, and from use of tracked data to demonstrate the effects of investment in the IAF, are also not known.

There is anecdotal evidence and some documents that note the success of the IAF and many stakeholders praise the Foundation for successes in raising awareness, advancing the academic discourse surrounding Inuit art, and providing benefits to artists. However, a few stakeholders are also sceptical that the IAF has had any significant effect in regards to its intermediate or long-term objectives. Based on the responses of artists who were unaware of the Foundation's work, or felt it was limited to specific regions, there is still significant work to be done in order to realize the role of a national Inuit artists' organization.

 Recommendations

  1. In order to provide clarity of direction and to ensure integration with departmental accountability mechanisms, INAC should re-examine the IAF's position in the Program Activity Architecture. In addition, INAC should consider whether to merge the single dedicated authority supporting the IAF into an existing authority.

  2. Clarify the IAF's role and objectives, including its intended results; its stakeholders and the primary recipients of its services.

  3. Develop an approach to increase awareness of IAF services and to better engage Inuit artists in all regions.

  4. The IAF should continue to develop sustained partnerships with other arts and cultural service organizations to maximize efficiencies, and to make use of existing resources.

  5. The IAF should increase opportunities for fundraising by developing a strategy to attract and leverage additional funds from private and corporate donors.

  6. Clarify and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the IAF's Board of Directors to stakeholders.
Return to Table of Contents 

Management Response and Action Plan

Project Title: Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation
Project #: 1570-7/09090

  1. Management Response
  2. Action Plan 
RecommendationsActionsResponsible Manager (Title / Sector)Planned Implementation and Completion Dates
1. In order to provide clarity of direction and to ensure integration with departmental accountability mechanisms, INAC should re-examine the Inuit Art Foundation's (IAF's) position in the Program Activity Architecture. In addition, INAC should consider whether to merge the single dedicated authority supporting the IAF into an existing authority. We concur. Director, Indian and Inuit Art Centre Start date:
2011-12
The Indian and Inuit Art Centre (IIAC) will work with the INAC Chief Financial Officer Sector and Policy and Strategic Direction Sector to evaluate the IAF's position in the PAA as well as its authority. Completion:
2012-13
2. Clarify the IAF's role and objectives, including its intended results; its stakeholders and the primary recipients of its services. We concur. Director, Indian and Inuit Art Centre Start Date:
June 2011
INAC understands that Inuit artists are the principal recipients of the IAF's services. INAC will develop a performance measurement strategy in order to clarify the IAF's role and objectives, including its intended results; its stakeholders and the primary recipients of its services. Completion:
March 2012
3. Develop an approach to increase awareness of IAF services and to better engage Inuit artists in all regions. We concur. Director, Indian and Inuit Art Centre Start Date:  
2011-12
The IAF will develop strategies to increase awareness of the foundation's mission and services including a public relations/fundraising supplement to the Inuit Art Quarterly (IAQ) to increase awareness of the IAF's mission and activities. The IAF will host an Open House with the board in June. Complementary CDs, highlighting 25 years of IAF activity, will be provided to donors and other interested parties. Completion:
Ongoing annually
4. The IAF should continue to develop sustained partnerships with other arts and cultural service organizations to maximize efficiencies, and to make use of existing resources. We concur. Director, Indian and Inuit Art Centre Start date:
2011-2012
IAF will enhance existing sustainable partnerships with other arts and cultural service organizations like the Nunavut Arts and Crafts Association. Completion:
Ongoing annually
5. The IAF should increase opportunities for fundraising by developing a strategy to attract and leverage additional funds from private and corporate donors. We concur. Director, Indian and Inuit Art Centre Start date:
2011-12
IAF will raise funds from the private sector by specifically targeting its American subscriber list of the IAQ. A professional development agency will be contracted, if resources permit, to produce a planned giving strategy. The Inuit Art Shop will continue to be a valuable source of programming funds. Completion:
March 2012
6. Clarify and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the IAF's Board of Directors to stakeholders We concur. Director, Indian and Inuit Art Centre Start date:
2011-12
IAF will include information about the Board of Directors, who are respected practitioners, and their specific role and responsibilities in the annual public relations supplement in IAQ, as well as on IAF's 25th anniversary CD. Completion:
Ongoing annually

I recommend this Management Response and Action Plan for approval by the Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Committee.

Original signed on April 15, 2011 by:

Judith Moe
Acting Director, Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Branch



I approve the above Management Response and Action Plan.

Original signed on April 15, 2011 by:

Marie-Josée Lévesque
Corporate Secretary, Corporate Secretariat

The Management Response / Action Plan for the Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation were approved by the Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Committee on April 19, 2011.

Return to Table of Contents 

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview

The Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation (IAF) was undertaken to inform decisions respecting the continuance of the dedicated authority for the IAF: "Contributions to the Inuit Art Foundation for the purpose of assisting Inuit artists and artisans from the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Northern Quebec and Labrador in the development of their professional skills and marketing of their art". This authority is due for renewal on March 31, 2012.

In line with Treasury Board (TB)'s Policy on Evaluation, the objective of the evaluation was to examine the Foundation's continuing relevance as well as its performance in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and economy. It also examined issues related to design and delivery. The evaluation covers IAF activities from 2005-2006 to 2009-2010.

This report is organized in the following manner:

1.2 Program Profile

1.2.1 Background and Description

The IAF is a non-profit organization incorporated in 1989. It is an Inuit specific arts service organization and the only Inuit art service organization at a national level. Governed entirely by Inuit artists and northern cultural workers, the Foundation operates as a professional development service to artists by offering training and resources, information on competitions and grants, and networking opportunities. As well as providing support to art producers in Arctic communities, the IAF also assists in promoting Inuit art, across Canada and the world.

Initially, the IAF was created to address concerns of stakeholders, including specialists and dealers, that the production of fine Inuit art was a critical element of the northern economy, but was in a state of decline and required intervention strategies to stimulate both the quantity and quality of art being produced. The organization was designed to function as an "implementer/facilitator" working with other organizations. It was intended to work with Inuit art producers to reverse this declining trend, and since its inception, has been working to improve the quality and accessibility of Inuit art.

The focus has shifted in the last two decades towards facilitating opportunities for artists. In order to support its mandate to facilitate the creative expressions of Inuit artists and to foster a broader understanding of these expressions worldwide, the IAF engages in four main pillars of activity:

The last evaluation of the IAF was published in 2001 and covered a ten-year period ending in 1999. The evaluation focussed on the Foundation's effectiveness in meeting its objectives; services provided to Inuit artists and level of satisfaction; cost-effectiveness, cost recovery and revenue generation; and funding alternatives.

The evaluation determined that there was a need for greater clarity in the IAF's vision and identified a need for a greater presence and communication in the North. It noted that the IAF should ensure its programs and services were known among its primary clientele (artists). It also found that the IAQ had proven to be a successful marketing activity that had raised the profile of Inuit art both within and outside of Canada. Although the IAF had succeeded in diversifying its funding sources through its publication of the IAQ and direct selling of Inuit art, it was recommended the Foundation give greater consideration to private sector sources of funding. It was also recommended that the Foundation should ensure that the members of its Board of Directors be subject to conflict of interest guidelines; as a minimum, board members should not have access to the Foundation's services.

1.2.2 Program Objectives and Expected Outcomes

Expected results and outcomes of the IAF most closely align with the departmental Program Activity Architecture (PAA) under The Government. This Program Activity supports the Strategic Outcome of good governance and co-operative relationships for First Nations, Inuit and Northerners. The IAF's activities fall under the Governance and Institutions of Government. The contribution agreement for the IAF is managed by the Indian and Inuit Art Centre (IIAC), which is housed within the Corporate Secretariat and its activities fall under the banner of Internal Services. As such, the Corporate Secretariat is tasked with contributing to the overall effective and responsible management of the Department as a whole, positioning Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) to achieve all of its Strategic Outcomes.

Activities, objectives, and outcomes are listed in the logic model for the contribution to the IAF. The IAF's immediate objective is to assist Inuit artists to develop their skills, both as artists and in the marketing and promotion of their art. The expected results are improved economic opportunities for sales and copyright fees for Inuit artists, improved accessibility of northern artists to cultural industries, and increased awareness and appreciation of Inuit art and artist for Canadians and others. The intermediate outcome of federal investments is improved economic and social conditions for Inuit artists with a final outcome of strengthening communities and the economy of Inuit while increasing Aboriginal governance, especially in the cultural economic industries related to Inuit art.

A Performance Measurement Strategy is outlined in the 2003 Results-based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF). The Foundation's contribution agreement does not have a performance measurement strategy. However, the IAF provides INAC with some data to satisfy the terms and conditions of the contribution agreement, including copies of their publication, the IAQ, reports of their activities and IAF board meetings, as well as their annual audited financial revenues and expenditures reports.

1.2.3 Program Management, Key Stakeholders and Beneficiaries

INAC provides core funding in the amount of $458 000 for the IAF's operating and administrative budget. The Director of INAC's Indian and Inuit Art Centre meets with the IAF Board of Directors at their bi-annual meeting in Ottawa, as well as on quarterly basis with the Executive Director and staff of the IAF to discuss the progress of the IAF programs and activities, and for advice and consultation on issues and concerns related to the INAC mandate. The centre also maintains reporting requirements as per the terms and conditions of the contribution agreement. The IAF is primarily responsible for the development of Inuit artists' professional skills, marketing of their art, and raising awareness of Inuit art and artists. It is also responsible for raising public and private funds to supplement INAC's annual contribution. The day-to-day operations of the Foundation are managed by the Executive Director and six staff. The IAF Board of Directors is comprised of eight to ten Inuit artists and cultural workers that meet twice annually to approve the IAF work plan, budget, and financial statements.

In addition to the Government of Canada and the IAF, key stakeholders are identified in the terms and conditions of the contribution agreement to include Inuit art specialists, dealers, gallery curators, art collectors, educators, and Inuit artists. The beneficiaries of the contribution are Inuit artists, who access the services provided by the IAF, and those who wish to access Inuit art or artists for various purposes.

1.2.4 Program Resources

The IAF is supported by "Contributions to the Inuit Art Foundation for the purpose of assisting Inuit artists and artisans from the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Northern Quebec and Labrador in the development of their professional skills and marketing of their art"

Through this authority, which is due for renewal March 31, 2012, INAC provides the IAF with $458,000 in contributions annually. INAC has provided core operating and administrative contributions since 1988. The IAF receives short-term project grants from the Department of Canadian Heritage for activities such as festivals (Qaggigs) and marketing strategy for their publication, the IAQ.

Total expenditures for the Foundation fluctuate annually depending on support secured from a variety of funders, with INAC accounting for approximately 40-45 percent of the IAF's core funding and administrative costs. Between 2007 and 2009, the Foundation received a one-time contribution from Canadian Heritage of $274,437 to assist in launching its online exhibitions. Donations account for seven to nine percent of revenue. Revenue is also earned by IAF activities through communications (IAQ subscriptions and advertising), CICP fees, and the Inuit Artists' Shop. Revenues and Expenses for the years 2009 and 2010 are listed in Tables 1 and 2 below.

