Evaluation of the Climate Change Adaptation and Clean Energy Program 2016-17 to 2020-21

Overview

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) has been addressing climate change adaptation under the federal government's Clean Air Agenda since 2008. As part of the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change (PCF), CIRNAC received ongoing funding in 2016 to support continued climate change adaptation and clean energy work. In 2017, CIRNAC along with ten other departments sought to renew and expand with new programming elements to further enhance adaptation and clean energy efforts, such as including traditional knowledge and using a distinctions-based approach to program implementation.

The Climate Change Adaptation and Clean Energy Program (CCACE) is intended to increase the resilience of Indigenous and northern communities by supporting the integration of climate information in decision-making and reducing reliance on diesel and greenhouse gas emissions. Three of the CCACE initiatives fall under the PCF Adaptation and Climate Resilience Pillar— First Nation Adapt (FNA), Climate Change Preparedness in the North (CCPN), and Indigenous Community-Based Climate Monitoring (ICBCM). A single CCACE initiative falls under the PCF Complementary Actions Pillar— Northern Responsible Energy Approach for Community Heat and Electricity (Northern REACHE).

Findings and Conclusions

There is strong evidence that the CCACE is highly relevant in terms of its alignment with the needs of Indigenous and northern communities related to climate change adaptation and mitigation, for the following reasons:

• Like all other nations, Canada is, and will continue to be vulnerable to the wide-ranging repercussions of climate change. Indigenous and northern communities are suffering disproportionate impacts of climate change, exacerbating the political, social and economic challenges they are already facing. There will continue to be a broad, continued and urgent need to support adaptation and mitigation in Indigenous and northern communities;
• The CCACE responds to this need by supporting planning and implementation of adaptation and mitigation measures in Indigenous and northern communities; and
• The CCACE is well aligned with the PCF, Government of Canada priorities regarding climate change, reconciliation and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (PDF) (UNDRIP), and the mandate and priorities of CIRNAC.

This relevance is reinforced by the CCACE being an effective and well conceived, designed, managed and delivered program, for the following reasons:

• The CCACE has embraced Indigenous climate leadership, including at the community-level;
• Overall and for each of its four initiatives, the CCACE has contributed to successes and positive impacts at the community-level from the projects it has supported; and
• The CCACE displays strong program delivery and governance appropriate to the limited resources available to the program to respond to needs and priorities identified by Indigenous and northern communities.

However, the full breadth and depth of the climate change-related needs of these communities extend far beyond, in fact, orders of magnitude beyond what this relatively modest program has been positioned and resourced to achieve. As such, the relevance and success of the CCACE, as configured during the evaluation period, cannot be assessed on the extent to which it has helped "solve" climate change adaptation and mitigation issues, but rather the extent to which it has helped some communities better understand the issues and problems they are facing and, in some cases, take first steps towards addressing them.

At a minimum, the CCACE and its four initiatives should continue to be consistent with its current and proven design, delivery and governance, and in doing so, adhering to the following drivers of success:

• Maintain current engagement practices, ensuring continued alignment with reconciliation, UNDRIP, and Indigenous climate leadership (including at the community level);
• Continue to deliver administrative flexibility to optimize project success—and seek further streamlining opportunities;
• Continue fostering a learning environment within the program and look for opportunities to adapt the CCACE as circumstances warrant;
• Maintain the cooperation and collaboration of those federal departments that can contribute to supporting adaptation and mitigation in Indigenous and northern communities;
• Continue to directly support the capacity needs of Indigenous and northern communities, by systematically understanding capacity needs and continuing to be strategic in investing in capacity improvements that can be sustained; and
• Renovate the CCACE performance measurement indicators to reflect Indigenous and northern community perspectives and the outcomes and indicators that are important to them.

The evidence gathered through this evaluation suggests that, in addition to continuing the status quo, a business case could be made for program improvements that would add value for Indigenous and northern communities.

• Improve the sharing of knowledge and successes from individual projects to a broader audience of Indigenous and northern communities;
• Building on the success of the CCPN Climate Change Community Liaison support, establish system Navigators who could assist Indigenous and northern communities with understanding the landscape of federal programs, determine programs with the best fit to meet needs, and support proponents in accessing funding to support all stages of project development, from ideation through implementation (e.g., feasibility, design and construction); and
• Encourage applications from those higher risk Indigenous and northern communities that have yet to access the CCACE.

The CCACE is only able to support a small fraction of the climate change adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities. CCACE oversubscription is substantial and widespread—many impactful projects are turned away, some are only partially funded, and others suspended during implementation—and many Indigenous and northern communities with priority needs are not being served.

While the CCACE supports the early project stages to meet the adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities—such as ideation and feasibility—the implementation of solutions generally requires resources orders of magnitude greater than that available through the CCACE. Improving community resilience to the impacts of climate change and transitioning communities off-diesel is a whole-of-government challenge, which CIRNAC and the CCACE cannot address in isolation.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusions, it is recommended that CIRNAC should:

1. Continue to work with Indigenous and northern communities to ensure implementation of climate change adaptation and mitigation actions that are commensurate with the observed and projected repercussions of climate change, including sustainable funding mechanisms for Indigenous and northern communities.
2. Scale-up the CCACE—and further strengthen engagement by adding system Navigators within the program and cross-initiative procedures and processes.
3. Build on the Northern REACHE's participation in the development of the Indigenous and Remote Communities Clean Energy Hub by implementing a one-window approach through collaboration with other federal departments to support adaptation in Indigenous and northern communities.
4. Co-develop the CCACE program performance measurement and reporting to ensure that Indigenous and northern communities' understandings of success towards meeting climate change adaptation and mitigation needs are reflected to foster joint leadership and accountability.

Project Title: Evaluation of the Climate Change Adaptation and Clean Energy Program

1.1 Evaluation Purpose

In accordance with the Five-Year Evaluation Plan for Crown Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada and in compliance with the Treasury Board Policy on Results, the purpose of this evaluation was to examine the Climate Change Adaptation and Clean Energy Program (CCACE) to assess its relevance, design and delivery, performance, and efficiency and economy for the period of April 1, 2016 to March 31, 2021. As the program includes ongoing Grants and Contributions, the evaluation was further subject to Section 42.1 of the Financial Administration Act.

The evaluation covers the activities and outcomes of four of CIRNAC's CCACE initiatives: First Nation Adapt (FNA), Climate Change Preparedness in the North (CCPN), Indigenous Community-Based Climate Monitoring (ICBCM), and Northern Responsible Energy Approach for Community Heat and Electricity (Northern REACHE). The evaluation excluded the CCACE initiative Engaging Indigenous Peoples in Climate Policy (EIPCP).

There have been three evaluations and one audit since 2015 relating to the Climate Change Adaptation theme, ECCC's 2017 Horizontal Evaluation of the Clean Air Agenda Adaptation Theme, the 2017 Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development (CESD) Report: Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change, and the 2015 Evaluation of the ecoENERGY for Aboriginal and Northern Communities Program^{Footnote 1}. In 2019, the Program also conducted an internal pre-evaluation assessment of the CCACE.

1.2 Program Context

1.3 Program Profile and Narrative

CIRNAC has been addressing climate change adaptation and clean energy under the federal government's Clean Air Agenda since 2008. As part of the PCF, CIRNAC received ongoing funding in 2016 to support continued climate change adaptation and clean energy work. In 2017, CIRNAC along with ten other departments sought to renew and expand with new programming elements to further enhance adaptation and clean energy efforts, such as including traditional knowledge and using a distinctions-based approach to program implementation.

The CCACE is intended to increase the resilience of Indigenous and northern communities by supporting the integration of climate information in decision-making and reducing reliance on diesel and greenhouse gas emissions. Three of the CCACE initiatives fall under the PCF Adaptation and Climate Resilience Pillar—FNA, CCPN and ICBCM^{Footnote 2}. A single CCACE initiative falls under the PCF Complementary Actions Pillar—Northern REACHE (these initiatives are further described at Appendix A)^{Footnote 3}.

The CCACE is designed to take a collaborative and capacity-building approach, working with territorial governments, Indigenous and northern communities and Indigenous organizations to first identify priorities and then provide direct funding support for territorial governments and Indigenous and northern communities. The support is intended to:

• Assist Indigenous peoples in the design and implementation of long-term community-based climate monitoring projects;
• Conduct assessments to identify the impacts of climate change that affect communities;
• Facilitate the development and assessment of adaptation options;
• Implement adaptation actions in northern communities;
• Identify and coordinate adaptation opportunities in communities at significant risk of flooding; and
• Assist northern communities, governments, and organizations to plan and construct renewable energy and energy-efficient projects.

The Climate Change Adaptation and Clean Energy (CCACE) program contributes to CIRNAC's core responsibility under Community and Regional Development, which enables Indigenous and Northern communities to strengthen their capacity to adapt to changing environments. This involves undertaking community-based activities of:

• Monitoring and mapping projects;
• Adaptation assessment, mapping, planning and implementation projects;
• Engagement projects; and
• Renewable energy and energy efficiency projects.

The complete logic model for the program can be found in Appendix B.

1.4 Program Management, Key Stakeholders and Beneficiaries

ECCC is the lead department for climate change policy and provides overall coordination for the federal Clean Growth and Climate Change horizontal initiative. Several other major departments are part of the horizontal initiative^{Footnote 4}.

Figure 1 depicts the organizational structure of where the program sits within the Northern Affairs Organization. Program staff are based in the National Capital Region and are responsible for program management, oversight and coordination at the regional and national level.

Text Alternative: Figure 1: Organizational Structure of the Climate Change and Clean Energy Directorate

Figure 1 shows the current organizational structure of the Climate Change and Clean Energy Directorate, organized by hierarchy.

At the highest level is the Northern Affairs Organization.

At the next level, there is the Natural Resources and Environment Branch.

At the next level, there is the Climate Change and Clean Energy Directorate.

At the next level, there is CCPN, Northern REACHE, FN Adapt, ICBCM, and EIPICP. At this level, there is Regional Office Support, Program Partners, and Advisory Committees.

Funding is provided through CCACE budgets and is directly managed by the initiatives. Contribution agreements are managed internally in Northern Affairs or, where master agreements exist at the regional level, funding is flowed to regional offices to amend those agreements. The initiatives have significant local and regional participation through a co-development approach to program administration.

The primary partners are eligible project applicants and recipients, selection and oversight committees, and the communities where the initiatives are located^{Footnote 5}.

Indigenous peoples and Northerners are the primary expected beneficiaries from the delivery of CIRNAC's CCACE initiatives. Canadians, generally, and the international community through the broad climate change context are also expected to benefit as the outcomes of the program activities are achieved.

1.5 Program Alignment and Resources

Table 1 provides actual spending for fiscal years 2016–17 through 2020–21 for the CCACE. The program uses two funding authorities, both of which are ongoing contributions.

• Contributions for promoting the safe use, development, conservation and protection of the North's natural resources, and promoting scientific development; and
• Contributions to support the construction and maintenance of Community Infrastructure.

2.1 Approach and Methodology

An Evaluation Working Group was established to advise the evaluation team on the evaluation process and ensure diverse perspectives were reflected in the evaluation. The working group comprised of representatives from the CCACE program, the Confederacy of Mainland Mi'kmaq, Nihtat Energy Limited, Magnetawan First Nation, and the Métis Nation of Alberta. The working group also provided feedback on the evaluation framework, evaluation instruments, preliminary findings and this evaluation report.

The evaluation utilized a mixed-methods approach with multiple lines of inquiry to comprehensively address the identified issues and key evaluation questions. Overall, the conclusions and recommendations have been developed on the basis of all findings, further enhancing reliability and validity.

The Evaluation Matrix in Appendix C provides additional information. Lines of evidence included:

2.2 Limitations and Mitigation Strategies

3.1 Relevance: Continued Need for the CCACE

Compared to the rest of Canada, in the 2020 ECCC report: A Healthy Environment and a Healthy Economy, Indigenous and northern communities contribute comparatively little to greenhouse gas emissions—Indigenous communities produce less than one million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions per year. However, due to a dependence on and close relationship with the environment and its resources, Indigenous and northern communities are more vulnerable to and disproportionately affected by the impacts of climate change than any other demographic in Canada. For example, there are 100 natural hazard emergencies each year in First Nations communities, between 2009 and 2017 there were 160 community evacuations due to flooding, and 33 communities in the Northwest Territories face risks to infrastructure due to permafrost thawing. The livelihoods of many Indigenous communities are also being affected, causing changes in caribou hunting patterns and increasingly unreliable sea ice conditions.