Table 1: Revenue of the Inuit Art Foundation for the years 2009 and 2010

Revenue20102009
INAC Development Contribution $458,000.00 $458,000.00
Grants and contributions – Canadian Heritage $62,944.00 $250,607.00
In kind grants and contributions $24,422.00 $40,260.00
Workshop Fees (CICP)   $21,661.00
Inuit Artists' Shop $163,298.00 $148,007.00
Communications (IAF and others) $86,671.00 $134,825.00
Donations $81,982.00 $67,356.00
Interest and foreign exchange $1,210.00 $3,385.00
Endowment income (loss) $4,107.00 $(8,304.00)
Other $2,784.00 $500.00
Total $885,418.00 $1,116,297.00


Table 2: Expenses of the Inuit Art Foundation for the years 2009 and 2010

Expenses20102009
Total Administration Expenses [Note 1] $521,759.00 $556,550.00
Salaries and benefits $299,181.00  
Casual Labour $318.00  
Corporate Rebranding $10,880.00  
Professional Fees $5,675.00  
Accounting Services $39,176.00  
     
Office Expenses $145,925.00  
     
Board Meetings $20,604.00  
     
Amortization $8,413.00 $12,196.00
     
Programs [Note 2]    
Communications $109,149.00 $136,769.00
Training and Development $87,566.00 $323,445.00
Inuit Artist Shop $150,995.00 $162,171.00
Programming sub-total $347,710.00 $622,385.00
Total expenses $877,876.00   $1,191,131.00 [Note 3]


Return to Table of Contents 

2. Evaluation Methodology

2.1 Evaluation Scope and Timing

Relevance and performance are the focus of the evaluation. The evaluation also contains questions related to design and delivery. The scope of the evaluation includes all program activities between 2005-2006 and 2009-2010.

Terms of Reference were approved by INAC's Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Committee in May 14, 2010. Fieldwork was conducted between November 2010 and January 2011.

2.2 Evaluation Issues and Questions

In line with the Terms of Reference, the evaluation focused on the following issues:

Relevance

Effectiveness - Success (or Performance)

Demonstrations of Efficiency and Economy

Design and Delivery  

Other evaluation issue(s)

2.3 Evaluation Methods

The evaluation team used multiple lines of evidence to explore the evaluation questions (see Appendix A) and improve reliability and validity of the evaluation findings through the triangulation of results. Qualitative data was the primary source of information for the findings, with the use of quantitative evidence when available.

Most of the data collection was conducted by the Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Branch (EPMRB) staff with the exception of a preliminary literature review that was conducted by TK Gussman Associates. Prairie Research Associates (PRA) assisted with interview analysis, findings triangulation, and the drafting of the final report.

2.3.1 Literature Review

A preliminary literature review was conducted by TK Gussman Associates and later supplemented by EPMRB staff. Sixty-two sources were examined on issues of cultural policy and arts funding; performance measurement and the arts; arts and community economic development linkages; and support for indigenous arts and crafts. The focus of the search for relevant literature was on art programs in Canada and other jurisdictions that target indigenous and remote communities.

2.3.2 Document and File Review

A review of 25 government and IAF documents included: program and policy documentation and approvals; previous evaluations, implementation reports, reviews and audits; IAF Annual Reports (2005-2006 to 2009-2010); the Canadian Heritage Project Artist Survey, IAF: 20 Year Review and IAF: Strategic Business Plan, project documents, including the Inuit Art Quarterly; and related websites such as Inuit Art Alive.ca, Virtual Museum.ca, and Inuit Art.org.

2.3.3 Key Informant Interviews

Approximately 34 key informant interviews were conducted with a variety of interviewees, including: INAC and IAF program staff [8], federal/provincial/territorial/regional government departments [11], educational organizations [3], arts organizations, studio operators, art wholesaler s, retailers, and artists [12]. Analysis of this line of evidence was conducted by PRA using NVivo 9 software.

2.3.4 Site Visits

In order to gather in-depth information on the IAF's work and interaction with end-users/stakeholders, four communities (Pangnirtung, Nunavut; Nain, Labrador; Ulukhaktok, Northwest Territories; and Inukjuak, Quebec) were visited. EPMRB staff visited studios, galleries, co-ops and educational institutions to conduct interviews and obtain documents. Interviews in each community were arranged by a local co-ordinator who was familiar with the local art industry. For many interviews, an Inuktitut-English interpreter was used. Interviews were also conducted with provincial and regional government staff, art organizations, and art purchasers. Inuit artists [28] with varying levels of interaction with the IAF were interviewed, including members of the Board of Directors and past CICP participants. Inuit artists who had not participated directly in those programs were also interviewed to determine the impact of programs on non-participants in the community. Interviews were also conducted in Yellowknife, Iqaluit, and Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

The sites were selected based on discussions held at an IAF Board of Directors Meeting, a review of the IAF documents, and a review of community statistical information. Collectively, these site visits allowed for an assessment of each community's artist needs, an indication of involvement with the IAF, and/or the prevalence of other art initiatives and organizations. It was important to examine communities with a diverse geographical representation, so each Inuit region (Nunavut, Nunatsiavut, Inuvialuit, and Nunavik) was visited.

Table 3: Key Informants, including Site Visit Interviewees

CategoryNumber of Interviews
INAC Program Staff 5
Inuit Art Foundation 3
Other Government Departments/Agencies 5
Provincial/Territorial and Regional Government 6
Educational Institutions 3
Other Arts-related Services and Organizations 12
Inuit Artists 28
Total 62

2.3.5 Methodological Considerations, Strengths and Limitations

2.4 Stakeholder Engagement

In line with EPMRB's Engagement Policy, representatives from the Indian and Inuit Art Centre, Inuit Art Foundation, Inuit Art Foundation Board of Directors, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, and Inuit Relations Secretariat were engaged at different stages in the evaluation process. Representatives from these organizations provided contact information for key informants, documentation, reviewed the evaluation Terms of Reference, methodology report, preliminary findings and the final report.

2.5 Roles, Responsibilities and Quality Assurance

EPMRB of INAC's Audit and Evaluation Sector was the project authority for the Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation and managed the evaluation in line with EPMRB's Engagement Policy and Quality Assurance Strategy.

Nearly all data collection was conducted by EPMRB staff. TK Gussman Associates provided some of the preliminary research for the literature review and PRA analyzed data and drafted the final report. EPMRB ensured that project were adequately planned, organized and carried out by experienced and competent personnel. The Advisory Committee reviewed the Terms of Reference, methodology report, preliminary findings, and the final report. The methodology and draft reports were peer reviewed by EPMRB for quality assurance.

Return to Table of Contents 

3. Evaluation Findings - Relevance

This section describes key findings drawn from three lines of evidence: the document review, literature review, and key informant interviews. Findings are organized under the general headings of relevance, design and delivery, effectiveness of performance, effectiveness of economy, and adherence to best practices, and respond directly to the issues and questions defined in the evaluation framework.

3.1 Relevance to art and artists

Question 1: To what extent does the IAF address an ongoing need?

The IAF has effectively identified major needs in Inuit cultural and economic development, and its activities are designed to address a number of those needs. The IAF has modest resources with which to engage issues that affect Inuit artists and communities on a vast scale, and it has continued to adjust its methods of delivery to ensure its ongoing relevance in response to the changing environment of northern cultural industries. The IAF is the only organization explicitly focused on supporting the development of quality Inuit art.

The IAF is primarily an informational resource, best able to promote awareness of Inuit art and artists, form connections between groups and individuals in cultural industries, and provide opportunities for artists to undertake professional development. Stakeholders and literature agree that the arts infrastructure in the North is minimal, and Inuit artists still face challenges in meeting basic needs such as access to art materials, equipment, and workspace. [Note 4] A 2006 survey of nearly 100 Inuit artists conducted by the IAF found that 78 percent of respondents have difficulties obtaining materials. [Note 5] Severalinterviewees agreed that it would not be practical for the IAF to seek to provide for these needs through direct funding, given its level of resources and mandate in this area. Rather, the IAF staff noted that activities are intended to develop artists' capacity to build the infrastructure they need and access other sources of support.

The evolving nature of Inuit art is not clearly addressed by any other organization. Both artists and collectors are reportedly expanding out of traditional work — what some describe as commercial or ‘souvenir' art — and developing interest in contemporary subject matter that is more abstract or representative of modern lives and perspectives. [Note 6] These perspectives can include the societal problems that Inuit communities face,such as violence and substance abuse.

The need for robust arts infrastructure in the North has not been adequately addressed by other existing sources of support. Historically, arts have not been recognized as a priority by most Aboriginal regional governments in Canada, and so funds from local governments are scarce, while investments at both territorial/provincial and national levels have not been sufficient to develop the necessary expertise, networks, and physical infrastructure. [Note 7]

The 2006 IAF Artist Survey found that 49 percent practiced art as their primary means of sustaining their lifestyle, and only 42 percent had applied for a financing grant, despite there being an 87 percent success rate among artists who did apply. [Note 8] Artists and external stakeholders indicated that the low application rate was the result of language barriers and limited capacity to access internet resources.

Artists are aware of their own need for education in the entrepreneurial business of art and grant applications, which would give them access to greater financial resources and improve their ability to promote their own work. Greater access to and familiarity with internet technologies would serve both marketing purposes and allow for more communication between artists, which is also a stated need. By supporting community workshops and programs, the IAF can address these and other issues. Additionally, the Foundation's primary activities include the production of IAQ and the development of online Art Histories, which are used by artists to connect with other parts of cultural industries and to share professional ideas.

Art is economically and socially relevant to Inuit communities. Artists in the Northwest Territories earn less compared to the average worker in the territory, earning 76 percent of the average worker's wage. [Note 9] The 2006 Census indicated a total of $6.4 million in earnings for artists in the Northwest Territories accounting for 0.54 percent of overall territorial workforce earnings. [Note 10] For Nunavut, the 2006 Census indicated that the proportional number of artists in the territorial labour force was 242 percent of the national average, although the average income of a Nunavut artist was approximately 53 percent of the average Nunavut worker. [Note 11]

A 2010 economic impact study in Nunavut found that the arts contributed $33.4 million (including direct and spin off) to the territory's gross domestic product in 2009; the arts and crafts sector accounted for 1,068 full-time jobs in the territory. Artists received approximately $27.8 million from the total $52.1 million in end sales of Nunavut artwork in 2009. [Note 12] Additionally, various international studies support the indication that the development of arts and other cultural industries can induce greater activity in other sectors of the economy.

Both artists and academic literature emphasize the importance of art in addressing societal problems, allowing individuals to engage issues of suicide, depression, and marginalization in a restorative manner, and ultimately providing constructive outlets that reduce the incidence of crime, family violence, substance abuse, and increase employment. Artists have expressed particular concern with the need to engage youth in art, both for the above restorative purposes and to maintain cultural continuity. Academic researchers have additionally argued that Aboriginal art can be a means to correct stereotypes and misperceptions around Inuit culture. [Note 13]

3.2 Relevance to government

Question 2: To what extent do the activities and objectives of the IAF align with INAC and the Government of Canada's priorities?

IAF priorities are supportive of the broad goals of both INAC and the Government of Canada, specifically in terms of supporting economic development in the North and in Aboriginal communities.

The IAF's ultimate goal, according to its current logic model, is to "Strengthen the communities and the economy of the Inuit while increasing Aboriginal governance". The mandate of INAC includes support for Aboriginal peoples and Northerners in creating economically sustainable and prosperous communities in good health and general social well-being, and increasing their participation in the economic, social, and political development of all of Canada. [Note 14] While INAC does not have any specific commitment to the development of cultural industries, the IAF's objectives are expected to have sustainable social and economic benefits and increase Inuit communities' integration with the rest of Canadian society, to mutual benefit.

The priorities of the Government of Canada related to IAF activities and objectives are expressed in the Federal Framework for Aboriginal Economic Development, Canada's 2010 Budget Plan, and active federal support for arts and culture. The Framework seeks to strengthen Aboriginal human capital and entrepreneurship, and increase economic integration through new partnerships. [Note 15] The 2010 federal budget contained a commitment to skills development for Canadian workers and superior economic opportunities for Aboriginal Canadians and the North in general. [Note16] Federal policy already includes departmental programs and Crown corporations such as the Canada Council for the Arts, which seeks to promote the creation, study, and appreciation of art. These clearly indicate federal priorities are in support of IAF capacity-building efforts for Inuit artists, communication within cultural industries, promotion of Inuit art, and pursuit of economic benefits through art.

Question 3: To what extent is the IAF and its outcomes/policy framework properly positioned in INAC's current PAA?

The IAF is currently positioned under the Government within INAC's PAA, which aligns with IAF goals to increase Aboriginal self-sufficiency. The Foundation also has strong associations with the Economy, the People, and the North.

The IAF's most appropriate position is not entirely clear, and no sources strongly support or oppose repositioning the IAF. No interviewed stakeholders expressed concerns that IAF operations are impeded by its place in the PAA, being largely satisfied that it is relevant to INAC's objectives. IAF staff noted that the Foundation seeks to create self-sufficiency among Inuit artists, providing them with the information they need to engage in professional development, expand their business, and other various goals. As an Inuit-led foundation, it is expected to be responsive to the needs of Inuit communities and advocate for them elsewhere. These objectives align with the Government outcome of "Good governance and co-operative relationships for First Nations, Inuit, and Northerners".

The Economy includes efforts towards the "Economic well-being and prosperity of First Nations, Inuit, and Métis", which is also expected to result from IAF initiatives, and is a direct goal of activities such as the copyright negotiations within the Foundation's Inuit Art Services and the Inuit Artists' Shop. [Note 18] An argument was also made that the IAF aligns most closely with The People and the outcome of "Individual and family well-being for First Nations and Inuit". This statement was based on the IAF's work in developing individual artists' capacity and promoting education. However, neither of these pillars of the PAA can fully encompass the IAF's cultural objectives, and each may not address either the economic or the people-focused goals of the Foundation.

A better fit could be the area of Innovation and Partnerships under the North, which would lead to the outcome whereby "The people of the North are self-reliant, healthy, skilled, and live in prosperous communities". [Note 19] The IAF's current Strategic Business Plan indicates that the Foundation may look to define its role more specifically as a facilitator of other organizations' activities and this pillar is sufficiently broad to include social, economic, and governance goals. [Note 20] However, not all of Canada's Inuit artists reside in the North, and the IAF's mandate includes all Inuit artists, including those in the South.

The IAF's contribution agreement is administered by the IIAC. The IIAC is housed within the Corporate Secretariat and its activities fall under the banner of Internal Services. As such, the Corporate Secretariat is tasked with contributing to the overall effective and responsible management of the department as a whole, positioning INAC to achieve all of its Strategic Outcomes. According to its staff, the IIAC's activities are aligned with The People and The Economy. By contrast, the IAF is aligned with The Government. This may be adversely affecting the Foundation's ability to evaluate and improve on its operations—for example, the IAF has not developed appropriate performance indicators since 2003—and complications within the PAA are believed to have contributed to this oversight.

It should be noted that through the data collection process undertaken for this evaluation, challenges were noted in collecting data that could allow for the attribution of impacts to the IAF, given that it is a single initiative with a dedicated authority. It was suggested that there could be benefits to folding the IAF into another authority with related outcomes relevant to community and economic development and strengthened Aboriginal governance. If an evaluation might more easily attribute impacts to the larger organization, then it could be expected to have more available data. In such a scenario, an evaluation could address multiple programs simultaneously for a more efficient evaluation process.

Return to Table of Contents 

4. Evaluation Findings - Design and Delivery

4.1 Clarity of roles for the IAF and INAC

Question 4: Are the roles and responsibilities of the IAF and the Government of Canada clear?

The responsibilities of the IAF are documented on some matters, but unclear on others. Definitions of key concepts are inconsistent, particularly IAF objectives and the definition of stakeholders. The overall role of the IAF appears to be unclear for many stakeholders and needs to be communicated clearly. Responsibilities in relation to INAC's role are more clearly defined; however, INAC's role as it pertains to results-based management should be strengthened.

The IAF Board of Directors is responsible for setting policy and internal guidelines, approving the work plan and controlling the Foundation's finances. These activities are conducted at the board's biannual meetings and all board members must be Inuit artists or cultural workers. The operational protocol including conflict of interest guide for the board is not clear to some stakeholders, although a recommendation from the 2001 evaluation of the Foundation suggested that conflict-of-interest guidelines be established and board members be restricted from accessing IAF services. [Note 21]

The Board of Directors protocol, which is not available as a public document, might address stakeholder's concerns if it were communicated openly. It has been indicated by IAF staff that members of the board act as volunteer resource personnel for their communities, providing support and advice through workshops, radio talks, public demonstrations, and other events. Stakeholders vary widely in their views on how the IAF can and should best serve artists.

Among those who were familiar with the IAF, many were aware of the Foundation as a capacity-building and artist advocacy group. Others stated that it is appropriate for the IAF to provide grants for tools, materials, and the basic needs of artists, or contribute to artist travel funds in conjunction with other organizations. However, others stated it would not be practical for the IAF to provide for these needs through direct funding, given its level of resources and mandate in this area. Some stakeholders spoke positively of the IAF's past work in purchasing and dealing in Inuit art, while others were adamant that the IAF should focus on promotion but not become directly involved in the industry. Some were not clear as to whether the IAF had any influence on government policy related to Inuit art.

There were inconsistencies in references to stakeholders between IAF funding documents and the opinions of the IAF expressed through interviews and documents. IAF funding documentation indicates that IAF programs are intended for Inuit artists in both the north and south of Canada and that programs should also benefit Inuit art businesses, including private galleries, dealers, wholesalers, and agents; Canadian art and cultural industries including public art galleries and museums; Government departments and agencies; and the Canadian public. [Note 22] By contrast, IAF reports indicate that the operating philosophy is to nurture a small group of committed artists producing high-level art to benefit the whole range of production. [Note 23] Furthermore, IAF staff noted that art retailers are not their stakeholders and that Inuit artists have always been the primary recipients of their services. It has been suggested by some external stakeholders that the IAF should endeavour to include southern Inuit artists within the scope of its programming to a greater extent.

It remains unclear whether the IAF seeks to support all types of Inuit art or only specific medium. Visual art such as carving, printmaking and wall hangings have received ongoing support, but there have been past instances of support for jewellery making and throat-singing.  There are no guidelines available to determine which artists are entitled to receive support, including complimentary copies of the IAQ. Some stakeholders believe that this conflicts with statements that the IAF is representative and supportive of all Inuit artists. The definition of high‑level or quality art was not found in documents, but was defined by IAF staff as "art that is sold by members of the Art Dealers Association of Canada or collected by major public galleries. Quality of art is defined by the commitment of the maker and the originality and desirability of the product."

The responsibilities of INAC are set out in the IAF contribution agreement and regular contact has been maintained between the Director of the IIAC and IAF personnel. In addition to attending the regular scheduled meetings, IIAC staff have indicated that they maintain frequent informal contact with the IAF.

INAC does not and has not sought to control IAF activities, policy, or expenditures, although they do require regular reports on IAF finances and indicators of program impacts. The IAF reports in a timely manner to fulfill some reporting requirements, including financial statements and annual reports, but there remains a disconnect between the IAF and INAC, as interviewees in both organizations did not have the same understanding of roles and responsibilities. This miscommunication may have affected the availability of performance-based data. The IAF and IIAC will need to collaborate in order to clarify roles and reporting responsibilities to emphasize results-based program management.

4.2 Logical cohesion of IAF operations

Question 5: Does the Foundation have clearly defined objectives, activities, outputs, and outcomes (to which all parties agree)?

IAF activities have changed substantially over the last few years, such that it is not clear whether the Foundation's most recent logic model, developed in 2006, accurately reflects their objectives and methods of operation. The 2006 model does not describe or clearly indicate the expected logical sequence by which activities will lead to the achievement of outcomes.

Although INAC has expressed approval of IAF operations, it is not clear what INAC's expectations are for the Foundation in terms of the magnitude of impacts. Most stakeholders do agree that the IAF Board of Directors has ensured that the needs and concerns of artists are represented in IAF operations, indicating an overall coherence of activities towards stated objectives.

Question 6: Can the current design of the IAF and its implementation be reasonably expected to contribute to the program outcomes?

Although the current logic model is incomplete, it is reasonable to conclude that the IAF's activities support expected outcomes based on best practices for promotion and advocacy in cultural industries. As is discussed in detail below (see Section 5.1), little information is available to substantiate a causal link between program activities and outcomes.

The sequence of activities, outputs, and outcomes needs to be communicated clearly to stakeholders if the IAF is to identify and connect with potential partner groups and organizations. The 2006 logic model lists expected immediate, intermediate, and final outcomes from IAF activities, which are categorized under four pillar activities: Communications, Fundraising, Marketing and Promotion, and Training and Development. However, the model is vague in distinguishing activities from outputs, and in defining links from activities and outputs to immediate outcomes. It is not clearly explained which outputs are expected to contribute to a given outcome, or whether any relationships or interdependencies exist between concurrent activities or outcomes. More recently, the IAF developed Work Plans for 2008-2009 and 2010‑2011 describing some connections between activities and expected outcomes, indicating the Foundation is making some progress in this area; however, a long-term plan and data collection strategy would strengthen logical cohesion of the IAF's activities for the future.

As part of a Canadian Heritage-funded capacity building exercise in 2006, the IAF conducted an artist survey and 20-year review to determine the needs of artists and set priorities. The exercise resulted in the drafting of a Strategic Business Plan, which identified strategic issues and opportunities. [Note 24] However, over the past five years, IAF activities have changed in response to a number of factors, including the perceived needs of Inuit artists, ongoing considerations of budget limitations and cost-effectiveness, and the need for additional resources to conduct the 20-year review in 2006. Over the last five years, the IAF has variously focused on the provision of information, artist advocacy, direct artist support, art exhibition, facilitation in partnerships with regional organizations, and provision of professional development opportunities. Each type of activity may be valuable, but there is no indication of concerted progression towards long-term goals.

Interviews indicate that INAC's approval of the IAF's objectives is based on an understanding that Inuit artists are not effectively and sufficiently served by the existing programs and organizations targeting Canada's artist community, including those specific to Aboriginal peoples. In the absence of performance measurement data, INAC's ongoing support for the Foundation appears to be based on the practice of ongoing and regular communication between INAC and the IAF to ensure that the Foundation meets government expectations.

Although external individuals and organizations do not have a formal role in the regular planning of the IAF, the Foundation has consulted with stakeholders on a project-by-project basis, seeking input from groups such as the Nunavut Arts and Crafts Association (NACA), in order to inform their decisions.

Return to Table of Contents 

5. Key Findings - Effectiveness

5.1 Performance and Success

Question 7: To what extent is the IAF achieving results in relation to its stated outcomes and objectives?