Since northern regions have warmed at a much higher rate than southern regions, northern communities are particularly vulnerable. Over the last 30 years, the Arctic has warmed at roughly twice the rate as elsewhere on the planet. This is primarily caused by melting ice. As ice melts it becomes less reflective and more absorbent of sunlight, and this results in increased warming. Floating sea ice is shrinking, snow cover has decreased, glaciers are retreating, and permafrost is warming and, in many areas, thawing. Thawing of permafrost alone could affect up to 3.6 million people in Canada during the next 30 years (ECCC 2020). As well as the need for adaptation, communities in the North have a high dependency on diesel for heating and electricity, which has economic, environmental and health impacts.

Climate change has exacerbated the political, social and economic challenges Indigenous and northern communities are already facing. Without investment in robust adaptation and mitigation measures, the observed and projected repercussions of human-induced climate change will continue to represent a clear and present threat to Indigenous and northern communities.

Over 70, predominantly Indigenous communities across Canada's North rely completely on diesel for heat and power. Many communities and Indigenous organizations are advancing clean energy initiatives to improve environmental, social, and economic outcomes for their people. To advance these objectives investments in capacity and projects are needed so that Indigenous Peoples and Northerners may fully and meaningfully participate in Canada's clean energy transition and fight against climate change.

Indigenous peoples are important contributors to the sustainability of the many ecosystems in their lands and territories, and may help enhance the resilience of these ecosystems. As First Peoples, the knowledge of these lands, the resources and environment has been gained over many generations, enabling Indigenous peoples to interpret and react to the impacts of climate change in creative ways and draw on traditional knowledge to find solutions. This is particularly relevant to the PCF's Adaptation Pillar, which supports measures to adapt to the impacts of climate change and build resilience. One of the identified five actions to build resilience to climate change across Canada is "translating scientific information and traditional knowledge into action," against which the CCACE aligns.

Recent evaluations have emphasized the continued need to support adaptation and mitigation in Indigenous and northern communities. The 2017 Indigenous and Northern Affairs Evaluation of the Emergency Management Assistance Program found that, in general, "many First Nations are still not sufficiently prepared for an emergency event and are not adequately engaged in mitigation and preparedness activities". The 2017 Environment and Climate Change Canada Horizontal Evaluation of the Clean Air Agenda Adaptation Theme identified the need for First Nations to be included to a greater extent in developing emergency management service agreements between Indigenous communities and the department and provincial/territorial governments, and recommended areas for improvement, in particular: expanding engagement, expanding awareness of tools, and increased collaboration across adaptation programming.

Engagement sessions in the North from June 2016 to March 2017 also supported the continued need for adaptation and mitigation measures, particularly the development of renewable and alternative energy sources, energy efficiency initiatives, research and monitoring, and climate change adaptations. Within these action areas, participants stressed several programming needs and considerations, including prioritizing community and region-specific needs, the diversity of northern communities, integration of scientific and traditional knowledge, improved coordination on the sharing and use of research results, accessible communication, flexible funding, multi-year funding, and fostering positive relationships between funders and communities.

Those interviewed for this evaluation identified similar needs to those identified in the recent evaluations and engagement sessions, although there was more emphasis on the sufficiency and sustainability of funding to support adaptation and mitigation. Inadequacy of funding to address the impacts of climate change in Indigenous and northern communities was the most common issue raised by all interviewees.

There is a continued need for programming to support the planning and implementation of adaptation measures, such as the CCPN and FNA. Lessons learned from the former Climate Change Adaptation Program (CCAP) established that there is an ongoing need for programming to be targeted to regional needs and local priorities, to communities that are most at risk, and to increase collaboration and engagement. Engagement sessions have also pointed towards a need for floodplain mapping support.

There is a continued need for programming to support Indigenous community-based climate monitoring integrating scientific data and traditional knowledge, such as that provided under the ICBCM initiative. The need for community-based monitoring was identified in the development of the PCF and reaffirmed through several subsequent engagements, symposiums, and forums.

There is also a continued need for programming to support diesel reduction as part of climate change mitigation efforts, such as that provided by the Northern REACHE initiative. Northern communities are heavily reliant on diesel for heating and electricity. This high reliance on diesel leads to high transportation and household energy costs, as well as significant environmental and health risks. Renewable energy projects to reduce diesel dependency have numerous benefits including climate change mitigation, economic benefits, and building capacity in communities. Lessons learned from the former ecoENERGY program as well as subsequent engagements indicate a continued need for flexible, targeted, sustainable, and community-focused diesel reduction programming.

Those interviewed for this evaluation were in broad agreement that the CCACE—and specifically the FNA, CCPN, ICBCM and Northern REACHE initiatives—continued to be required to support Indigenous and northern communities, and that CIRNAC, among federal departments, was uniquely positioned to do so. As the lead for the Government of Canada's work in the North, and efforts to renew the nation-to-nation, Inuit-Crown, government-to-government relationship between Canada and First Nations, Inuit and Métis, CIRNAC is particularly well-positioned to administer climate change adaptation and mitigation programming for Indigenous and northern communities.

3.2 Relevance: Alignment with the Pan-Canadian Framework

The PCF establishes Canada's ongoing commitment to a 2030 target of a 30 percent reduction below 2005 levels of greenhouse gas emissions (Figure 1). The PCF includes four pillars: 1. Pricing Carbon Pollution, 2. Complementary Climate Actions, 3. Adapt and Build Resilience, 4. Clean Technology, Innovation, and Jobs. Pillars 1, 2, and 4 establish a commitment to climate change mitigation through carbon pricing, energy efficiency standards, and clean and renewable energy technologies. Pillars 3 and 4 establish a commitment to adaptation through building resilience to extreme climate events, particularly for vulnerable regions and communities, and through investments that support mitigation and adaptation measures.

3.3 Relevance: Alignment with Government of Canada Priorities

Table 5 describes the alignment of the CCACE initiatives to key Government of Canada priority statements. There is a strong alignment of FNA, CCPN, ICBCM and Northern REACHE with a range of federal priorities, as outlined in Table 5.

Federal budgets 2016 through 2019 also display close alignment with the priorities and goals of the CCACE initiatives:

• Budget 2016 included developing green infrastructure, social infrastructure, climate resilience, infrastructure for Indigenous communities, and infrastructure investments to address climate change;
• Budget 2017 included a commitment to the PCF pillars;
• Budget 2018 included pricing carbon pollution and supporting clean growth, adapting Canada's weather and water services to climate change, and supporting Inuit and Métis Nation priorities; and
• Budget 2019 included a clean economy, strong Arctic and northern communities, healthy, safe, and resilient Indigenous communities, supporting First Nations, Inuit and Métis Nation priorities, and improving Canada's ability to prepare for and respond to natural disasters.

3.4 Relevance: Alignment with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

In 2015, the Government of Canada committed to achieve reconciliation with Indigenous peoples and to fully implement the Calls to Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Call to Action 43 calls for the federal, provincial, territorial, and municipal governments to fully adopt and implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) as the framework for reconciliation. Furthermore, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Call to Action 44 calls on the Government of Canada to develop a national action plan, strategies, and other concrete measures to achieve the goals of the UNDRIP.

In 2016, the government endorsed UNDRIP without qualification and committed to its full and effective implementation, and on June 21, 2021, Bill C-15: The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act received Royal Assent, described as a key step in renewing the government's relationship with Indigenous peoples. UNDRIP articles 25, 26 (1) and 29 (1) affirm that Indigenous peoples have the right to their lands, territories and resources, protection of the environment, and the right to maintain and strengthen their spiritual relationship with their lands, territories, waters and coastal seas and other resources, and their responsibilities to future generations in this respect^{Footnote 6}.

Interviewees were asked for their views on how well the CCACE complies with the UNDRIP. Those external to the federal government generally did not have enough familiarity with UNDRIP to comment. Internal respondents did not generally raise any concerns about misalignment between the CCACE and UNDRIP. However, internal respondents did note that while UNDRIP provides an important backdrop to the CCACE, there was no practical guidance from CIRNAC to incorporate UNDRIP into program delivery. One interviewee did observe that Section 42 of the standard contribution agreement, which notes the Government of Canada has free use of any generated intellectual property, is inconsistent with Article 31 which affirms that Indigenous peoples have the right to protect their intellectual property over traditional knowledge^{Footnote 7}.

3.5 Relevance: Alignment with the Government of Canada's Reconciliation Agenda

In 2019, the Program undertook pre-evaluation work, involving interviews with Indigenous community organizations, and the CCACE initiatives were found to be well aligned with reconciliation principles. In particular, the pre-evaluation found that officials acted with integrity, good faith and fairness, and worked with applicants to support projects that address climate change needs and build capacity within Indigenous organizations and communities, a distinctions-based approach was used by several CCACE initiatives, and Indigenous peoples participated in decision-making. Indigenous interviewees also positively cited these program features.

Most of the Indigenous respondents interviewed for this evaluation agreed that the CCACE initiatives do advance reconciliation. Respondents from CIRNAC stated that climate change and reconciliation are linked, and that reconciliation considerations are central to the CCACE design and delivery. For example, the Principles respecting the Government of Canada's relationship with Indigenous peoples helped inform the ICBCM initiative.

3.6 Relevance: Alignment with Indigenous Climate Leadership

Indigenous climate leadership is described as being an important part of Canada's partnership with Indigenous peoples on climate change. The importance and interactions of Indigenous leadership and knowledge, linking these with renewed nation-to-nation, Inuit-to-Crown and government-to-government relationships, UNDRIP, and self-determined climate action and its link to reconciliation as expressed in Canada's Partnership with Indigenous Peoples on Climate have also been emphasized. Canada's climate plan, A Healthy Environment and a Healthy Economy (PDF) , builds on foundational principles of Indigenous climate leadership, including:

• Recognizing the unique realities, needs, and priorities of Indigenous peoples across and within distinctions;
• Respecting and promoting self-determination;
• Advancing early and meaningful engagement;
• Incorporating inclusiveness-by-design principles in all of its climate actions;
• Advancing co-development and other collaborative approaches to find solutions;
• Creating a space for Indigenous voices across and within distinctions;
• Positioning Indigenous peoples to have a say at governance tables; and
• Supporting Indigenous approaches and ways of doing, by acknowledging traditional, local, and Indigenous Knowledge systems as an equal part in policy development, programs, and decision-making.

All key informant interviewees—Indigenous, CIRNAC and other government departments—agreed that the CCACE and its four initiatives are aligned with Indigenous climate leadership, as described above, both in their intent and design and in their reality on the ground. The same was the case for those interviewed for the case study on Indigenous Climate Leadership, who also noted that the concept of community climate leadership resonated more strongly and was more important for them at the community-level.

3.7 Relevance: Alignment with CIRNAC Mandate and Priorities

The CCACE is well-aligned with CIRNAC priorities and results as articulated in Departmental Results Reports from 2016-17 to 2019-20.

The Departmental Reports 2016-17 and 2017-18 place the CCACE program under Strategic Outcome 4—The North: Self-reliance, prosperity and well-being for the people and communities of the North^{Footnote 8}. Activities of the CCPN and Northern REACHE are discussed under Program 4.1: Northern Governance and People, and align directly with the departmental result "Northern communities, governments, and organizations identify priorities for adaptation activities and reducing reliance on diesel".

While this Strategic Outcome and result align directly with the CCPN and Northern REACHE, given their exclusive northern focus, ICBCM does not seem to be fully captured, and the FNA program does not appear to be aligned at all. However, ICBCM and FNA do fit well under CIRNAC priorities in general and are linked with various other program areas. FNA is linked with Community Economic Development and Infrastructure and Capacity programs in the 2016-17 Corporate Risk Profile. ICBCM, launched in 2017-18, is linked with Infrastructure and Capacity, Northern Governance and People, Northern Science and Technology, Northern Land and Resources, and Environmental Management programs in the 2017-18 Key Risks.

The Departmental Reports 2018-19 and 2019-20 place CCACE activities under the Core Responsibility: Community and Regional Development, which is described as follows:

• Support the efforts of Indigenous and northern communities in sustainable economic development, sustainable food, natural resources and environmental management. This includes: investment in Indigenous and northern entrepreneurs and businesses; land management and resource development; clean energy development and climate change adaptation; remediation of contaminated sites; and protection of the Arctic ecosystems and advancement of northern (Arctic) science and technology.

Under this Core Responsibility, ICBCM, CCPN, and FNA are linked to the departmental result "Indigenous and northern communities strengthen their capacity to adapt to changing environments." Northern REACHE is linked to the departmental result: "Land and resources in Indigenous communities and the North are sustainably managed".

Only CIRNAC interviewees were in a position to comment on CCACE alignment with CIRNAC mandate and priorities. While CIRNAC respondents generally agreed with the above findings, they did note that the climate change situation had evolved substantially since the CCACE initiatives were established, especially in terms of the understanding of community vulnerability, and consequently CCACE design would be considerably different today. CCPN and ICBCM were offered as examples of this, being too "piecemeal" with many small disconnected projects.