Over the past five years, the IAF has undertaken activities under each of its four pillars of Communications, Fundraising, Marketing and Promotion, and Training and Development. However, very little information was available at the time of data collection on the outcomes or impacts that resulted from most activities. The Foundation has not selected performance indicators for its activities since the development of the RMAF in 2003. Those indicators were to be used in a 2005 evaluation that was subsequently cancelled, and data appropriate to the RMAF was not available for the current evaluation. The majority of information on program impacts has been drawn from key informant interviews, and has not been verified by other sources.

5.1.1 Achievement of immediate outcomes

Advocacy and promotion of Inuit art

The vast majority of stakeholders highly approve of the IAF's efforts in advocacy and promotion of Inuit art. This is exemplified by the production of the IAQ, which is recognized as a unique and valuable voice for Inuit art. The IAF has also developed online resources such as its website, the Inuit Art Alive exhibition, and the online Inuit/Regional Art Histories, and held public events such as Arts Alive on multiple occasions.

Stakeholders variously praise the IAQ for its professional presentation of artwork, its effectiveness in sustaining and advancing the study of Inuit art among a broad audience, its work in identifying and introducing new artists who go on to prestigious careers, and its demonstrated understanding of Inuit culture. Some stakeholders specifically praised the IAQ's presentation of the regional distinctions in artistic approaches. Other external stakeholders observed that writing on Inuit art outside of the IAQ often approaches the topic from an outsider perspective, which removes the focus from the artist and evolving cultural expression.

The quality of the IAQ discourse is considered to be appropriate to assist readers in understanding the context of art within broader Inuit culture, and to engage buyers with an informed appreciation of works. Art is recognized to be a luxury market, making it particularly vulnerable during the recent global economic difficulties, but IAF staff recognize the importance of holding the interest of those with high discretionary income, and the IAQ has maintained a significant circulation over the past several years.

The existing Inuit Art Histories and Inuit Art Alive websites were noted by external stakeholders for their high accessibility in terms of geographic and linguistic barriers, and work is underway to develop art histories for Nunavik and Nunatsiavut. Information on the results of developing these resources was not available during this evaluation.

Various public events were conducted in the last several years to raise awareness and interest for Inuit art, including Arts Alive events from 2006–2007 to 2008–2009, with additional television coverage for the event coinciding with the 20th anniversary of the IAQ. Some stakeholders indicated that the events attracted international attention, but information was not available on public attendance of these events, increased donations, or any subsequent effects on interest in the IAF.

Some artists, particularly in the western North, have expressed concerns that the IAF has not adequately represented the full range of Inuit art media and artists from all northern regions. The IAF, in its work on the IAQ and elsewhere, is perceived to focus on Nunavut, with some recognition of Quebec and Labrador but little engagement with the Northwest Territories. IAF interviewees expressed challenges in finding artists to represent the Northwest Territories on the Board of Directors, noting that relatively few artists live in that region and that coordinating travel to Ottawa is difficult.

Providing economic opportunities

The IAF has had some successes in providing Inuit artists with economic opportunities. Stakeholders reported that demand for Inuit art has increased, and artists have profited from accessing Inuit Art Services. The IAF continues to facilitate connections between artists, galleries, and other dealers through the IAQ and various networking initiatives.

Although economic effects for artists are a more quantifiable impact than many of the IAF's objectives, little data has been collected to measure these results. An external stakeholder indicated that there had been an economic impact study on Inuit art conducted in the mid-1990s, but little investigation or tracking has occurred since then. The recent Economic Impact Study: Nunavut Arts and Crafts by the Government of Nunavut in 2010 may indicate an increased focus of understanding the role of art in the economy. IAF staff stated that Canadian Inuit art has achieved financial and critical success surpassing any other indigenous art within Canada or elsewhere in the world, attributing some of that success to the Foundation. Several external stakeholders questioned whether any conclusions could be drawn about the IAF without a clear analytical framework and data on appropriate indicators.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that the IAF has been useful in connecting artists with galleries and other buyers, as well as operating the Inuit Artists' Shop. The shop buys Inuit art primarily from wholesalers at a fair standard of compensation and sells art in Ottawa and online. At the time of data collection, no data was available as to the economic impact for artists selling their work at the shop. The shop has achieved self-sufficiency and in 2009–10 operated at a small profit. Some external experts stated the IAQ and online artist profiles and exhibitions are effective in promoting artists to art purchasers.

A number of stakeholders stated that the IAF's work in raising artists' awareness about copyrights, commissions, and other art business issues is valuable. Some sources noted that other organizations also provide similar assistance with copyright as the IAF does through Inuit Art Services. IAF staff noted that the Foundation works with other organizations such as the Cape Dorset artists' co-operative where appropriate.

The IAF provided small grants (around three thousand dollars) through the Community Initiative Program that supported community projects that improve local access to needed materials. Grants were provided to the community of Arviat (in 2006–07) for wall-hanging materials, and to Taloyoak (2006–07) and Repulse Bay (2007–08) for stone quarrying [Note 25]. Information was not available on the impact of these grants; however, it was demonstrated to be a successful enterprise in building relationships with the Nunavut Development Corporation which administered the grants.

Access to cultural industries

Inuit artists are still largely isolated from cultural industries, although a few additional bridges are forming. Various barriers, such as language and geographic distance, restrict artists from making contact with art buyers, such as co-operatives, wholesalers, galleries, and dealers that are not already focused on Inuit art. The IAF provides information on various marketing channels, along with the pros and cons of each. The IAF has not proactively offered the CICP in the last year, and stakeholder views on its effectiveness are mixed.

According to the responses of some interviewees, the definition of ‘cultural industries' with regards to IAF objectives is not entirely clear or effectively communicated.

Artists repeatedly described insufficient lines of communication between artists and cultural industries organizations. Difficulties in travelling between northern regions or into the South were noted by artists to limit their ability to interact with galleries, dealers, and other sources of support including southern-based IAF programming.

Additionally, the lack of Inuktitut capacity in most organizations prevents many Inuit artists from being able to initiate contact without assistance. Both internal and external stakeholders of the IAF are aware of the absence of Inuit from positions in cultural industries. One external stakeholder estimated that there are approximately five curators of Inuit art in galleries or museums in Canada. Furthermore, there are relatively few Inuit working in galleries and shops, including the Inuit Artists' Shop. According to IAF staff, the CICP program has contributed to an increased presence of Inuit in cultural industries. Furthermore, IAF staff noted that the organization played a role in the first Inuk hired as associate professor in art history at Concordia University, as she was supported through the Virginia J. Watt and Dorothy Stillwell Award, an annual scholarship given to encourage Inuit to pursue studies in Inuit art and culture.

The IAF has conducted events that temporarily remove barriers to allow for direct contact between artists and other parts of cultural industries, such as the Arts Alive festivals. While various interviewees praised this event, there was little evidence of the event's long-term effects on raising awareness or building partnerships.

External stakeholders and artists praised the CICP (delivered in 2007, 2008, and 2009) for the program's design and goals. Although the program is adaptable and intended to be tailored for the needs of each participating group, it has not been provided within the last year. According to IAF staff, the CICP is held as requested, as it requires substantial commitment from community members to organize groups to participate. They note that CICP sessions are the outcome of ongoing dialogue between IAF staff and northern cultural workers. The sessions demonstrate some capacity to build temporary partnerships with community organizations.

Past participants of the CICP have included artists, art administrators, gallery managers, community cultural workers, and government arts advisors. [Note 26] All past participants were from communities in Nunavut and Quebec. During interviews, no stakeholders (including participants in the program) mentioned evidence of results for individuals who participated or impact on their communities upon returning from the program. During document gathering for this evaluation, documented feedback from participants was not available.

Stakeholders generally agreed that the IAQ reaches the vast majority of buyers of Inuit art and can therefore enable southern cultural industry buyers to access artists. IAF staff indicated that the IAQ is a useful tool for artists to understand how the art market works.

5.1.2 Achievement of intermediate outcomes

Stakeholders are divided on the degree to which the IAF is successfully effecting social and economic development. Conditions for Inuit artists are reportedly improving, but little data is available to determine the extent of these changes or the degree to which they have resulted from IAF activities. The IAF is perceived to be in a strong position to support social and economic development, but no previous investigation has demonstrated a causal link, and expectations of the IAF in this area are not entirely clear.

Stakeholders and independent research indicate that Inuit people are benefitting from participation in the arts, and artistry is providing useful employment opportunities during difficult economic times, reducing dependency on outside assistance. IAF staff report increases in formation of artists' associations, which suggests that artists are beginning to independently form networks to address their own needs through collaboration. They noted that no other organization has the explicit goal of developing artist associations or the national mandate of Inuit artist development. The IAF also works through workshops and community efforts to develop community artists' associations. It has recently collaborated with NACA in this area.

Some stakeholders believe that the IAF has played a meaningful role in driving this growth. By promoting artists, the IAF may be improving individuals' outcomes and providing encouragement for other artists to seek similar successes. Some stakeholders have suggested that IAF workshops have provided additional skills that are applicable outside of artists' work such as business expertise and that this has lead to improvements in economic conditions.

Other perceptions were uneven about the extent to which improved economic conditions could be attributed to IAF activities.

5.1.3 Stakeholder engagement

Question 8: To what extent is the IAF reaching its audience?

The extent of the target audience for IAF activities is not entirely clear (see Section 4.1). Additional challenges arise as a result of the IAF's location in Ottawa while serving artists primarily in the North. The Foundation has included representation on the Board of Directors from the four target regions of Nunavut, Quebec, Labrador, and the Northwest Territories and the IAQ is distributed to all Inuit communities. However, awareness of IAF services appears to be low in the general artist population, [Note 27] and many IAF activities have primarily focused on Nunavut, with some concerns raised that the Northwest Territories are underserved (see Section 5.2.1).

In developing the Inuit art industry, it is necessary to connect with and consider the perspectives of the broader cultural industry, without allowing other interests to supersede those of the artists. The IAF seeks to address this through the IAQ, which receives input from an editorial advisory board that has included art experts, dealers, and curators of galleries and museums. Internal stakeholders indicate that the IAQ has been able to benefit from the knowledge of these advisors without compromising artist needs, allowing artists to better reach buyers, including the primary system of co-operatives, as well as wholesalers and agents.

Given that the IAQ is received by at least one artist household in all of Canada's 50 Inuit communities, the IAF has overcome some of the initial difficulties in reaching a population spread over such wide distances. [Note 28] However, a number of interviewed artists who knew of the IAQ were still unaware of the IAF, or did not know that the IAQ was an IAF product.

As internet access becomes more widespread through the North, the potential reach of the IAF's online resources similarly increases, including IAQ content, the Artists' Shop, Inuit Artists' College, Inuit Artists' Centre, and the Art Histories. Average monthly visits to the site have reportedly remained steady between 4,000 and 5,000 for some years, although these numbers have recently declined while the site underwent reconstruction. IAF staff noted that the use of new online subscription and donation forms indicates success for the site as a communication tool. There has been no documented effort to determine how accessible or useful artists in the North consider the site to be. The IAF has a strategy for delivering educational services online, but reports that few Inuit artists have internet access and that they will continue to distribute hard copy materials until internet access is universal.

The IAF has made efforts to address the language preferences of artists. [Note 29] Ninety-one percent of surveyed artists indicated that they speak and read Inuktitutut. Sixty-seven percent indicated they could speak and read some English. Fifty-onepercent of surveyed artists prefer to communicate in Inuktitut, while thirty-two percent preferred English and seventeen percent said they use both languages equally. [Note 30] Online IAF resources have included increasing amounts of content in both English and Inuktitut, such as the Inuit Art Alive virtual exhibition and the Art Histories. As the IAQ is still primarily produced in English, many artists that only speak Inuktitut use the magazine for the visuals, some of which are captioned in Inuktitut. There are many dialects of Inuktitut, making it impossible to reflect all languages within the magazine.

The IAF made efforts to engage other media in promoting foundation events in 2006–07, such as newspaper promotions for that year's Arts Alive event, and CBC North and Nunatsiaq News coverage for the Northern Cultural Workers Meeting, both of which took place in Ottawa. Since 2006–2007, press releases and media attention have not been considered significantly in IAF operations or planning, and the Arts Alive festival appears to have been discontinued after 2009. [Note 31] IAF staff stated that the costs associated with hosting Inuit Arts Alive present challenges to the event's continuity.

IAF Board of Directors are expected to act as ambassadors to their communities, promoting the IAF through local media and distributing materials, but any specific successes in this area have not been documented. The 2001 evaluation found that some stakeholders perceived that the IAF Board of Directors were the primary recipients of services. [Note 32] For the current evaluation, a few interviewed stakeholders indicated they had similar perceptions, although there is no further evidence to support this view.

5.2 Efficiency and economy

5.2.1 Context of the IAF among other programming

Question 9: What relationships, similarities, overlap, or duplication exist between the IAF programming and other federal, provincial or private programs/organizations?

Although there are many other organizations supporting culture and economic development in various regions of the North, the IAF appears to be the only national service organization with a mandate for the development of all Inuit art and artists. In each region, there are potential partners with goals that overlap with the IAF to some degree, and the IAF is in a unique position to facilitate and coordinate between organizations, as described in the IAF Strategic Business Plan. Duplication of activities appears to be low.

At the federal level, Canadian Heritage, Industry Canada, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, and the Canada Council for the Arts were all consulted as potential major funders for the IAF in 2003–2004, but all determined that the Foundation's mandate for both cultural and economic development made it ineligible for their support. Several departments, including Canadian Heritage, maintain some support for Aboriginal cultural economic development through funding, investment, advocacy, and brokering. However, besides the IAF, there is no agency or organization taking the lead on Inuit art at the national level.

Each territorial or provincial region is supported by a different group of smaller-scale organizations that focus on local artists and economic development. Nunavut appears to have the most extensive array of such organizations, including programs in the territorial Department of Economic Development and Transportation, NACA, and the Nunavut Development Corporation, as well as regional and community organizations, such as the Kakivak Association operating in the Baffin area. The Canada Council has also begun activities to promote artists in Nunavut after identifying the North as an underserved area.

The Northwest Territories similarly features relevant territory-wide organizations such as the Business Development and Investment Corporation, which has supported artists' co-operatives, and the territorial Department of Industry, Tourism, and Investment. External stakeholders indicate that there are local sources of support in various communities, such as the Ulukhaktok Arts Association and Arts Centre, but connections between communities are weak. Some artists who perceive the Northwest Territories as being underserved by the IAF stated that that they have received various other sources of support but did not provide details.

IAF staff also report that there are relatively few artists' co-operatives in the Northwest Territories and in Labrador, which has presented challenges in finding appropriate representation for the region on the IAF board and in conferences or other events. External stakeholders indicate that the provincial government and Nunatsiavut do provide some cultural programming for Inuit artists in Labrador, and engage in buying and reselling of art, but there is little information on capacity-building organizations similar to the IAF.

In Quebec, stakeholders note that Makivik and the Avataq Cultural Institute are active in the area of arts policy and delivering educational support to Inuit artists in Nunavik. Additionally, La Fédération des coopératives du Nouveau-Québec supports artists by purchasing their work. One external stakeholder specifically noted the recent development by Makivik of an ‘arts coordinator' position that works with the provincial arts council, indicating that this position has been useful and could apply in other regions as well.

There is evidence that the IAF is aware of the concentration of programming in Nunavut and is seeking to direct additional support to less active areas. In 2010, the IAF identified some services or activities that were adequately provided by other organizations and reallocated internal resources accordingly to avoid redundancy, but details on the types of services or organizations were not provided.

Question 10: Are activities being conducted to promote linkages between the IAF and other government or private agencies and departments?

Although the IAF has partnered with many other organizations to implement specific projects, little exists in the way of long-term partnerships. Both internal and external stakeholders have identified potential areas where partnerships could be beneficial to organizational efficiency and effectiveness, thereby benefitting Inuit artists.

The ongoing development of Inuit Art Histories has involved temporary partnerships between the IAF and the Avataq Cultural Institute, Kativik Regional School Board, Makivik Corporation, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, Inuit Broadcasting Corporation, the National Gallery of Canada, the Canadian Museum of Civilization, Acart Communications, Carleton University, and the Canadian Heritage Information Network. Currently, there is no information as to whether any of these partnerships are being investigated as a basis for future collaboration.

The IAF does have an established connection with NACA to share information and expertise, including an arrangement to allow each organization a seat on the other's Board of Directors, and the IAF is reportedly looking for a way to incorporate NACA's detailed information on Nunavut artists and communities. Additionally, the IAF's Inuit Art Services, negotiating copyright on behalf of artists, is provided in consultation with Canadian Artists' Representation/le Front des artistes canadiens.

The Foundation reportedly attempted to establish a broad network of artists' agencies and associations in 2005–06, and seeks to engage them wherever possible, but lacks the capacity to maintain active partnerships outside of specific projects.

Partnerships with other regional organizations have been sought but the IAF has encountered challenges in finding groups with objectives that align with their mandate. For example, external stakeholders indicate that the Labrador Craft Marketing Agency, funded by the provincial government of Newfoundland and Labrador, maintains its focus on increasing sales of crafts, as opposed to the support for artistic development and evolving cultural expression that is the IAF's stated goal.

Stakeholders also observed that economic development corporations may be useful partners but require clear economic incentives to justify engaging with an arts-focused organization. This was successfully demonstrated in a Community Initiative Grants distributed to Taloyoak and Arviat by the IAF, for which the administrative costs of delivering the grant were absorbed by the Nunavut Development Corporation. Collecting data on the economic impacts of IAF activities could be very useful when seeking similar future partnerships.

5.2.2 Diversity of funding support

Question 11: How effective are the IAF's efforts to secure/leverage funds and increase revenues through fundraising and other partnerships?

The IAF is still primarily dependent on INAC for approximately half of its annual budget despite efforts to access other sources of revenue. Fundraising efforts for specific projects and initiatives have reportedly been more successful but have not led to long-term partnerships. A more extensive fundraising strategy could be valuable, following best practices of similar organizations, and enhanced with tracked data on the results of IAF activities.

Question 12: Are there funding alternatives for the IAF and/or Inuit art and artists? 

In its various activities, the IAF has attempted to support Inuit artists by adopting approaches that are commonly used among cultural arts organizations, including direct granting of funds, educational programming, network-building events, and various methods of promotion and awareness-raising. Funding options for the IAF have been explored, and while there are opportunities to diversify the sources of income, it appears unlikely that the Foundation could significantly shift its funding model without affecting its methods, activities, or objectives.

While the Inuit Artists' Shop in Ottawa benefits artists, it is not yet a source of significant revenue that the IAF could use to support its programs, which is a stated objective for the shop. Sales in 2009–2010 exceeded expectations, suggesting that the shop may prove to be an effective long-term investment.

The IAF continues to supplement its revenues through other means, such as advertising space within and paid subscriptions to the IAQ. Revenue from the IAQ declined from 2005–2006 levels during the recent economic downturn but appear to be recovering. Revenue in 2010 from all communication activities, including IAQ, was comparable to that amount received through private donations, constituting between nine and ten percent of total IAF revenues.

Information on revenue from tuition to the CICP and fees for Inuit Art Services concerning copyright negotiations was not available at the time of data collection. Based on the data provided, expenses for the CICP appear to be more costly than the revenue generated. The relative contribution of each income source in the IAF budget varies from year to year.

One of the major benefits of the IAF being a foundation is that it is eligible for private donations, and this potential income should be explored to its fullest extent. Donations were a substantial source of support for the Community Initiative Grants, and are estimated to consistently cover seven to nine percent of total annual costs. Donations have been unreliable as a revenue stream over time despite being drawn from a diverse range of public and private organizations. IAF staff observed that donations are generally highest after the Foundation conducts special events in the South and draws in large numbers of people, suggesting that additional efforts to attract donations could be effective to increase or stabilize the rate of this income.

Several best practices for maximising leveraged funds have already been identified, beginning with increased information tracking on the results of IAF programs and fundraising activities. Past research indicates that clear evidence of the IAF's effects could greatly contribute to attracting donors and motivating sustained support. [Note 33] Clearer performance measurement with financial tracking would allow the IAF to demonstrate its cost-effectiveness to potential donors, granting organizations and corporate investors or charitable groups, and ensure accountability to all supporters of the Foundation.

IAF staff and internal stakeholders are aware of the potential private sources of funding, but perceive that corporations often set rigid criteria on and expect exceptionally high results from their investments. The IAF operates in a niche market and at least one corporation has indicated that they will only fund activities that will reach audiences of many thousands of people.

Contributions to the IAF have previously been secured from Canadian Heritage, Human Resources Development Canada, Industry Canada, and the National Capital Commission, although only Canadian Heritage has been a regular contributor, supporting multiple projects over the past five years. The provincial governments of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Ontario, and Quebec have also provided funds on previous occasions for specific projects. As an Ontario-based organization, the IAF has reportedly faced challenges in accessing funds from other provinces and territories. The IAF's funding partners are primarily federal departments on a project-specific basis.

5.2.3 Efficiency of IAF mechanisms and characteristics

Question 13: Is the IAF an appropriate mechanism for supporting Inuit artists? Are there advantages to operating this program as an Inuit-led foundation?

Stakeholders generally agree that a non-governmental foundation with extensive Inuit leadership is a strong approach for supporting Inuit artists, but hold varying views on the degree to which the current IAF fulfills this potential. There is some evidence that the IAF would not be able to access important lines of financial and personnel resources if it were integrated with INAC or another government body.

Existing research consistently agrees that there is a need for support for artists in the North, which can be directly provided by organizations or through the development of more substantial arts infrastructure. The IAF has worked with both approaches, although its original goals and recent comments from IAF personnel about upcoming directions tend toward the latter.

The vast majority of stakeholders agree that Inuit leadership is the key to achieving the objectives of the IAF, noting that the majority of cultural industries and Inuit-art-related events are out of Inuit control and this is perceived to lead to exclusion of artists in many cases. As an Inuit-led group, the IAF expected to more effectively respond to the needs of Inuit artists and communicate and act on those needs.

Some stakeholders stated that the influence of the Board of Directors, as representatives of Inuit culture, was clear in the shape of IAF policies and activities but others were sceptical that the board had any significant role in developing plans, and suggested that the board primarily approves plans and programs. There was a stated desire for more transparency around board activities to make the roles, responsibilities, and actual activities of the board clear to those outside the IAF.