As discussed in section "4.1: Sufficiency of Resources to Meet Needs," the CCACE program faces serious funding shortfalls in contrast to the adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities. From an implementation perspective, the CCACE can only make limited impact and so contributes little to the full scope of CIRNAC outcomes.

3.8 Design and Delivery: Program Delivery

The successes and challenges related to the CCACE program delivery identified through the key informant interviews and the document review lines of evidence tended to be specific to each of the CCACE initiatives. In this section then, themes common to the CCACE initiatives are presented with reference to individual initiatives for illustrative purposes.

More specifically, in 2019, the Program undertook pre-evaluation work and found strong evidence that the CCACE initiatives are targeted to Indigenous priorities and needs, noting that the programs have conducted extensive engagements and built on lessons learned from their predecessor programs, with the goal of Indigenous self-determination. Indigenous respondents interviewed for this CCACE evaluation broadly agreed with these findings. The pre-evaluation also found some unevenness in the inclusion of Indigenous voices in decision-making processes and the transparency of decision-making processes. CIRNAC interviewees noted that while a distinction-based approach is used for some of the initiatives, there is some inconsistency, without dedicated funds to the Métis Nation and unaffiliated Indigenous parties.

CCACE officials work with regional offices and Indigenous organizations to identify priority communities, and also work closely with project proponents from the ideation stage through the development of proposals and implementation of projects, displaying the administrative flexibility to optimize the success of program recipients. For example, in 2019, the Program undertook pre-evaluation work and found that FNA and Northern REACHE work closely with applicants to shape proposals and provides multi-year funding.

The document review found that CCPN has permitted a greater community voice in adaptation priorities, making federal climate change adaptation funding more accessible to smaller communities. The ICBCM was also highlighted as "targeted, distinctions-based, Indigenous engagement in design and decision-making, flexible terms and conditions," aligning with Indigenous climate and research strategies, and with the goal of Indigenous self-determination.

CIRNAC interviewees noted that in 2016, Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience Program for Aboriginals and Northerners was split into First Nation Adapt (South) and Climate Change Preparedness in the North (North) to focus on specific regional needs, which represented an intentional pivot to focus support on Indigenous and northern communities. Some interviewees, both internal and external to the departments, observed that the CCACE is quite transactional, focussing on individual projects, which may be a by-product of both the refocus on communities and the widespread funding shortfalls and program oversubscription. Interviewees suggested the program refine its strategic approach to project investment (rather than a project-by-project basis), stepping back and understanding what the investment portfolio looks like, and aligning to the needs and priorities of provinces, territories, regions and communities, to both improve CCACE program impact and contain costs.

The CCACE has dispensed with the typical funder-recipient relationship, transforming the CCACE into a modern, innovative, public administrative program, recognizing that supportive relationships with Indigenous and northern communities is key to successful program delivery.

CCACE officials describe the program as primarily "about relationships," which is the primary driver of program success. The CCACE has engaged with stakeholders through a number of avenues over the evaluation period. In addition, individual CCACE initiatives are closely engaged with applicants and communities in identifying regional needs and priorities, facilitating the application process, and supporting project implementation. This engagement approach is intended to make the CCACE as accessible as possible to all Indigenous and northern communities, not just those with the capacity to write strong proposals.

The program has successfully built trusting and respectful relationships with Indigenous and northern communities. This is the foundation on which the CCACE and its engagement rests, and judging by the responses from Indigenous respondents interviewed for the Engagement case study and the key informant interview line of evidence, the program has been very successful.

For a program such as CCACE, the evaluation team expected that the balance of information flow, and so type of engagement, would evolve from an initial program information stage to a more consultative proposal stage and finally to a more participatory or even partnership stage through project implementation. The evaluation team also expected that engagement mechanisms would shift from generic forms (to simply impart information) to more direct and personal forms in the service of Indigenous and northern communities (to firm up ideas, negotiate funding agreements and successfully implement projects). Indigenous respondents noted that these expectations have been exceeded by the CCACE.

From the outset, the CCACE is brought to potential proponents generally in a manner that is appropriate to their context and capacity. Interviewees reported learning about the CCACE (and program eligibility and proposal requirements) through a wide range of mechanisms, including word-of-mouth (networks inside and outside the federal government), the CIRNAC website, information sheets, direct email and verbal contact from federal officials and CCPN Climate Change Community Liaisons, regular and ad hoc meetings and site visits with federal officials and CCPN Climate Change Community Liaisons.

As projects are being developed by proponents, the CCACE moves into a collaborative approach with proponents—a service delivery model—assisting them through ideation to firm proposals, again as needed and in a manner that is appropriate to individual proponent's context and capacity. The CCACE is conscious of potential barriers to accessing funds. Proposal requirements have been streamlined, and in most cases there is an ongoing intake of proposals, and support is provided where needed. As would be expected, as project proponents are firming up ideas and developing proposals, the engagement mechanisms are more direct and personal, with program officials (including Climate Change Community Liaisons in the case of CCPN and ICBCM where relevant) making themselves available (by phone, email, in-person) to provide support. These efforts appear to have been very successful; interviewees generally describe the application process as straightforward and accessible.

Finally, as projects are approved, negotiated and implemented, the CCACE demonstrates adaptability and flexibility, again reflecting the realities individual project recipients may encounter. As funding agreements are negotiated for approved projects and projects move into implementation, the program steps back—its engagement through project implementation was described as "hands-off." However, as individual project context changes, the CCACE rapidly shifts to accommodate these, providing support where required, pushing out timelines and carrying over funding, with a view to optimizing project success. At this stage, the engagement mechanisms remain direct and personal, grounded in the respectful and trusting relationships built with project recipients, with ongoing communication ("touch base") by phone, email and in-person.

Interviewees offered a number of improvements to the various engagement mechanisms used by the program. These suggestions generally reflect incremental adjustments rather than wholesale changes in approach, specifically tightening up the communications strategy and mechanisms (e.g., clarity of emails, tenor and content of newsletters, breadth, clarity, consistency and currency of information provided through websites, more project narratives, and offering the option of verbal project status reporting).