Operating the IAF as an organization independent of the government provides several advantages, some of which have been noted in previous sections. Integration with INAC or another department would eliminate the IAF's access to donations and further hamper its ability to access funds from granting agencies such as the Canada Council or other government departments such as Canadian Heritage. It appears unlikely that a government program could attract volunteer personnel to the same degree as a charitable foundation, and in addition to the all-volunteer Board of Directors, the IAF uses volunteers to supplement its staff for specific projects.

5.2.4 Best practices

Question 14: What are some best practices for supporting and/or administering cultural art programs?

Certain IAF activities are already consistent with best practices for cultural art organizations, notably, the production of the IAQ and development of educational resources and workshops. Local ownership and leadership of initiatives have been identified as a best practice, and aligns well with IAF goals to create self-sufficient capacity in Inuit communities. The successful practices of art centres in Canada and internationally may inform the IAF in improving the economic outcomes for artists, forming links to southern dealers and galleries, and generally, promoting Inuit art in the Canadian population.

Both internal and external stakeholders described a broad range of practices and organizations that they perceive to be effective for achieving objectives relevant to the IAF. Many of these practices focus on the benefits from implementing programs with the participation of Inuit artists and their communities, rather than developing an outside program and presenting it in a complete form for artists to engage or ignore. Independent of a given program's ability to benefit artists, southern-based organizations must engage northern communities in an inclusive decision-making process.

The need for Inuit artist-led programming connects with the lack of arts infrastructure in the North. Stakeholders expressed a need for stable locations where artists could consistently access equipment, art and business training, communicate with other artists, and connect with other parts of the industry. Art centres represent the self-improving and self-sustaining capacity development that the IAF seeks to create in the North. Such centres can also incorporate the practice of artists' co-operatives and develop a group strategy for the promotion of local artists. The Aurora Arts Society in Yellowknife operates a facility to address many of the above needs, and the NACA in Nunavut provides similar services. Best practices suggest that there is a need for a greater number of smaller-scale centres to serve communities throughout the North.

Aboriginal art centres in Australia and New Zealand were referenced by stakeholders and in literature as exceptionally successful in maintaining a community focus while effectively promoting artists. [Note 34] Amongthese centres, there is evidence that the most successful promotional strategy involved a campaign of exhibitions in high-profile international and domestic art galleries. Australian centres commonly employ outside advisors to inform their marketing plans for sales to dealers and galleries in major cities, but final decisions remain in the hands of artists' communities.

Internal stakeholders have recognized the importance of basing decisions on artist input, but besides the Board of Directors, there is no evidence of an existing IAF mechanism to regularly receive artist input. Communication in both directions is facilitated by the formation of additional artist associations, which allow organizations such as the IAF to reach multiple artists through a single contact point, and by increasing IAF capacity in Inuktitut to accommodate artist ability and preferences.

In terms of IAF-driven activities, the production of the IAQ aligns with the practice of other arts organizations, such as the Canadian Art Foundation (CAF). [Note 35] The Canadian Art magazine is considered effective in raising awareness of artists, in conjunction with other CAF activities that the IAF may benefit from exploring, including speaker series and studio- or gallery-based events.

The IAF's development and provision of educational resources may also be a best practice, insofar as it is a common strategy among other arts organizations. However, without performance measurement information, it is not possible to determine whether the IAF's CICP and online resources are the most effective approaches to deliver training and education.

As noted in Section 4.2, best practices also indicate that arts organizations should operate independently from the government to minimize politicization of their activities and that government funding is appropriate, but it should only be included as one of a diverse range of income sources. The IAF operates using both of these best practices.

Return to Table of Contents 

6. Conclusions and recommendations

6.1 Conclusions

Inuit artists within and outside of Canada's North have many unresolved needs, from basic access to equipment to complex communication networks connecting the entire cultural industry. The IAF is aware of these needs and has objectives to address them in a manner beneficial to artists and appropriate to Inuit culture. In doing so, it aligns itself with the broader goals of the Government of Canada regarding cultural expression and economic development for Aboriginal peoples, and with many of INAC's goals for increased prosperity and well-being in the North.

The design of the IAF outlines the multiple approaches of a strategy to achieve its economic, social, and cultural goals for Inuit artists and their work but has limited cohesion between activities, particularly in logically linking specific activities to the outcomes to which they are expected to contribute. IAF activities over the last several years are all within the Foundation's mandate but would benefit from a new overarching structure or long-term plan.

Stakeholders approve of the IAF as a foundation, operating independently from the Government, as this offers a wider range of potential funding sources, and may facilitate IAF activities in areas where the Government would be perceived as interfering with Inuit governance. The vast majority of stakeholders also agree that the IAF is operating from a unique position in the cultural industries and any redundancy or duplication of programming is minimal. The IAF has partnered on a temporary basis with a wide variety of other organizations – academic, artistic, cultural, commercial, and government – but has yet to develop many persistent partnerships. There are indications from IAF staff that this may be a focus for upcoming work.

A number of IAF activities and priorities align with identified best practices for organizations supporting art and artists, including production of the IAQ, emphasis on developing art and business skills, and support for artist-controlled centres of professional development and marketing.

Measurement of impacts resulting from IAF activities is minimal. The Foundation lacks a framework of indicators that could be expected to illustrate its intended results and little tracked data was available even for ongoing activities, including feedback about the Inuit Artists' Shop, specific sales data, or feedback on the CITP. This absence of reliable and quantifiable data hinders the IAF in being able to make effective and efficient decisions or attract and engage potential partners and supporters.

Due to lack of data on the achievement of outcomes, there are no conclusive grounds on which to determine whether the IAF has made the most effective use of its available resources. It is still clearly dependent on INAC funding to maintain operations, and other income-gathering activities are unlikely to become profitable enough to change this scenario. However, the potential increases in income from a comprehensive fundraising strategy as used by other foundations, and from use of tracked data to demonstrate the effects of investment in the IAF, are also not known.

There is anecdotal evidence and some documents note the success of the IAF, and many stakeholders praise the Foundation for successes in raising awareness, advancing the academic discourse surrounding Inuit art, and providing benefits to artists. However, a few stakeholders are also sceptical that the IAF has had any significant effect in regards to its intermediate or long-term objectives. Based on the responses of artists who were unaware of the Foundation's work, or felt it was limited to specific regions or media in art, there is still significant work to be done in order to realize the role of a national Inuit artists' organization.

6.2 Recommendations

  1. In order to provide clarity of direction and to ensure integration with departmental accountability mechanisms, INAC should re-examine the IAF's position in the Program Activity Architecture. In addition, INAC should consider whether to merge the single dedicated authority supporting the IAF into an existing authority.

  2. Clarify the IAF's role and objectives, including its intended results; its stakeholders and the primary recipients of its services.

  3. Develop an approach to increase awareness of IAF services and to better engage Inuit artists in all regions.

  4. The IAF should continue to develop sustained partnerships with other arts and cultural service organizations to maximize efficiencies, and to make use of existing resources.

  5. The IAF should increase opportunities for fundraising by developing a strategy to attract and leverage additional funds from private and corporate donors.

  6. Clarify and communicate the roles and responsibilities of the IAF's Board of Directors to stakeholders.
Return to Table of Contents 

Appendix A- Evaluation Matrix

Table 1: Evaluation Scope and Issues

Issue Questions Evaluation Indicators Literature Review Document and File Review Key Informant Interviews
Program Officials Direct/
Indirect
Stakeholders
External
1. RELEVANCE
To what extent does the IAF address an ongoing need? Extent to which the IAF activities and objectives meet current needs a) Evidence of continuing need to support Inuit artists (e.g. review of Profile of Inuit Artists) a) Evidence of continuing need for Inuit led efforts to support Inuit artists (e.g. review of Profile of Inuit Artists) a) Do you believe there is a continuing need for support of Inuit artists? Why or why not? a) What are the current needs of Inuit Artists? a) What are current needs for Inuit Artists and howcan they best be met?
Extent to which there is a need to improve the quality and accessibility of Inuit art and support the professional development of artists b) Assessment of key challenges facing Inuit Artists living in the North b) Assessment of key challenges facing Inuit artists living in the North b) Do you believe the IAF is addressing these needs? Why or why not? b) How are these needs being met by the IAF?
Extent to which there is a need to market and promote Inuit art and whether it contributes to the local communities c) Evidence that Inuit art contributes to the local communities c) Full range of IAF activities and objectives that address identified needs
To what extent do the activities and objectives of the IAF align with INAC and the Government of Canada's priorities? Consistency with INAC and government priorities. a) Evidence of linkages with federal priorities, policies, strategies a) Evidence of linkages with federal priorities, policies, strategies a) What federal and/or departmental policies do you see the IAF supporting or stemming from? N/A N/A
To what extent is the IAF and its outcomes/policy framework properly positioned in INAC's current PAA? Comparison of IAF objectives and activities with INAC's strategic outcomes (Program Activity Architecture) N/A a) Evidence of the extent to which IAF aligns with and contributes to the current PAA a) How do the IAF outcomes align with and contribute to the current PAA

b) Is the IAF properly positioned under the current SO?
N/A N/A
2. DESIGN AND DELIVERY
Are the roles and responsibilities of the IAF and the Government of Canada clear? Evidence of IAF and INAC roles clearly documented and adhered to N/A a) Evidence of clear documentation of roles and responsibilities outlined and administered by the appropriate party a) What are the roles and responsibilities of INAC? a) What are the roles and responsibilities of INAC? N/A
b) What are the roles and responsibilities of the IAF? b) What are the roles and responsibilities of the IAF?
Does the Foundation have clearly defined objectives, activities, outputs, and outcomes (to which all parties agree)? Demonstration of a logical progression from inputs and outputs of the program to expected outcomes N/A a) Evidence of clear and logical description of objectives, activities, outputs, and outcomes a) What are INACs current expectations for the IAF? a) Are you comfortable with the expected activities and outcomes established by INAC for the IAF? Why/why not? N/A
Demonstration that INAC's expectations for the IAF are consistent with its investment b)How do they align with the desired outcomes outlined in the logic model? b) Are INACs expectations fair and clear? Why/ why not?
c) To what extent were external stakeholders engaged in their development? c) Did your organization contribute to the definition of these objectives?
Can the current design of the IAF and its implementation be reasonably expected to contribute to the program outcomes? Evidence of logical link between activities, outputs, and outcomes a) Evidence that the program design and logic is consistent with identified best practices a) Evidence of the extent to which activities and outputs are leading to the achievement of expected outcomes a) To what extent is the IAF achieving its intended outcomes? a) To what extent is the IAF achieving its intended outcomes? N/A
Evidence that activities and outputs are resulting in intended outcomes b) Is the current design appropriate to meet these outcomes? b) Is the current design appropriate to meet these outcomes?
3. EFFECTIVENESS (SUCCESS/PERFORMANCE)
To what extent is the IAF achieving results in relation to its stated outcomes and objectives? Assessment of impacts against intended outcomes:

Intermediate outcome:
  • Increased capacity building for social and economic development for Inuit in cultural economic industries

  • Improved economic and social conditions for Inuit Artists

Immediate Outcome:
  • Improve accessibility of Inuit artists to cultural industries

  • Improved economic opportunities

  • Increase awareness and appreciation of Inuit art and artists by Canadians and others

  • Assessment of INAC's contribution to these results and impacts
a) Evidence of positive change in the expected outcomes listed to the left a) Evidence of positive change in the expected outcomes listed to the left, including a review of identified indicators (RMAF) and data collected to support them a) What results and impacts have been achieved through the IAF? a) What results and impacts have been achieved through the IAF? N/A
b) Have there been any unintended consequences? b) Have there been any unintended consequences?
More specifically:

c) Has the IAF contributed to economic development opportunities?
More specifically:

c) Has the IAF contributed to economic development opportunities?
d) Has it affected social conditions for Inuit artists? d) Has it affected social conditions for Inuit artists?
e) Does the IAF contribute to increased Aboriginal Governance? e) Does the IAF contribute to increased Aboriginal Governance?
f) Has IAF programming had an impact on the capacity and accessibility of Inuit artists to cultural industries? f) Has IAF programming had an impact on the capacity and accessibility of Inuit artists to cultural industries?
g) Has the IAF increased awareness and appreciation of Inuit art and Artists by Canadians and others? g) Has the IAF increased awareness and appreciation of Inuit art and Artists by Canadians and others?
To what extent is the IAF reaching its audience? Assessment of the IAF's ability to reach its target audience(s) N/A a) Evidence of appropriate communication materials generating IAF awareness a) Please describe the intended target audience(s) of the IAF. a) Please describe who IAF programming is intended to reach and how this is accomplished. a) What do you know about the IAF and the services that they offer?
b) Evidence of reach of program across various communities b) Have they been successfully reached and/or engaged? Why or why not? b) Have they been successfully reached and/or engaged? Why or why not?
c) Evidence of extent to which artists, curators, dealers, and buyers are aware of and use IAF services (e.g. membership lists?)
4. EFFECTIVENESS (EFFICENCY/ECONOMY)
What relationships / similarities, overlap, or duplication exist between the IAF programming and other federal / provincial / private programs / organizations? Evidence of relationships/similarities, overlap, or duplication a) Evidence of other departments, agencies, or organizations with similar programs or objectives a) Evidence of other departments, agencies, or organizations with similar programs or objectives a) Are you aware of any other programs or initiatives that are similar to and/or support the IAF? a) Are you aware of any other programs or initiatives that are similar to and/or support the IAF? a) Are you aware of any other programs or initiatives that are similar to and/or support the IAF?
Are activities being conducted to promote linkages between the IAF and other government/private agencies and departments? Evidence of activities being conducted to promote linkages

Assessment of ways in which existing linkages can be enhanced
a) Evidence of best practices for horizontal partnerships a) Evidence of existing partnerships or horizontal engagement efforts a) What efforts have been or are being made to establish partnerships with other departments, agencies, etc? Have they been effective? Why or why not? How could this be improved? a) What efforts have been or are being made to establish partnerships with other departments, agencies, etc? Have they been effective? Why or why not? How could this be improved? a) What partnerships may be beneficial for the IAF to establish?
How effective are the IAFs efforts to secure/leverage funds and increase revenues through fundraising and other partnerships? Evidence of efforts to secure funds and increase revenue. a) Evidence of existing or potential sources of funding or revenue generation a) Review of funding related documents (i.e. business plans) a) How effective has the IAF been in diversifying its funding base? What has worked and what hasn't? a) How does the IAF secure their funding? What are the different funding avenues and sources used? a) Can you identify any best practices in the area of leveraging funds and establishing partnerships?
Degree to which IAF is self-sufficient beyond INAC funding b) Evidence of activities related to revenue generation, fundraising and/or leveraging b) What are some other means in which additional funds could be leveraged or revenue raised? b) What are some other means in which additional funds could be leveraged or revenue raised? b) What are some potential benefits of challenges to establishing these partnerships?
Is the IAF an appropriate mechanism for supporting Inuit artists? Are there advantages to operating this program as an Inuit-led foundation? Evidence and assessment of alternative mechanisms (either in terms of activities or delivery) a) Evidence of value added in the use of foundations to deliver programming and manage funding a) Evidence of rationale for current foundation structure a) Is the IAF an appropriate mechanism for supporting Inuit artists? Why or why not? a) Is the IAF an appropriate mechanism for supporting Inuit artists? Why or why not? a) How can Inuit art be best supported? Are the IAF services appropriate to these needs?
Evidence of benefits to operating the program as a foundation led by Inuit artists. b) Assessment of potential alternatives mechanisms b) How can Inuit art be best supported? b) How can Inuit art be best supported?
5. OTHER EVALUATION ISSUES
What are some best practices for supporting and/or administering cultural art programs? Evidence of best practices a) Evidence of identified best practices N/A a) Can you identify some best practices for supporting and/or administering cultural art programs? a) Can you identify some best practices for supporting and/or administering cultural art programs? a) Can you identify some best practices for supporting and/or administering cultural art programs?
Are there funding alternatives? Evidence of funding alternatives a) Evidence of potential funding options N/A a) Are there other ways in which the IAF or Inuit art (or artists) could be funded? a) Are there other ways in which the IAF or Inuit art (or artists) could be funded? a) What are some alternative ways in which the IAF could be financially supported?
 
Return to Table of Contents 

Appendix B: Evaluation Terms of Reference

Terms of Reference
Impact Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation
(Project Number: 1570-7/09090)
Date: May 2010

1. Overview

This document sets out the Terms of Reference for an Impact Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), an Inuit-controlled agency that serves the needs of Inuit Art producers of the North. The evaluation is being undertaken to satisfy Treasury Board (TB) requirements for program renewal. In line with TB's Policy on Evaluation, the evaluation will examine the Foundation's continuing relevance as well as its impact, efficiency and economy.

2. Program Description

2.1 Background and Scope/Activities

The IAF is a non-profit organization incorporated in 1987. It is the only Inuit specific arts service organization in Canada and the only Aboriginal art service organization at a national level. Owned and governed entirely by Inuit artists and northern cultural workers, the Foundation operates as a professional development service to artists by offering training and resources, information on competitions and grants, and networking opportunities. It also promotes Inuit art in Arctic communities, across Canada, and the world.

The IAF was created to address concerns of stakeholders, including specialists and dealers, that the production of fine Inuit art was a critical element of the northern economy but was in a state of decline and required intervention strategies to stimulate both the quantity and quality of art being produced. The IAF was intended to work with both Inuit art producers and advertisers to reverse this declining trend, and since its inception has been working to improve the quality and accessibility of Inuit art.

In order to support its mandate to facilitate the creative expressions of Inuit artists and to foster a broader understanding of these expressions worldwide, the IAF engages in four main pillars of activity:

2.2 Program Objectives and Expected Outcomes

Expected results and outcomes of the IAF fit within the existing departmental Program Activity Architecture (PAA) under Government and Institutions, which has the strategic outcome of good governance and co-operative relationships for First Nations, Inuit and northerners, and is supported through the four pillars of Gathering Strength – Canada's Aboriginal Action Plan.

Activities, objectives, and outcomes are listed in the program's logic model as well as outlined in the Results-based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF). The immediate objective is to assist Inuit artists to develop their skills as artists and to help with marketing and promotion of their art. The expected results are improved economic opportunities for sales, copyright fees, and art commissions for Inuit artists, improved accessibility of northern artists to cultural industries, and increased awareness and appreciation of Inuit art and artist for Canadians and others. The intermediate outcome of federal investments should be improved economic and social conditions for Inuit artists with a final outcome of strengthening communities and the economy of Inuit while increasing Aboriginal governance, especially in the cultural economic industries related to Inuit Art.

2.3 Program Management, Key Stakeholders and Beneficiaries

Program management within the Department falls with the Indian and Inuit Art Centre, which is part of the Corporate Secretariat of the Deputy Minister's Office. The contribution is intended to provide the IAF with core funding to assist in delivering their main programs and activities. The IAF is primarily responsible for the marketing and training aspects of the program as well as fundraising. In addition to the Government of Canada and the IAF, key stakeholders include art specialists, dealers, gallery curators, art collectors, educators, and Inuit artists.

2.4 Program Resources

The IAF is supported by Contributions to the Inuit Art Foundation for the purpose of assisting Inuit artists and artisans from the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Northern Quebec and Labrador in the development of their professional skills and marketing of their art. Through this authority, which is due for renewal in 2012-2013, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) provides the IAF with $458,000 in contributions annually, accounting for 42 percent of the core funding and administrative costs. Total expenditures for the Foundation exceed $1M annually. In 2008, the Foundation also received a one time contribution of $274,437 to assist in launching its online exhibitions.

2.5 Previous Evaluation Work

The last evaluation of the IAF was published in 2001 and covered a ten-year period ending in 1999. The evaluation issues focussed on the effectiveness of the Foundation in meeting its objectives; services provided to Inuit artists and level of satisfaction; cost effectiveness, cost recovery and revenue generation; and funding alternatives.

The evaluation indicated a need for greater clarity in the IAF's vision and identified a need for a greater presence and communication in the North. It also found that the Inuit Art Quarterly had proven to be a successful marketing activity that had raised the profile of Inuit art both within and outside of Canada, while at the same time, although the IAF had succeeded in diversifying its funding sources through its publication of the Inuit Art Quarterly and direct selling of Inuit art, the Foundation should give greater consideration to private sector sources of funding.

3. Evaluation Methodology

3.1 Evaluation Scope and Issues

Evaluation questions outlined in this Terms of Reference are preliminary and subject to change during the development of the methodology report. The evaluation will examine program activities undertaken from 2006-2010 and assess against the following issues:

3.2 Evaluation Method

3.2.1 Data Sources

Subject to further development in the detailed methodology and work plan, the evaluation findings and conclusions will be based on the analysis and triangulation of the following lines of evidence:

The potential for undertaking a survey with some of the groups identified above will be explored during the development of the detailed methodology report.

3.2.2 Considerations, Strengths and Limitations

Preliminary discussion with the program indicates that the IAF, as well as INAC program staff, seem to have done well in keeping regular documentation that can support progress towards objectives. However, an initial review of data will be necessary to determine how it will provide evidence to support outcomes.

Studying alternatives is an important but difficult endeavor in this evaluation. Since the IAF is considered a unique entity in Canada, preliminary research also suggests it may be hard to provide direct comparisons given that there are few, if any, related programs operating under a similar structure. A scan of national and international literature will be conducted to identify the best possible practices and comparisons.

In line with INAC's Gender-Based Analysis Policy, consideration will be taken of gender issues in the collection and analysis of the evaluation research. Moreover, the inclusion of Inuit perspectives, as governed by the Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Committee Engagement Policy, will be an important factor. Mechanisms will be identified for establishing either a working group and/or advisory committee to include membership from Inuit groups such as ITK and Pauktuutit in order to facilitate this process. Where relevant, indicators related to sustainable development may be employed to assess performance and relevance.

4. Project Management and Quality Control

The Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Branch (EPMRB) of INAC's Audit and Evaluation Sector will direct and manage the evaluation in line with the EPMRB's Engagement Policy and Quality Assurance Strategy. If required, some of the evaluation research and/or data collection may be conducted by an external consultant in partnership with EPMRB staff.

During the course of this evaluation, an internal working group will be established with the IAF and other relevant Headquarters/regional representatives. Invitations may also be extended to representative organizations (e.g. ITK) in line with EPMRB's Aboriginal Engagement Strategy. This working group will review the detailed methodology report, preliminary findings and the draft final report up to its conclusions. The methodology report and final report will also be peer reviewed by another member of the EPMRB.