FNA and CCPN emerged from the CCAP, which was split to facilitate a greater focus on separate regional needs. The 2019 pre-evaluation indicates that CCPN has been successful in adapting to lessons learned from the CCAP and the ongoing needs of applicants through practices such as flexible/multi-year funding, ongoing intake of proposals, the use of proposal templates, and collaborating with applicants in developing proposals. It notes that the program has continued to adapt to the needs of applicants with the inclusion of funding in Budget 2017 to move beyond assessment and planning towards funding implementation of adaptive designs in construction. Like CCPN, the FNA removed the call-for-proposals process from the earlier CCAP and moved to the ongoing intake of proposals. FNA works closely with applicants to shape proposals, and provides multi-year funding.

ICBCM's ongoing intake of proposals for Inuit applicants has led to unexpected impacts, such as inefficiencies and delays in funding. Those interviewed for this evaluation observed that ongoing intake of proposals has meant that the amount of funds remaining to support projects is unclear. Clearer communications about what kinds of projects ICBCM will fund to reduce inefficiencies, as well as additional support for applicants who are new to community-based monitoring or federal funding processes was recommended, as was providing insights from past recipients on what to include for successful projects; improving timeliness and clarity about proposal outcomes; and providing guidance on continuing projects beyond program funding. However, where challenges arise in implementing ICBCM projects, the initiative is flexible in helping recipients to adapt to challenges.

Northern REACHE documentation indicates that the program has developed a strong and flexible proposal process. Regional engagement sessions indicate that the program has been successful in supporting applicants in developing proposals; providing a simplified and user-friendly application process; staged applications, including planning phases; timely feedback on proposals; connecting project teams to other funding sources; and positive personal contacts and relationships with program officers. Participants in regional engagement sessions appreciated the flexibility of funding under Northern REACHE. Participants indicated that there are often federal stacking limitations which limit the proportion of projects that are eligible for federal funding, Northern REACHE was recognized for being able to provide 100% of funding. Currently, Northern REACHE is working in collaboration with other federal departments to improve community access to federal clean energy funding and resources as part of the off-diesel hub. As a result, design and delivery features, indicators, and governance structures are anticipated to change in the upcoming years.

Indigenous interviewees were broadly in agreement with these findings. CCACE officials provided strong support throughout the proposal process and project implementation. Application and reporting templates were identified as being clear and succinct. While all CCACE initiatives exhibited streamlined reporting, again CCPN was viewed as the model. It was suggested that the CCACE adopt a harmonized reporting process and reporting template across the program initiatives.

In terms of the program funding approach, Indigenous interviewees were particularly complimentary about the flexibility of the CCACE in this regard. Interviewees indicated that CCACE officials have an excellent understanding of their operating context (e.g., Northern conditions), and as such, the funding approach has been very adaptive to circumstances as they arise, with carry-over of funds to help mitigate delays in project implementation, moving unspent funds across budget lines. Interviewees also observed that, unlike other federal climate change programming, funding is available for capacity-building activities (e.g., training, workshops, and staff positions), a finding similar to that of the pre-evaluation.

The pre-evaluation noted strong coordination and collaboration between CCACE initiatives under the CIRNAC and Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) PCF umbrella (i.e., CCPN, FNA, ICBCM, Climate Change and Health Adaptation Program (CCHAP) North and South, and EIPCP), and with other federal programs to ensure a no-wrong-door approach. Examples include the formal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between CCPN, ICBCM and CCHAP North (ISC), co-funding between FNA and CCHAP South (ISC), and coordination between ICBCM and the Indigenous Guardians Pilot Program (ECCC) and Northern Contaminants Program (CIRNAC program). Northern REACHE coordinates with other clean energy programs to ensure a no-wrong-door funding approach and enable joint funding, and works with territories to target communities with greatest needs, and with the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency communities and Indigenous governments to address local needs.

As of 2020, an internal memorandum of understanding is in place between CIRNAC (CCPN, ICBCM), ISC, and ECCC, agreeing to collaborate to establish a coordinated approach to identify and support regional and community level climate monitoring, information/services and adaptation projects and related activities in the following regions based on Parties' mandate and responsibilities: Yukon, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Nunavik, Nunatsiavut, NunatuKavut, and Eeyou Istchee Territory. Goals of this internal MOU are oriented around coordinating priorities, needs, visions, and services, and collaboration with Indigenous and northern partners.

External respondents interviewed for this evaluation agreed that the CCACE provides strong engagement with programs in CIRNAC and other federal departments.

External respondents interviewed for this evaluation raised difficulties navigating the range of federal programming providing adaptation and mitigation support—to determine the most appropriate programs to approach for support.

External interviewees were strongly supportive of a one-window approach, to avoid the need (and required capacity) for bilateral interactions with federal departments and programs. Interviewees, particularly those within the federal government, noted institutional barriers to the one-window approach, such as separate governance structures, different timelines, barriers transferring and pooling funds across departments. One Indigenous interviewee noted that a one-window approach is more consistent with a government-to-government relationship. Another Indigenous interviewee cautioned that a single window approach should not result in the CCACE program being subsumed by other, much larger, federal programs, as this could mean a change in the project adjudication process and a shift from funding necessary small-scale projects.

Program engagement with stakeholders in 2016-17 highlighted several "barriers to action" in developing climate adaptation projects in the North. One of the main issues is limited capacity and expertise, specifically related to understanding of climate change, knowledge of how to navigate CCACE initiatives and access funding, participation in collaborative projects, and participation in CCPN governance structures.

A 2021 internal review of the ICBCM initiative pointed to several capacity challenges experienced by program recipients, including lack of Indigenous technical institutions for tool development (e.g., data collection devices and protocols) and capacity building, and the slow pace in starting and building capacity on some projects.

Northern REACHE engagement sessions indicated that lack of non-government institutional capacity and energy literacy are the two major capacity challenges for diesel reduction programs in the North. Lack of capacity limits the ability of communities to apply for and access funding. The sessions pointed to potential solutions such as energy coordinators or "pathfinders," funding for capacity building, a single-window approach, simplified applications, and flexible funding.

Respondents interviewed for this evaluation agreed that local capacity is a perennial issue among Indigenous and northern communities, and a limiting factor to successful delivery of the CCACE. Concern was voiced that higher capacity communities, rather than those at higher risk, may be more successful in obtaining funding. Interviewees stressed the need to view projects "holistically" (rather than through a purely technical lens), to explicitly configure projects to address capacity challenges. As was reported in the pre-evaluation, those interviewed for this evaluation observed that, unlike other federal climate change programming, funding is available for capacity-building activities (e.g., training, workshops, and staff positions), however the available funding was insufficient to address the need (e.g., funding local climate change champions in each community).

3.9 Design and Delivery: Program Governance

The successes and challenges related to the CCACE governance, identified through the key informant interviews and the document review lines of evidence, varied between each of the CCACE initiatives and there were no common themes. However, key informants identified the need to include regional offices in governance bodies and Indigenous partners facing capacity constraints are subject to higher opportunity costs for their participation.

3.10 Design and Delivery: Performance Measurement

CIRNAC interviewees noted that the program approach to developing their performance framework (outputs, outcomes and indicators) has been driven by practicality to enable the CCACE to report performance without burdening Indigenous and northern recipients. Respondents did recognize that this approach has resulted in an overly federal-centric perspective, and ideally Indigenous and northern stakeholders would identify what program success looks like from their perspectives.

While the administrative flexibility of the CCACE related to recipient progress reporting has been a factor in their project success, this has caused issues with the currency of performance data. Recipient project reports can be delayed and there can be substantial time lags in the performance data. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic impacted data collection for 2019-20 and 2020-21.

The importance of the performance measurement framework for a program goes far beyond its use for performance reporting. Through its articulation of the program theory and model (as represented by the program outcomes and outputs in the logic model, and performance indicators for these), the framework provides the basis for dialogue, information sharing and decision-making at all stages in the outcome-based management of the program. Such outcome-based management requires the alignment of Expectations, Commitments, Actions and Results. First, the framework provides a platform for initial engagement, where the conversation focuses upon aligning expectations (needs) and commitments (plans) for both internal and external stakeholders. Second, it provides the guidance (e.g., targets on indicators) for ensuring these commitments are operationalized through action. Third, it provides the basis for measuring and analyzing the results achieved or contributed to by the actions that were undertaken. And fourth, it provides the framework for ensuring that the results link back to the expectations of external and internal stakeholders.

This ongoing cycle of aligning Expectations, Commitments, Actions and Results is the driver for the program's consultation, planning, operational and reporting processes, as well as ongoing program improvement. Connections throughout the cycle are important for maintaining stakeholder understanding, effectiveness, efficient use of resources, and upholding program credibility. As the CCACE has evolved, there have been several iterations of the program performance framework over the evaluation period, including retirement and tracking of indicators as they became no longer relevant to ensure accurate reflection of program design and success.

4.1 Sufficiency of Resources to Meet Needs

"Funding" was one of the "barriers to action" in developing climate adaptation projects in the North raised during the Engagement sessions held during 2016-17. This includes the general lack of funding, high upfront costs and lack of funding for long-term projects. The document review found that in 2018, the main emerging climate change programming issues at that time concerned oversubscription, lack of dedicated funds to the Métis Nation and insufficient funds for Inuit.

Funding, or the lack thereof, was the most commonly raised issue by those interviewed for this evaluation, and so was made the subject of the Investment case study. The main findings of this case study follow.

Those interviewed for the key informant interview and case study lines of evidence described the overall investment approaches as distinctions-based, however, further refinement of the overall investment philosophy or strategy is needed. Funds are not ongoing (i.e., A-base) as would be expected for a program like CCACE supporting measures to adapt and mitigate the long-term impacts of climate change. Investment is managed very much in light of the widespread oversubscription and the substantial funding shortfalls compared to the need. The CCACE is so preoccupied (and trying to "do more with less") with the operational impacts of the widespread oversubscription that refining a strategic approach to addressing these needs has not been possible.

The evaluation team expected that the Government of Canada would have comprehensively quantified the climate change adaptation and mitigation needs as derived from climate change models, the expected impacts on Indigenous and northern communities (i.e., to understand the scope of the problem and need), and determined the required investment level to address these needs—in much the same way as Northern REACHE has determined the price tag to reduce/eliminate diesel in northern communities. Although there have been attempts to undertake this work, the variation in climate change impacts and needs and the cost associated with replicating costing studies across communities and regions is challenging. As a result, the exact requirements to address the climate change adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities is largely unknown.

Oversubscription of all CCACE initiatives is substantial and widespread, as the next few paragraphs illustrate. Many impactful projects (by their very nature requiring long term and substantial support) to meet the very urgent climate change adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities are turned away, while some are only partially funded (rather than committing all required funds at the start of a project as per private sector engineer practices). This also means that the full scope of the urgent climate change adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities is unknown.

The Year 1 ICBCM funding request totaled $34M, over 5 times the available funding. Of the 212 proposals from First Nations received through the 2018-19 Call for Proposals, 165 were unfunded, totalling $73M over 3 years, a number that was reduced to $71M when a handful of the 2018-2019 call projects were on-boarded in 2019-20. ICBCM is seeking to link to monitoring-type programs in various departments (Guardian programs). However, the massive funding shortfalls noted above will not be appreciably impacted by this measure.

Northern REACHE always spends its full budget ("and more"), and "much more is required." $9-15B is required to reduce/eliminate diesel in northern communities, but Northern REACHE is a $3.7M/year program. To help manage this gap, the program does not actively solicit project proposals, and focusses on early stage programming, feasibility, capacity and small scale energy efficiency projects, and relying on other funders (e.g., Infrastructure Canada, NRCan) to fund implementation (e.g., construction). This has led to a situation where early stages of projects have been supported by Northern REACHE but cannot be completed as the required funding is well beyond what the initiative can provide—for example, the Whapmagoostui First Nation wind project, Tarquti Energy Inc. wind clean energy systems in 12 Nunavik communities.

FNA officials were unable to quantify the oversubscription issue, mainly due to having an ongoing intake process, but did report a similar situation as Northern REACHE—for example, implementation of recommendations of drainage studies for the Ebb and Flow First Nation and Long Plain First Nation, and remedial measures to mitigate flooding at the Mattagami First Nation were unfunded.

Similarly, CCPN officials were unable to quantify the oversubscription issue, but did report a similar situation as FNA and Northern REACHE. For example, Tuktoyaktuk is facing more than a $63M funding shortfall for their project, Iqaluit Lake Geraldine Emergency requires $5.3M, the full cost of the Iqaluit water system upgrade is $256M (some of which remains unfunded)^{Footnote 9} and the Arviat drainage plan, in response to flooding, requires $4.6M to implement recommendations.

There is not a sustainable and sufficient funding stream for the CCACE to comprehensively address the climate change adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities, and the exact requirements to address the needs are largely unknown. Attempts to address the widespread program oversubscription and funding shortfalls rely on reducing the number of proposals the CCACE receives and leveraging other federal departments and programs (the "no wrong door approach"). However, these other government departments have different mandates to CIRNAC, also face limited funding levels, and those interviewed for this evaluation stated other government departments have very limited understanding of the North and Indigenous communities.

4.2 Economy and Efficiency of Delivery

As noted in sections "3.8 Design and Delivery: Program Delivery" and "3.9 Design and Delivery: Program Governance," those interviewed for this evaluation were broadly satisfied with CIRNAC's delivery and governance of the CCACE.

More commonly, interviewees raised concerns about how the CCACE can keep pace with the rapidly changing climate. Two options were offered—to scale up or evolve into something quite different.

Some respondents felt that program will not scale well, as it occupies a very specific, and critical, niche among the federal family (e.g., building capacity, supporting ideation and feasibility), with a corporate culture that has fostered genuine engagement with and trusting relationships among Indigenous and northern stakeholders, and displays nimbleness and flexibility which may not lend itself to a larger scale. Some program staff indicated that the CCACE is scale-able to address challenges with oversubscription, while maintaining engagement, relationships, and flexibility as guiding principles.

Very few proposed other delivery models—among those that did, the most common suggestion was to flow funds directly to Indigenous organizations, for example regional Indigenous organizations, viewed as being in a better position to understand regional and local needs and to direct investments to priorities.

Within its current operating parameters, however, the CCACE has not avoided adapting its delivery model as circumstance warrant. The evaluation found good evidence that the CCACE has fostered a learning culture, with officials very responsive to changing conditions. For example, the Northern REACHE initiative is modifying its governance to adopt a hub model with other federal diesel reduction programs, the "Indigenous and Remote Communities Clean Energy Hub" in partnership with ISC and NRCan will launch in 2022-23.

5.1 Conclusions

There is strong evidence that the CCACE is highly relevant in terms of its alignment with the needs of Indigenous and northern communities related to climate change adaptation and mitigation, for the following reasons:

• Like all other nations, Canada is, and will continue to be vulnerable to the wide-ranging repercussions of climate change. Indigenous and northern communities are suffering disproportionate impacts of climate change, exacerbating the political, social and economic challenges they are already facing. There will continue to be a broad, continued and urgent need to support adaptation and mitigation in Indigenous and northern communities;
• The CCACE responds to this need by supporting planning and implementation of adaptation and mitigation measures in Indigenous and northern communities; and
• The CCACE is well aligned with the PCF, Government of Canada priorities regarding climate change, reconciliation and UNDRIP, and the mandate and priorities of CIRNAC.

This relevance is reinforced by the CCACE being an effective and well conceived, designed, managed and delivered program, for the following reasons:

• The CCACE has embraced Indigenous climate leadership, including at the community-level;
• Overall and for each of its four initiatives, the CCACE has contributed to successes and positive impacts at the community-level from the projects it has supported; and
• The CCACE displays strong program delivery and governance—appropriate to the limited resources available to the program—to respond to needs and priorities identified by Indigenous and northern communities.

However, the full breadth and depth of the climate change-related needs of these communities extend far beyond, in fact, orders of magnitude beyond what this relatively modest program has been positioned and resourced to achieve. As such, the relevance and success of the CCACE, as configured during the evaluation period, cannot be assessed on the extent to which it has helped "solve" climate change adaptation and mitigation issues, but rather the extent to which it has helped some communities better understand the issues and problems they are facing and, in some cases, take first steps towards addressing them.

At minimum, the CCACE and its four initiatives should be continued consistent with its current and proven design, delivery and governance—and in doing so, adhering to the following drivers of success:

• Maintain current engagement practices, ensuring continued alignment with reconciliation, UNDRIP and Indigenous climate leadership (including at the community level);
• Continue to deliver administrative flexibility to optimize project success—and seek further streamlining opportunities;
• Continue fostering a learning environment within the program and look for opportunities to adapt the CCACE as circumstance warrant;
• Maintain the cooperation and collaboration of those federal departments that can contribute to support adaptation and mitigation in Indigenous and northern communities;
• Continue to directly support the capacity needs of Indigenous and northern communities, by systematically understanding capacity needs and being strategic in investing in capacity improvements that can be sustained; and
• Renovate the CCACE performance measurement indicators to reflect Indigenous and northern community perspectives and the outcomes and indicators that are important to them.

The evidence gathered through this evaluation suggests that, in addition to continuing the status quo, a strong business case could be made for program improvements that would add value for Indigenous and northern communities.

• Improve the sharing of knowledge and successes from individual projects to a broader audience of Indigenous and northern communities.
• Building on the success of the CCPN Climate Change Community Liaison support, establish system Navigators who could assist Indigenous and northern communities with understanding the landscape of federal programs, determine those with the best fit to meet needs, and support proponents in accessing funding to support all stages of project development, from ideation through implementation (e.g., feasibility, design and construction).
• Encourage applications from those higher risk Indigenous and northern communities that have yet to access the CCACE.

The CCACE is only able to support a small fraction of the climate change adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities. CCACE oversubscription is substantial and widespread—many impactful projects are turned away, some are only partially funded, and others suspended during implementation—and many Indigenous and northern communities with priority needs are simply not being served.

While the CCACE supports the early project stages to meet the adaptation and mitigation needs of Indigenous and northern communities—such as ideation and feasibility—the implementation of solutions generally requires resources orders of magnitude greater than that available through the CCACE. Improving community resilience to the impacts of climate change is a whole-of-government challenge, which CIRNAC and the CCACE cannot address in isolation.

5.2 Recommendations

Based on the evaluation findings and conclusions, it is recommended that CIRNAC should:

1. Continue to work with Indigenous and northern communities to ensure implementation of climate change adaptation and mitigation actions that are commensurate with the observed and projected repercussions of climate change, including sustainable funding mechanisms for Indigenous and northern communities.
2. Scale-up the CCACE—and further strengthen engagement by adding system Navigators within the program and cross initiative procedures and processes.
3. Build on the Northern REACHE's participation in the development of the Indigenous and Remote Communities Clean Energy Hub by implementing a one-window approach through collaboration with other federal departments to support adaptation in Indigenous and northern communities.
4. Co-develop the CCACE program performance measurement and reporting to ensure that Indigenous and northern communities' understandings of success towards meeting climate change adaptation and mitigation needs are reflected to foster joint leadership and accountability.