5. Evaluation Resources and Timeline

The estimated cost of the evaluation is $75 000, which will be recovered from the program. EPMRB intends to conduct as much of this evaluation as possible in-house with funds set aside for services that may be required to assist in the data collection phase (e.g. facilitator for focus groups, interpreter, etc.).

ExpenditureEstimated CostPercentage
of cost
Contracting Costs (e.g., key informant interviews/case studies and/or survey work) $35,000 47%
Travel Costs (two evaluators/three case studies) $20,000 27%
Translation Costs (including the need for translators present during interviews) $15,000 20%
Engagement (potential costs related to participation of Inuit on the working group and/or elders) $5,000 6%

Subject to verification in the detailed methodology report and work plan, the Impact Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation is expected to be completed by March 2011.

I approve the above Terms of Reference

Marie-Josée Lévesque
Corporate Secretary
Corporate Secretariat

The Terms of Reference for the Impact Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation were approved by the Evaluation, Performance Measurement and Review Committee on May 14, 2010.

Return to Table of Contents 

Appendix C: List of documents

Altman, J. (2003). Economic development and participation for remote indigenous communities: Best practice, evident barriers, and innovative solutions in the hybrid economy. Presentation to Ministerial Council for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs (MCATSIA).

Americans for the Arts . (2007). Arts and economic prosperity III: The economic impact of nonprofit arts and culture organizations and their audiences.

Aurora Arts Society . (2011). About us.

Australia's Aboriginal art movement: An indigenous culture emerging from poverty through art.  (2008).  

Australian Government. (n.d.). Indigenous arts centres: Strategy and action plan Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Services, Australia Council for the Arts.

Australian Government. (2002). Report of the Contemporary Visual Arts and Craft Inquiry. Prepared for the Commonwealth by the Contemporary Visual Arts and Crafts Inquiry.

Australian Government. (2009). Australia Council Annual Report 2008-09

Australian Government. (2010a). Expense measures . Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.

Australian Government. (2010b). National Arts and Crafts Industry Support. Department of Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.

Australian Government. (2010c). National Indigenous Arts Infrastructure Program for Organizations: Program description. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Arts Board.

Canada Council for the Arts. (2001). Arts and cultural projects in rural and remote Canada: A review of Canada Council support. Prepared for the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

Canada Council for the Arts. (2008). Arts and culture in Canada fact sheet: Contemporary Aboriginal arts in Canada.

Canada Council for the Arts. (2009). Arts and culture in Canada fact sheet: Contemporary Inuit arts in Canada.

Canada Council for the Arts. (2010). Annual Report 2009-10 .  

Canadian Art Foundation. (2011). CANADIAN ART: Print Edition.

Creative consequences: Understanding the value of the arts in Essex. (2006).

Cuesta, C. M., Gillespie, D. M., & Lillis, P. (2005). Bright stars: Charting the impact of the arts in rural Minnesota. Minneapolis: McKnight Foundation.

Cultural Human Resources Council. (2010). The art of export marketing .

Dunphy, K. (2009). Developing and revitalizing rural communities through arts and creativity: Australia. Prepared for the Creative City Network of Canada.

Foley and Lardner LLP. (2007). Non-profit board best practices.  Chicago, Illinois.

Government of Canada. (2001). Evaluation of Inuit Art Foundation. Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

Government of Canada. (2009a). Evaluation of Canadian Arts and Heritage Sustainability Program.

Government of Canada. (2009b). Federal Framework for Aboriginal Economic Development.

Government of Canada. (2010a, March 4). 2010 Budget: Canada's Economic Action Plan – Leading the way on jobs and growth. Tabled in the House of Commons by the Honourable James M. Flaherty, P.C., M.P. Minister of Finance.

Government of Canada. (2010b). Government of Canada supports Inuit artists of Nunavut.

Government of Canada. (2010c). Speech from the Throne: A stronger Canada, a stronger economy, now and for the future.

Gray, C. M., & Heilbrun, J. (2001). The economics of art and culture (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Healey, J. (2002, April). ‘Unconventional business': Marketing of Aboriginal art from remote area communities .  The New Wave: Entrepreneurship & the Arts.  Melbourne, Australia.

Hill Strategies Research Inc. (2009, March). Artists in Canada's provinces and territories: Based on the 2006 Census. Statistical Insights on the Arts, 7(5), 9.

Hogan, C. (2008). Prospect research: A primer for growing nonprofits. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). (n.d.). About INAC.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). (2001). Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). (2010a). Federal Framework for Aboriginal Economic Development.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). (2010b). 2010–2011 INAC Program Activity Architecture.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2004). The support system for Inuit artists. Inuit Art Quarterly, 19(3) and 19(4).

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2006a). Inuit Art Foundation: Strategic business plan.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2006b). Inuit Art Foundation: 20 year review.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2006c). CAHSP Project: Responses to interviews.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2006d). Canadian Arctic multimedia information kit.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2007). IAF Annual Report 2006–07.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2008). IAF Annual Report 2007–08.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2009). IAF Annual Report 2008–09.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2010a). Annual Board of Directors meeting minutes.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2010b). IAF 2010–2011 work plan.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2010c). IAF Annual Report 2009–2010.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2010d). IAF training and development 2006–2010.

Inuit Art Foundation (IAF). (2010e). Inuit artist recipients of free IAQs.

Johanson, K., & Rentschler, R. (2002). The new arts leader: The Australia council and cultural policy change. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 8(2).

Kay, A. (2004). Art and community development: The role the arts have in regenerating communities. Community Development Journal, 35(4).

Library of Parliament. (1999). The arts and Canada's cultural policy .

Library of Parliament. (2008). Federal government policy on arts and culture .  Retrieved from

Makivik. (2010a). Corporate/Makivik mandate.

Makivik. (2010b). Current/Makivik Scholarship Fund.

Myers, M., & Sutherland, D. (1987). Inuit Art Foundation implementation plan.

Myers, M., & Sutherland, D. (2001). Appendix A: Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation. Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

Nelson, R., & Sisco, A. (2006). Closing the gap: Toward capturing the value of Aboriginal cultural industries. Prepared for the Aboriginal Affairs Branch at Canadian Heritage.

Nordicity & Uqsik. (2010). Economic impact study: Nunavut arts and crafts final report. Submitted to the Government of Nunavut, Department of Economic Development and Transportation.

Northwest Territories. (2006, June). NWT Arts Strategy progress report.

Northwest Territories. (2011a). Industry, Tourism and Investment – Business and economic development: Economic development officers .

Northwest Territories. (2011b). Business and economic development: Business Development and Investment Corporation . Retrieved from

Nunavut Arts and Crafts Association. (2010). Helpful organizations .

Nunavut Department of Economic Development and Transportation. (2007). Sanaugait: A strategy for growth in Nunavut's arts and crafts sector.
Performance Stream. (n.d.). The process of strategic planning for non-profit organizations.

Phillips, R. (2004). Artful business: Using the arts for community economic development. Community Development Journal, 39.

Putland, C. (2008). Lost in translation: The question of evidence linking community-based arts and health promotion. Journal of Health Psychology, 13(2).

Quinn, E. (2010, September). THE NEW RAW – Contemporary Inuit art. Eye on the Arctic: Views from up North.

Statistics Canada. (2006). Inuit in Canada: Selected findings of the 2006 Census - Statistics Canada  .  

Swift, M. (2010). Nonprofit board of directors: 20 best practices .

The Conference Board of Canada. (2008). Compendium of research papers: The International Forum on the Creative Economy.

The National Governors Association Center for Best Practices. (2005). Strengthening rural economies through the arts.

Treasury Board Submission. (2006). [Provided by client].

Trépanier, F. (2008). Aboriginal Research Initiative: Report on consultations .



Return to Table of Contents 

Footnotes:

  1. A detailed financial statement of expenses was only available for 2010. (return to source paragraph)

  2. Program expenses indicate the direct costs associated with the activity. (return to source paragraph)
  3. The IAF generates a surplus annually with the exception of 2009, during which they drew on fund reserves to compensate for unexpectedly low revenue generation during the global economic downturn. (return to source paragraph)

  4. Canada Council for the Arts, Arts and cultural projects in rural and remote Canada: A review of Canada Council support Prepared for the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, 2001 (return to source paragraph)

  5. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), Canadian Arts and Heritage Sustainability Program: Artist Survey, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  6. E. Quinn, THE NEW RAW - Contemporary Inuit art, Eye on the Arctic: Views from up North. Retrieved September, 2010 (return to source paragraph)

  7. F. Trépanier, Aboriginal Research Initiative:  Report on consultations Retrieved 2008 (return to source paragraph)

  8. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), Inuit Art Foundation: Strategic business plan, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  9. Hill Strategies Research Inc., Artists in Canada's provinces and territories: Based on the 2006 Census, Statistical Insights on the Arts, 7(5), March 2009 (return to source paragraph)

  10. Ibid. (return to source paragraph)

  11. Ibid. (return to source paragraph)

  12. Nordicity & Uqsik, Economic Impact Study: Nunavut Arts and Crafts Final Report, submitted to the Government of Nunavut, Department of Economic Development and Transportation, June 2010 (return to source paragraph)
  13. R. Nelson & A. Sisco, Closing the gap: Toward capturing the value of Aboriginal cultural industries, Prepared for the Aboriginal Affairs Branch at Canadian Heritage, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  14. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), About INAC. (return to source paragraph)

  15. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), Federal Framework for Aboriginal Economic Development. Retrieved 2010 (return to source paragraph)

  16. Government of Canada, 2010 Budget: Canada's Economic Action Plan - Leading the way on jobs and growth, Tabled in the House of Commons March 4 2010 (return to source paragraph)

  17. Ibid. (return to source paragraph)

  18. Ibid. (return to source paragraph)

  19. Inuit Art Foundation, Strategic Business Plan, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  20. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC), Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation, 2001 (return to source paragraph)

  21. IAF Program Documentation, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  22. Inuit Art Foundation, IAF Annual Report 2006-2007, 2007 (return to source paragraph)

  23. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), Inuit Art Foundation: 20 year review, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  24. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), IAF Annual Report 2007-08, 2008 (return to source paragraph)

  25. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), IAF training and development 2006-2010, 2010 (return to source paragraph)

  26. General artists population surveyed had a range of experience/prestige and were from several communities in all four Inuit regions in the North served by the IAF, including artists that had received IAF services and those that had not. (return to source paragraph)

  27. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), Inuit artist recipients of free IAQs, 2010 (return to source paragraph)

  28. Inuit Art Foundation, Inuit Art Foundation: 20 year review, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  29. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF), Canadian Arts and Heritage Sustainability Program: Artist Survey, 2006 (return to source paragraph)

  30. Inuit Art Foundation (IAF) IAF Annual Report 2009-2010, 2010 (return to source paragraph)

  31. INAC, Evaluation of the Inuit Art Foundation, 2001 (return to source paragraph)

  32. C. Hogan, Prospect research: A primer for growing nonprofits, Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Publishers, 2008 (return to source paragraph)

  33. J. Healey, 'Unconventional business': Marketing of Aboriginal art from remote area communities .  The New Wave: Entrepreneurship & the Arts. Melbourne, Australia, Retrieved April 2002 (return to source paragraph)

  34. Canadian Art Foundation, CANADIAN ART: Print Edition. Retrieved 2011 (return to source paragraph)

Return to Table of Contents 

 
 
Date modified: