Evaluation and Audit of the Global Arctic Leadership Initiative, 2020-21 to 2023-24

Joint Audit and Evaluation report

Prepared by the Evaluation Division and Office of the Chief Audit Executive and Special Investigations
Global Affairs Canada
May 2025

Table of contents

• Acronyms and symbols
• Executive summary
• Background
• Evaluation and audit scope and methodology
• Evaluation and audit findings
• Conclusions
• Recommendations and considerations
• Annexes

Acronyms and symbols

ACAC

Arctic Cooperation Advisory Committee 

ANPF

Arctic and Northern Policy Framework

APP

Authorized Programming Process

CIAC

Canadian International Arctic Centre

CIAF

Canadian International Arctic Fund

CIRNAC

Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada

ECA

Nordic and Polar Relations Division

FAA

Financial Administration Act

FRET

Fiduciary Risk Evaluation Tool

FTE

Full-time equivalent

FY

Fiscal year

GAC

Global Affairs Canada

GALI

Global Arctic Leadership Initiative

GBA

Gender-based analysis

Gs&Cs

Grants and contributions

HQ

Headquarters

IDA

International Development Assistance

IGR

Regional Security and Defence Relations Division

MSR

Management summary report

NDFP

Northern Dimension of Canada’s Foreign Policy

NIF

Northern Initiative Fund

OGD

Other government departments

O&M

Operations and management

OPI

Office of Primary Interest

PMF

Performance Management Framework

SDWG

Sustainable Development Working Group

Ts&Cs

Terms and conditions

UArctic

The University of the Arctic

Executive summary

Since the 1990s, Global Affairs Canada (GAC) has supported the international dimension of Canada’s Arctic priorities through a series of funds. In 2020, these funds were expanded and became the Global Arctic Leadership Initiative (GALI), designed to bolster Canadian leadership and enhance participation of Arctic and northern Canadians in international forums.

The joint evaluation and audit of the Global Arctic Leadership Initiative (2020-21 to 2023-24) examined strengths, gaps and opportunities, particularly in terms of program processes, and assessed whether a management framework was in place to support effective program delivery and the management of funds. The evaluation found that GALI’s activities have become increasingly relevant within an emerging context in which Canada seeks to express its presence in the Arctic. Initial underspending was worsened by the COVID pandemic and the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the inability of some implementing partners to use budgeted funds. The context of the Arctic posed challenges, including the need to adapt approaches to work with small, Indigenous or non-traditional implementing partners who may not always have a track record with GAC, which required more intensive support from program staff.

GALI funding was essential to support Arctic Council initiatives with other government departments, yet opportunities for collaboration on broader Arctic issues remain. The GALI Mission Fund was fundamental in advancing Canadian Arctic priorities through Canadian missions abroad, despite challenges arising from the closure of the Canadian International Arctic Centre (CIAC).

The evaluation and audit underscored that while the program has integrated some elements of a distinction-based approach and taken steps to improve engagement with Indigenous partners, program staff do not yet have clear practical guidance from the department in terms of supporting Indigenous engagement.

The audit highlighted that appropriate steps were taken to deliver the program in accordance with the Treasury Board submission and terms and conditions. However, its procedures for assessing, implementing, and monitoring projects were not fully documented, posing risks for consistency and knowledge transfer. While the program was delivered in accordance with requirements, the evaluation found that GALI's processes and requirements were not sufficiently adapted to partners' capacities or the context of low-monetary-value projects of short duration. The program’s flexibility helped to alleviate these issues; however, challenges remained in balancing risk management with mitigating the administrative burden for partners. These challenges go beyond GALI and reflect key departmental challenges in transforming processes called for in the 2023 Future of Diplomacy Discussion Paper. 

Background

Arctic policies and funds, 2000 to 2024

Figure 1:

Canadian policy context of GALI

Historical overview, 2000 to 2024

Over the years, GAC has supported the international dimension of Canada's Arctic policies through various funds aimed at contributing to Arctic priorities and objectives and building on Canada's engagement in the circumpolar Arctic since the 1990s. GAC first supported the Northern Dimension of Canada's Foreign Policy (NDFP) with the Northern Dimension Fund from 2001 to 2012, with annual funding between $1M and $2M. The NDFP was replaced by the Statement on Canada's Arctic Foreign Policy, which outlined the international dimension of Canada's Northern Strategy. This was supported by the Canadian International Arctic Fund (CIAF) from 2012 to 2020, with annual funding of $1M. In 2019, Canada’s Arctic and Northern Policy Framework (ANPF) was introduced, followed by the launch of GAC’s Global Arctic Leadership Initiative (GALI) in 2020 to support the international chapter of the ANPF. As the evaluation was being completed, Canada introduced its new Arctic Foreign Policy (see page 14).

The Arctic and Northern Policy Framework

The ANPF is a whole-of-government framework, approved by Cabinet in June 2019, that continues to guide Canada’s overarching domestic and international approach to the Arctic. It provides a long-term vision for Arctic policies and investments aiming to address historical inequalities and promote sustainable development in northern and Arctic regions. Co-developed with Indigenous governments and organizations, the federal government, and 6 territorial and provincial governments (Yukon, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Newfoundland and Labrador, Quebec and Manitoba), the ANPF emphasizes collaboration and reconciliation with Indigenous communities. It integrates domestic and international directives through an overarching domestic framework, an International Chapter, and a defence and security chapter. Three departments receive funding to implement the ANPF, contributing to the ANPF Horizontal Results Framework: GAC ($35.9M, with an ongoing allocation of $8M), Transport Canada ($400M) and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC)($47.97M).

The international chapter of the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework

The ANPF international chapter seeks to reinforce Canada's sovereignty in the Arctic by ensuring Canada maintains a strong presence and exercises its rights over Arctic lands and waters, including the Northwest Passage. The chapter's goals and objectives are broad, from advancing Arctic leadership and fostering international cooperation to promoting sustainable economies and protecting the environment. It also aims to improve the resilience and well-being of Arctic and Northern Indigenous Peoples, support northern youth engagement, and advance reconciliation through the revitalization of Indigenous cultures and knowledge systems.

GALI was created to help achieve 2 of the objectives of the international chapter:

1. bolster Canadian leadership in multilateral forums where polar issues are discussed and decided upon
2. enhance representation and participation of Arctic and northern Canadians in relevant international forums and negotiations

GALI’s 5 programming pillars

The Global Arctic Leadership Initiative

GALI is the primary funding envelope for GAC's international Arctic activities, aiming to strengthen Canada’s leadership in the Arctic by supporting Canadian presence and participation in international forums and in international Arctic policy and programming. GALI works with a wide range of stakeholders, including the Arctic Council Indigenous Permanent Participants, Arctic Council working groups and their Canadian heads of delegations, and other government departments (OGDs). GALI also works with community and youth organizations, the University of the Arctic (UArctic) Secretariat and the UArctic network of institutions, Canadian missions abroad, provinces and territories, and other recipients and rights-holders (see Annex B for a more detailed stakeholders map and Annex E for examples of activities under each pillar).

GALI's main programming funds are structured around 5 programming pillars, each with its own objectives:

Pillar 1:  The Arctic Council

Seeks to reinforce Canadian capacity to contribute to the work of the Arctic Council and its expert working groups and task forces.

Budget: $875K per year*

Pillar 2: Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG)

Establishes a Canadian-based permanent secretariat for the SDWG to bolster the Arctic Council’s work on the human dimension, sustain its operations and provide funding for eligible projects.

Budget: $1.15M per year*

Pillar 3: Indigenous Permanent Participants

Supports the participation of Arctic and northern Indigenous Peoples (Permanent Participants; Arctic Athabaskan Council, Gwich'in Council International and Inuit Circumpolar Council) in international Arctic affairs.

Budget: $2M per year*

Pillar 4: Arctic and Northern Youth

Aims to enhance opportunities for youth engagement in Arctic policy and programming.

Budget: $1.075M per year*

Pillar 5: UArctic

Aims to strategically increase activities and programming in Canada’s Arctic and north. The UArctic is an international network of universities, colleges, research institutes and organizations concerned with education and research in and about the Arctic.

Budget: $900K per year*

*Amounts budgeted per year

In addition to the 5 pillars, GALI also has funds to support GAC's capacity to communicate and advocate for Canada’s international Arctic policy to domestic and international audiences, including Canadian missions abroad. GALI also has a Reserve Fund (see next page for details).

GALI’s funding structure

Figure 2:

GALI’s budget breakdown (2020-21 to 2023-24)

For programming purposes, GALI has both grants and contributions (including the 5 pillars) as well as O&M funds:

Grants and contributions

GALI has a Gs&Cs envelope of approximately $6.15M per fiscal year to support initiatives and projects that fall under its 5 programming pillars. While each pillar has a budget allocation, the program has the flexibility of reallocating funds between pillars based on needs or constraints.

Reserve Fund

The Reserve Fund, a subset of the Gs&Cs funds, was established to manage exchange rate fluctuations for Canadian contributions to Arctic Council or SDWG projects, which are often in foreign currencies, while also providing flexibility to fund other opportunities aligned with GALI’s objectives. In practice, the Reserve Fund is primarily used to finance global and local projects that advance Canada’s international Arctic priorities in collaboration with circumpolar partners.

Operations and management funds

GALI's operations and management (O&M) envelope for activities was $1.1M per fiscal year from 2021-22 to 2023-24 but was recently reduced to $800K per fiscal year. This envelope is used to support other GAC divisions, as well as and OGDs, in implementing Canada's international Arctic policy in alignment with GALI's mandate and objectives. These initiatives aim to support GAC initiatives that showcase Canadian leadership in bilateral dialogues and multilateral forums under the 5 pillars. The funds cover a range of activities, including travel, hospitality, communications, consultancy services, facilitation, monitoring, relationship building, and training and capacity building for recipients.

GALI Mission Fund

The GALI Mission Fund, formerly the Northern Initiative Fund (NIF), is a subset of the O&M envelope, and is available to GAC missions abroad. This fund supports initiatives at Canadian missions that advance Canada’s global Arctic leadership priorities. It is allocated on a case-by-case basis and is intended to achieve GALI’s objective of increasing GAC's capacity for communicating and advocating for Canada's International Arctic Policy to domestic and international audiences, including through strategic Arctic outreach and advocacy at local, regional, and multi-mission levels. As they do with other GAC funds, missions are encouraged to identify potential projects and include funding requests in their annual planning in Strategia, GAC's planning and reporting platform. During 2020-21 to 2023-24, the GALI Mission Fund provided $548K to missions.

Evaluation and audit scope and methodology

Evaluation and audit objectives and scope

Evaluation questions^{Footnote 1}

Q1. How effectively has GALI adapted to the changing context in which the program operates?

Q2. To what extent has GALI's O&M funding played a strategic role in supporting the work of Canada's missions on Arctic-related issues and advocacy?

Q3. What internal lessons can be drawn from GALI in terms of working with Indigenous partners in the context of reconciliation?

Q4. To what extent have GAC's administrative processes facilitated or limited the extent to which GALI could contribute to its objectives, especially considering the selection/determination of implementing partners?

Audit criteria

1. The department has processes, procedures, guidelines and tools to support the delivery of the program in an effective and consistent manner.
2. The program has controls in place to deliver projects aligned with program objectives, and in compliance with terms and conditions and applicable policies.
3. The program collects, analyzes and uses performance information and relevant data to inform decision-making. 

Methodology

Evaluation methodology: The evaluation used a mixed-methods approach, collecting data from a variety of sources to ensure multiple lines of evidence when analyzing data and formulating findings. Findings were triangulated using qualitative and quantitative evidence where available. Four methods were used:

Document review

Review of internal GAC documents:

• planning and strategy documents
• policy documents, briefing notes, memos and other government publications
• other evaluations, reports, audits and studies
• administrative data, projects funded under GALI

Financial review

Review of internal GAC financial documentation available on GALI: 

• review of available financial data on GALI’s Gs&Cs and O&M
• this included total disbursements, budgeted amounts, funding received by missions and variations over time

Key informant interviews

Semi-structured individual and small group interviews (n=35) with:

• current and former GAC and GALI staff
• current and former mission staff
• small sample of implementing partners and GALI funding recipients (as appropriate)

relevant OGDs

Survey of former GALI Mission Fund participants

A survey was conducted with former participants (n= 19) in initiatives funded by the GALI Mission Fund who have travelled to Canadian missions in support of GALI’s advocacy and outreach objectives. 

The survey recorded their perceptions of GALI processes to capture their views on what is working well, the main challenges, and areas for improvement.

Audit methodology: The engagement was conducted in conformance with the Institute of Internal Auditors' Global Internal Audit Standards and with the Treasury Board Policy and Directive on Internal Audit, as supported by the results of the quality assurance and improvement program.

Audit-specific methodology

The following audit methods were used to gather evidence:

• document review (policies, procedures, directives, reports, etc.)
• data analysis
• file review
• process review and mapping
• interviews with departmental officials and other stakeholders
• information analysis and consolidation
• other tests deemed necessary

Evaluation and audit collaboration and triangulation: The project was collaborative in nature to ensure triangulation of data, complementarity and thoroughness of findings. The collaborative approach enabled both the evaluation and audit teams to ensure that engagement with key stakeholders was coordinated, effective and streamlined, minimizing interviewee fatigue and reducing the administrative burden on the Office of Primary Interest. The collaboration continued until the finalization of a joint evaluation and audit report.

Evaluation limitations and mitigation measures

Evaluation and audit Findings

Policy context

Relevance to the policy context

Figure 3:

The Arctic Foreign Policy will provide new funding over 5 years to ensure that Global Affairs Canada is fit-for-purpose in the Arctic, including additional funding for the Global Arctic Leadership Initiative.

Finding 1: GALI's initiatives have become increasingly relevant within an emerging global context in which Canada seeks to express its Arctic presence and strengthen multilateral coordination.

In recent years, there has been increasing attention on the Arctic in the context of climate change, the interest of China and Russia in the Arctic, and other environmental and security concerns. The commitment to strengthen Canada's leadership in support of the rules-based international order described in the ANPF's international chapter in 2019 has become even more salient by early 2025, with the new U.S. administration's increased expressions of interest in the Arctic region, including security issues, access to critical minerals and advocy for the acquisition of Greenland.   

Even prior to these new developments, Canadian policy documents reflected the rising importance of the Arctic. Canada's Budget 2024 noted that climate change presented new threats to Canadian sovereignty as loss of the polar sea ice opens the Arctic to economic and geopolitical competition. The April 2024 defence policy Our North, Strong and Free: A Renewed Vision for Canada's Defense included $8.1B over 5 years and $73B over 20 years to protect Canada's Arctic and northern regions. These concerns are also reflected in Canada's December 2024 Arctic Foreign Policy, which builds on and supplements the international chapter of the ANPF, and provides new funding for 5 years. The policy focuses on 4 key pillars: asserting Canada’s sovereignty, advancing Canadian interests in the region, leading on Arctic governance and multilateral challenges, and adopting a more inclusive approach to Arctic diplomacy. GALI's central contribution in this global context is enhancing the meaningful participation and visibility of Canada's Indigenous and non-Indigenous Arctic residents in international Arctic-related forums, as well as enabling Canada's participation in the Arctic Council, the primary intergovernmental forum for cooperation and coordination among Arctic states. This type of visible reminder of Canada's presence in the Arctic can be seen to support the increasingly important goal of expressing Canadian presence and sovereignty over its Arctic lands and waters.

GALI's initiatives support many of the priorities expressed in the new foreign policy, particularly:

1. Reinforcing the Arctic Council: GALI supports Indigenous Permanent Participants, the Sustainable Development Working Group, and research projects collaborating with other Arctic Council members
2. Adopting a more inclusive approach to Arctic diplomacy: GALI supports Arctic and northern Indigenous Peoples and other northerners, including youth, in international Arctic-related forums, as well as cultural diplomacy through the GALI Mission Fund, relevant to ensuring that Arctic diplomacy is informed by the lived experiences of northerners
3. Advancing domestic priorities, including advancing reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples: GALI supports the participation of Indigenous peoples in UArctic education and research programs and supports Indigenous Permanent Participant organizations

Operating context

Challenges in program delivery 

Figure 4:

GALI’s budgeted amounts versus actual disbursements from 2020-21 to 2023-24

Note: These amounts comprise Gs&Cs and O&M (excluding salaries and internal services).

Finding 2: Following geopolitical constraints and some partners' inability to use budgeted funds, GALI strategically reallocated funds to minimize disruptions and underspending.

Due to COVID-related delays in the Treasury Board approval of the request for funds for GALI, as well as an additional delay in availability of approved funds, program staff could not sign the first contribution agreements with partners until March 31, 2021, approximately 6 months beyond what was originally envisioned. Given the international and travel-related activities supported by GALI related to the Arctic Council, both the COVID pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 had an impact on the program's ability to carry out planned activities:

• COVID domestic and international travel restrictions prevented staff and international academic teams from travelling within Canada or crossing borders to participate in meetings and research activities. Some restrictions were lifted by the time GALI funds were in place; while others remained (such as Nunavut, which maintained restrictions until April 2022)
• In response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Canada and 6 other members of the Arctic Council announced, in early March 2022, a pause in their participation in Arctic Council meetings and subsidiary bodies during Russia's chairing of the Council. Scientific cooperation under the Council's umbrella was also paused, being undertaken through Arctic Council working groups. In August 2023, virtual meetings of expert working groups involving all members resumed.

These geopolitical constraints, combined with the challenges of some of GALI's partners organizations to utilize funding, hampered the program's ability to disburse budgeted funds. This resulted in significant underspending, averaging approximately $1.5M per year over the evaluation period, with the most notable impact in in 2021-22.

GALI staff strategically reallocated funds from program pillars and organizations with activities that were less affected by restrictions to those with greater capacity to spend and implement activities, which helped mitigate the underspending and the pausing of certain activities. For example, during COVID, money was shifted to organizations with activities that did not involve travel or that could convert in-person events to virtual activities. During the pause on Arctic Council activities (which delayed the establishment of the SDWG Secretariat, including the hiring of staff and impacted Permanent Participants ability to spend), some funds from these 2 pillars were shifted toward the youth and UArctic pillars.

This was made possible by the flexibility built into the program. While funds were designated each year by pillar, there was no limitation on reallocating funds between pillars during the year. Adjusting money by pillar was a strategic approach to deal with these challenges; however, it was not possible to fully compensate for the impact of these events. For example, organizations funded under the youth pillar are often small entities that cannot absorb large amounts of funding on short notice.

Working in the context of the Arctic 

Finding 3: Partnering with small, local organizations was an appropriate approach for working in the unique context of the Arctic.

Working with Arctic and northern Canadians presents unique logistical challenges, including high travel costs, dispersed communities and unreliable Internet service in the region. To reach youth in communities in Canada's North and to support the Indigenous Permanent Participant organizations, GALI has funded small organizations that are most often based in Canada's northern and Arctic region. Working with small, local organizations is well aligned with the concept of locally led development, which GAC has endorsed. This places the emphasis on shifting resources and capacity to national and subnational governments and to national and local community organizations. While generally associated with international development assistance, working with local partners is also well aligned with the broader domestic goals of the ANPF, and is a key mechanism to reach participants in GALI-funded projects.

Finding 4: The programming context of working with small or non-traditional partners, and the need to adapt approaches for Indigenous partners, required a higher level of effort from staff.

As other programs at GAC have experienced, working with small (such as local organizations) or non-traditional partners (such as universities) who may not have a track record with GAC requires a higher level of support from program staff compared to working with large, experienced organizations. The small organizations supported by GALI's youth pillar, as well as some university partners, often employed a very limited number of staff who held multiple roles and were unfamiliar with the expectations involved in GAC funding, such as the details of contribution agreements, or required policies. Because there was no centralized support at GAC for partners to turn to, they sometimes needed considerable guidance from program staff on how to meet corporate and reporting requirements.

Recent evaluations^{Footnote 2} at GAC have highlighted the challenges faced by programs working with small partners, including the extra efforts required to help small or new partners to navigate corporate procedures and to finalize agreements. For the staff managing GALI, helping partners to understand and comply with the funding application processes, grants and contribution agreements, and reporting requirements created an additional workload for which the very limited number of team members was not designed. The 39 grants and contributions projects funded from 2020-21 to 2023-24 have largely, in practice, been managed by 2 project leaders. Furthermore, staffing levels did not allow for the investment of time required for adapting departmental tools, incorporating a full range of culturally appropriate approaches to working with Indigenous partners, or spending additional time seeking and building new partnerships to fully utilize the youth pillar budget. Challenges with human resource capacity were also noted in reviews of GALI and its previous iterations.

Grants and contributions

Project procedure documentation: Audit findings

Finding 5: The procedures used by the program to assess, implement and monitor projects were not fully documented.

Since GALI is a foreign affairs program, it is not required to follow the Authorized Programming Process, which was designed for the department’s Development stream projects. Despite this, the audit team noted that the GALI program used specific APP steps to manage and deliver projects in compliance with applicable policies and regulations. Although the program adjusted the APP procedures to match its scale, the audit team found that the processes were not documented. In addition, certain steps such as assessing project applications or collecting lessons learned were conducted informally.

Documented processes and procedures, as well as appropriate tools, are critical for supporting timely and effective program delivery through the implementation of consistent procedures across all projects and the efficient transfer of knowledge among program staff.

Funding processes

Figure 5:

Value of Gs&Cs projects from FY 2020-21 to FY 2023-24

During the engagement scope spanning FYs 2020-21 to 2023-24, more than half of GALI’s Gs&Cs projects had budgets of $500K or less (i.e. 24 projects out of a total of 39, or 61.5% of all projects), including 18 projects (46%) of less than $200K. In addition, 9 projects (23%) had budgets of $1M or more, which included only 3 projects (8%) with budgets between $2.5M and $5.5M.

These figures highlight the relatively low monetary value of most GALI Gs&Cs projects.

Finding 6: GALI’s funding processes and requirements were not sufficiently adapted to partners' capacities or the context of small monetary value projects.

While projects funded by GALI between 2020 and 2024 ranged in size ($46K to $5.5M), more than half of the Gs&Cs projects (24 projects) had budgets of less than $500K. With almost all GALI projects limited to 1 year and Treasury Board rules prohibiting fund carryovers for foreign affairs programs, GALI and its (often low-capacity) partners faced additional workload in managing unspent funds across multiple low-value projects.

Despite the relatively small size and short duration of GALI-funded projects, implementing partners were subject to nearly the same administrative processes and requirements as projects with significantly higher levels of funding within the department. Although GALI streamlined workloads by providing support and introducing flexibility into processes, the implementing partners and the GALI team faced a significant administrative burden related to project management. For partners with fewer resources and less experience with contribution agreements, valuable resources had to be allocated to navigate these administrative processes, which stakeholders have described as burdensome. For the GALI team, whose resources were already limited, this represented an extra workload as it had to provide tailored support to partners throughout the projects life cycle to ensure compliance with requirements. This challenge was further compounded by the short duration of projects, which resulted in the inefficiencies of recurring proposal submissions and the associated administrative and reporting workload.

Although flexibility existed for organizations formally recognized by the Government of Canada as Indigenous (through Annex K of the Directive on Transfer Payments), including the ability to extend the duration of contribution funding and to choose between semi-annual or annual advances and reporting, only 3 organizations funded by GALI qualified, the 3 Canada-based Indigenous Permanent Participant organizations.

These issues are not unique to GALI, having also been raised in previous evaluations such as those of the Partnership for Gender Equality, the Canadian Fund for Local Initiatives, the Women Voice and Leadership (WVL) and the Partnerships for Development Innovation Branch (KFM) evaluation. These evaluations examined programs working with small partners and highlighted the mismatch of requirements for smaller projects and their partners, given their capacity and the value and duration of the projects, a challenge also faced by GALI. Similarly to GALI, the WVL evaluation found that corporate due diligence and reporting requirements were not appropriate for working with small partners. Some of these evaluations also noted that GAC’s risk appetite was an impediment to increasing the number of partnerships with small organizations. Similar issues are being examined as part of GAC's Grants and Contribution Transformation Initiative, which is examining all Gs&Cs processes and operational policies to redesign them and modernize the departmental Gs&Cs platform. This includes the recurring challenges stemming from the undifferentiated application of transfer payment rules to smaller programs with distinct contexts. Taking into account the specificities of smaller programs like GALI, such as the need for a human-centred approach, will be key to avoid creating additional barriers to flexibility. 

Reporting

Finding 7: While GALI's reporting requirements were mismatched with partners' capacity and context, introducing flexibility in those requirements alleviated some of the challenges.

During the development of GALI, reporting requirements were established for contribution recipients to provide an annual narrative progress report on defined outputs and outcomes, and a financial report to monitor project progress, achievement of results, costs and lessons learned. In addition, in most cases, recipients also needed to provide an interim progress report. They were also required to report any changes to their risk assumptions and mitigation strategies at least once a year. Recipients of grants, due to the nature of their funding, were only required to provide an annual report. Partners highlighted that the content, nature and frequency of the reporting requirements were often misaligned with their organizational capacity and the length and size of projects, posing significant challenges for small organizations with limited resources. Some northern organizations, less familiar with results-based management practices, adopted quantitative indicators but lacked a comprehensive approach to tracking. Some partners perceived that quantitative indicators and other performance measurement tools and frameworks such as logic models were not only cumbersome but, as a Westernized approach to understanding outcomes, was poorly suited to the cultural context in the North.

In addition, it has been challenging for the program to find ways to capture outcomes from initiatives that last less than 1 year and that don't necessarily translate immediately into specific short-term changes in behaviour. Rather, these initiatives are intending to contribute to building long-term outcomes in the North, which in most cases would take place long after project progress reports are completed. This reflects the tension between pursuing long-term outcomes and GAC's approach of managing the risk of working with small organizations by funding short-term projects.

Despite these challenges, interviews with partners highlighted the flexibility of GALI staff in adapting reporting requirements and deadlines as a best practice. To cope with delays from partner organizations with limited capacity or operating in a Northern and Indigenous environment, GALI extended deadlines, reduced the number of required reports and accepted verbal updates instead of written interim reports, easing the burden on these organizations. Additionally, GALI funded a consultant to support partners in developing reporting tools and answering questions, with the goal of tailoring support to help them meet requirements and strengthening their reporting capacities. In some instances, GALI allocated funding to support organizational capacity building to enhance the ability of organizations to secure funding and implement initiatives that achieve sustainable outcomes. Partners expressed their appreciation of this flexibility and the value-added of the team's personalized support. However, this approach did not fully address what some partners saw as the misalignment of reporting requirements with the context, and opportunities remain to better capture program outcomes in the context of the North.

Balancing risk and due diligence 

Finding 8: It was challenging for GALI, as a foreign affairs program with differing levels of centralized support, to balance risk management and due diligence with streamlining processes and reducing partner burden, highlighting departmental challenges inherent to Transformation.

GAC's Future of Diplomacy discussion paper (June 2023) stated that the department must adapt to a rapidly changing environment and address burdensome policies and processes. The paper calls for business processes that create more agency for staff by embracing smart risk-taking. However, flexibility and agency for staff entail additional risks as well as opportunities.

Because GAC's approach is for foreign affairs programming to be responsible for its own processes, policies and templates, GALI staff were responsible for designing their own terms and conditions document. Unlike international development assistance (IDA), foreign affairs programming is not required to use all steps of the Authorized Programming Process. However, staff must still ensure responsible management of transfer payments. As such, GALI's Ts&Cs were drafted in 2020 to include what staff assessed to be the most relevant corporate processes that would strike a balance between risk management (especially working with some partners without a track record with grants and contributions from GAC) and the streamlining of processes. This included a somewhat streamlined version of the APP, including use of the FRET, environmental sustainability assessment, GBA Plus analysis and certain reporting requirements. While GALI staff could potentially have developed their own adapted tools that might have been more suitable for the program context, such as a simplified FRET, program staff did not have adequate time or expertise to undertake this and required some process to assess risk when selecting projects. In light of the department's growing openness toward risk tolerance and the experience gained in implementing GALI over several years, the GALI Ts&Cs are being revised to increase flexibility and streamline requirements. However, the program is still constrained by the Treasury Board restriction that unspent foreign affairs funds not be carried over from one year to the next (unlike IDA programs), which limits flexibility.

While foreign affairs programs are perceived to have more flexibility in the department, they also do not receive the same level of centralized support as IDA programs. For example, unlike international assistance programs, a small foreign affairs program like GALI receives ad hoc, as opposed to dedicated, tailored support from the GAC Grants and Contributions Centre of Expertise (SGD). GALI also did not receive a dedicated project-level financial management adviser to review projects and help prevent errors. By choosing to use the FRET, GALI could access the expertise of centralized internal support services to review FRET elements.

The potential benefits of streamlined processes and staff agency sought by GAC's Transformation process may not be fully realized without ensuring that dedicated support and an adapted tool set are available that can give staff confidence to make program design decisions that align with the department's acceptance of risk.

GALI Mission Fund  

Mission Fund's strategic value

Finding 9: The GALI Mission Fund was fundamental in advancing Canadian Arctic priorities through the network of Canadians missions abroad.

From 2020-21 to 2023-24, the GALI Mission Fund supported 16 Canadians missions abroad, located in both Arctic  and non-Arctic states, to implement a total of 61 initiatives, for a total funding of $548K, to advance Canada's international Arctic interests and priorities in collaboration with circumpolar partners. Initiatives funded by the GALI Mission Fund ranged from workshops, conferences and forums to discussion panels and other international events typically showcasing Arctic, Northern and Indigenous actors from Canada and foreign partner countries. The thematic focuses of GALI Mission Fund initiatives covered various Arctic priorities such as Canada's global image, Arctic leadership and defence, rights of Indigenous Peoples, water issues and climate change. Through these initiatives, the GALI Mission Fund has enabled the participation of 62 speakers—Northern Canadians, Indigenous peoples, youth, elders and experts—at Arctic-related events abroad, enabling them to network, represent Canada and share knowledge with international counterparts.

Mission staff found that the GALI Mission Fund was an essential and strategic tool in supporting advocacy of Canada's Arctic priorities, including reconciliation objectives, by providing missions with funds to carry out key activities that could not have been implemented using their operating budgets alone. Missions noted that they were unable to identify alternative sources of funding to support the specific activities funded by the GALI Mission Fund, such as facilitating Indigenous participation in key Arctic events abroad. These initiatives enabled Canadian missions, to contribute to strengthening Canadian leadership in the Arctic, improve the representation and participation of Arctic, Northern and Indigenous Canadians in relevant Arctic forums and events, and supporting bilateral cooperation with Arctic and key non-Arctic states and actors.

An external survey highlighted positive feedback from past participants in GALI Mission Fund projects, emphasizing lessons learned, knowledge sharing, networking opportunities with foreign Indigenous actors, and strong support from Canadian government staff. These examples illustrated the fund's strategic value in advancing Canada's Arctic priorities and the ANPF's international chapter objectives.

Examples of GALI Mission Fund initiatives

GALI Mission Fund challenges

Finding 10: The closure of CIAC and recent changes in GALI Mission Fund criteria created challenges, notably in providing mission support services and meeting the needs of vulnerable beneficiaries. 

CIAC’s support and intermediary role

From the launch of the new iteration of the GALI Mission Fund in 2021 through 2023, missions benefited from support, guidance and advice from the CIAC office based in Oslo. CIAC played an intermediary role between the missions and headquarters (HQ), providing dedicated support ranging from information and guidance on GALI Mission Fund funding applications, to advice on the eligibility of project proposals, to sharing key contacts in the Arctic relevant to mission initiatives, including Indigenous and Northern speakers. CIAC's support predated the introduction of the current GALI Mission Fund, since it was created in 2009 and had responsibilities for administering the Northern Initiative Fund, the GALI Mission Fund's predecessor.

However, in June 2023, Canada closed the CIAC office and reallocated 3 of its 4 FTEs to ECA at HQ in Ottawa. This led to a certain loss of expertise, outreach and support for the missions, including in relation to GALI Mission Fund funding applications. This resulted in some challenges for the missions, which lost the corporate memory and support of CIAC's Locally Engaged Staff. This included useful connections in the Arctic, and the intermediary role it used to play between them and HQ in providing timely feedback and advice on GALI Mission Fund project proposals. This, in turn, put pressure on the HQ team to provide feedback to missions and respond to their questions while they were in the early stages of ramping up these new capabilities and expanding the number of funded projects. Some stakeholders also suggested that reallocating key former CIAC staff to HQ fostered collaboration between ECA's policy and programming teams.

Recent changes to GALI Mission Fund criteria and processes

In addition, recent changes made to the GALI Mission Fund utilization criteria, following reductions in the Government of Canada's travel budget, have limited certain expenses, such as staff travel and hospitality. As a result, mission staff, in some cases, have been unable to travel to accompany Indigenous guests to events, potentially hindering relationship-building and their ability to provide adequate support for Indigenous participants in line with the approaches advocated by Canada’s reconciliation plan. However, in some cases, the GALI team has reportedly provided support and used a flexible approach to the criteria governing the use of the GALI Mission Fund to adapt to participants' realities. Detailed information on the fund and its criteria was provided to select missions but was not available in an easily accessible common location.

These recent changes, including CIAC’s closure and changes in GALI Mission Fund criteria and processes, made it more challenging for missions to accommodate the needs of vulnerable beneficiaries when carrying out projects, and highlighted some mismatch between Mission Fund criteria and the cultural specificities and realities of Indigenous rights-holders, including youth and elders.

Program delivery

Grants and contributions and Mission Fund: Audit findings

Finding 11: Appropriate steps were carried out to deliver the program according to the Treasury Board submission and GALI terms and conditions.

As part of the audit, a sample of 9 grants and contributions projects and 7 GALI Mission Fund initiatives were reviewed.

Projects generally complied with GALI terms and conditions regarding alignment with program objectives and eligible expenditures, and compliance with reporting requirements, with the exception of 1 financial report that was missing. In addition, mission initiatives generally aligned with program guidelines and Treasury Board submission requirements.

In addition, the program complied with the Financial Administration Act and the Policy on Transfer Payments. All required approvals for the reviewed grants and contributions projects and GALI Mission Fund initiatives were signed by individuals with the appropriate delegation of authority.

Reporting

The program developed a performance measurement framework to measure and assess performance against specific indicators. It was noted that the PMF is aligned with GAC’s responsibilities under the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework.

To collect, record and analyze individual project results against the program’s indicators, the program adapted a version of the departmental management summary report (MSR) that was derived from the PMF. The audit noted that results were reported for all projects except for 1 mission initiative. In addition, the compiled project results in the MSR were subsequently used to report on GAC’s responsibilities under the Arctic and Northern Policy Framework.

Working with other government departments

Funding Arctic initiatives

Figure 6:

Total GALI funding received by OGDs per FY

Finding 12: GALI supported the Arctic Council initiatives of other government departments; however, opportunities remain for collaboration on broader Arctic issues.

In the context of the ANPF, including its international chapter, effective collaboration among the implicated government departments is important for achieving its core objectives. As part of this collaboration, the interdepartmental Arctic Cooperation Advisory Committee was created to provide a mechanism for dialogue between Permanent Participants, Indigenous, territorial, provincial and federal representatives on international Arctic priorities and facilitate policy alignment among stakeholders.

Separately, GALI has been engaged with OGDs through the ECA policy team's coordinated group discussions with Canadian heads of delegations to the Arctic Council. These meetings provide a platform to discuss priorities related to the work of OGDs, and share recommendations based on their expertise and knowledge of Arctic priorities. It is also an opportunity for GALI to remind OGDs of available funding.

The GALI team also sends formal invitations for OGDs to recommend project proposals for GALI funding to support Canada's leadership in the Arctic Council. Departments that have received funding to support initiatives aligned with GALI's objectives include CIRNAC, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, Natural Resources Canada, the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, and the Canadian Coast Guard. The GALI team's interactions with OGDs have been described as seamless and helpful in supporting departments to determine how to access funding by providing a step-by-step approach. OGDs have also noted that GALI's mandate fills a gap by supporting Arctic Council initiatives, which are typically not covered by other departments.

However, OGDs have identified some challenges related to interdepartmental collaboration on Arctic issues. The initiatives implemented by different departments were sometimes perceived as being siloed, notably due to the division departmental-specific funding envelopes for the ANPF and the lack of coordination and communication between departments on similar Arctic initiatives involving the same implementing partners. It was noted that better tracking of initiatives and collaboration could help address duplication and potentially reduce the reporting burden on partners. While these challenges were noted, addressing interdepartmental coordination issues on the Arctic beyond GALI exceeds the program's mandate and responsibilities.

Information and communication

Visibility and information sharing

Finding 13: The lack of key communication materials hindered the program's ability to reach new potential implementing partners for the Youth Pillar or to share key information with internal partners.

While program staff expressed interest in developing communication materials, such as a dedicated program website, GAC's communication policy did not allow the program to have its own external website. Additionally, staff realized that they did not have the capacity to respond to the additional requests and inquiries that would result from a public website, nor would they be able to necessarily reach the kind of organizations that GALI seeks to fund - organizations that might not naturally turn to the GAC website as an obvious source of funding.

The lack of key communication tools and online presence has limited GALI's visibility among potential new implementing partners, especially for the Reserve Fund and the Northern Youth pillar, which allows for more flexible partner selection than other pillars. Beyond existing networks, it is unclear how new partners, unfamiliar with GALI, would discover the program, understand funding opportunities or learn about application requirements.

Additionally, unlike similar programs, GALI does not issue formal calls for proposals to invite organizations or individuals to submit project proposals for funding. While previous research conducted by a consultant recommended working with the same partners to build and consolidate relationships and support, the lack of formal calls for proposals reduces the program's reach to the public. This also does not appear to align with the Directive on Transfer Payments which requires that "a description of each program is made public, including application and eligibility requirements and the criteria against which applications will be assessed." This highlights the need to reflect on the relevance of using calls for proposals, and, if used, how they can be designed to better suits the need and the realities of a small program.

Missions also had limited information to learn about GALI and the GALI Mission Fund or become familiar with its requirements. The information has been ad hoc and limited to informal emails and the recent sharing of documents via a SharePoint page. Addressing these communication barriers both externally and internally would help meet this policy obligation and broaden awareness of GALI's funding opportunities under its 5 pillars and for the GALI Mission Fund.

Working with Indigenous partners

Gaps in guidance and support

Finding 14: Guidance related to working with Indigenous partners was limited, creating challenges for implementing the GALI Mission Fund.

Indigenous-related training with the Canada School of Public Service and internally at GAC helped mission staff better understand Indigenous communities in Canada, supporting their work with northerners and Indigenous Peoples in the context of the GALI Mission Fund. However, both the audit and evaluation teams noted that while government-wide principles have been developed, there are no formal departmental or program-level procedures or guidelines for engaging with Indigenous partners. As identified at the mission level and among GAC staff at HQ, the lack of guidance and practical resources, as well as certain GAC procedures, hindered effective engagement. The department is currently developing such documentation. OGDs and partners emphasized the need for a guide on key considerations for Indigenous engagement, along with a comprehensive list of partners and contacts. In early 2025, the GALI team began addressing this gap by creating a dedicated SharePoint page with resources to support the GALI Mission Fund implementation.

Finding 15: The transfer of certain activities under GAC's Action Plan on Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples from CIAC to ECA HQ, and resulting delays, contributed to a lack of guidance and support for GALI in working with Indigenous partners.

Launched in 2021, GAC's Action Plan on Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples provides a framework to guide the department's efforts toward greater engagement and stronger relationships with Indigenous Peoples. The Action Plan has 6 goals and 24 actions for 2021-25, and each action includes annual planned activities. ECA is the focal point responsible for 7 activities that contribute to the achievement of 5 actions linked to GALI's programming pillars and objectives. GALI funded and carried out most of these activities, including, for example, the funding of projects that allow Arctic and Northern Indigenous Peoples to participate in Arctic events via the Youth pillar and the Mission Fund. Before its closure in 2023, CIAC was also the focal point responsible for coordinating GAC's work on 8 activities that contributed to the achievement of 5 actions. Among other responsibilities, this included integrating Indigenous perspectives into Arctic initiatives and included training activities, coordinating webinars with missions, maintaining resources like the Arctic wiki, and implementing a communications strategy, including social media tools for missions. CIAC was also responsible for ensuring the support of Indigenous representation, identifying speaking opportunities for Indigenous youth and women at Arctic conferences, and developing bilateral strategies for engagement in the Arctic and to promote Indigenous perspectives and participation in science and research. Since the repatriation to HQ of CIAC's resources, these activities have been reassigned to ECA, but the sudden loss of long-time CIAC employees and the rapid transition required ECA to quickly absorb new functions while managing a high workload and staffing gaps without sufficient time to ramp up. This resulted in a lack of guidance and support for GALI and mission staff in working with Indigenous partners, notably in implementing GALI Mission Fund projects.

A distinctions-based approach

Finding 16: GALI has integrated some elements of a distinctions-based approach but could expand its efforts further.

Adopting a distinctions-based approach aligns with Canada's United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act Action Plan 2023-28 and commitment in recognizing the diversity of Indigenous Peoples. It also supports GAC's commitment to meaningful engagement with Indigenous Peoples on international issues affecting them. While not all GALI partners are Indigenous, the principles of a distinctions-based approach in the delivery of GALI is important as it focuses on northern and Arctic priorities, recognizing that the realities of Arctic communities can differ from other communities in Canada. The ANPF and its international chapter were co-developed with the federal government, Inuit, First Nations and Métis, and 6 territorial and provincial governments, through a distinctions-based approach. GALI was subsequently developed, building on its predecessor, to include funding for 5 key programming pillars that help respond to gaps and opportunities identified during the ANPF co-development process. However, the language used in the development of GALI wasn't directly focused on a distinctions-based approach. Non-Indigenous implementing partners are not required to implement this approach and are instead required to apply a GBA Plus approach. However, ECA is exploring how to incorporate this language and approach as it refines and adjusts the program for the future to have a more mindful application of distinctions-based approach, to contribute to improve working relationship with partners and to continue to ensure that the needs of Indigenous rights-holders are being met through program design and delivery. As part of that effort, ECA's policy team has undertaken a process to identify best practices for consultation and engagement.

In the meantime, in daily program implementation, the GALI team has been one of the pioneers at GAC in working with Indigenous implementing partners by providing a tailored approach to each partner, based on relationship building, which stakeholders and rights-holders have identified as key to the program's implementation. GALI is described as prompt, accessible and effective, offering personal and informal support to partners. Face-to-face interactions and travel to the North have been crucial for building relationships with partners. Partners found GALI staff to be supportive, engaged, and flexible in addressing stakeholders' needs, enabling partners to better pursue their objectives and having their perspectives valued. In addition, GALI has recently assigned a dedicated staff member to lead on Indigenous issues. Interviewees also shared additional complementary best practices for working with Indigenous rights holders, including: consulting partners to understand their needs by adopting a co-development approach, recognizing communities’ priorities,  avoiding assumptions, remaining open to exploring different approaches, avoiding a one-size-fits-all approach, promoting self-determination, ensuring meaningful representation, being mindful of consultation fatigue, identifying ways to compensate Indigenous rights-holders for their time, assessing activities for potential community impacts, and respecting the decision-making and communication approaches of each community. In some instances, working with Indigenous consultants can be helpful in navigating issues with Indigenous groups and engaging appropriately.

Conclusions

While pointing out areas for improvement in GALI’s implementation, the findings reinforce GALI's relevance in the Arctic's current geopolitical environment and the program's alignment with current Canadian foreign policy priorities in the region. GALI's central contribution to this global context is enhancing the participation and visibility of Canada's Indigenous and non-Indigenous Northern and Arctic residents in international Arctic-related forums (particularly the Arctic Council). This supports the goal of expressing Canadian presence in and sovereignty over its Arctic lands and waters.

GALI is an unusual program at GAC as it operates in both a domestic and international context. It has some funding dedicated to Canadian Indigenous partners, especially related to Indigenous representation at the Arctic Council. Working in the Arctic context also presents challenges, including the remote nature of small communities, which makes transportation, whether domestic or international, particularly expensive and time-consuming. While this program context may be unique, GALI shares many of the same challenges identified in recent evaluations of international development programs funded by GAC. This includes the mismatch of GAC’s corporate requirements linked to due diligence and reporting with the lower capacity of small partners, especially considering the often-low monetary value of projects. 

Although GALI is a low-monetary-value program in the context of overall GAC programming, there were some key areas of learning for the department:   

Balancing due diligence and smart risk-taking: GAC's Future of Diplomacy Discussion Paper (June 2023) calls for a transformation of business processes at GAC to reduce burden and create more agency for staff by embracing smart risk-taking. As a foreign affairs program responsible for its own processes, policies and templates, GALI is an example of the challenges programs face when trying to balance the streamlining of business processes with the need for risk management and due diligence.

This highlights the importance of equipping staff with necessary tools, clear guidance and support to ensure they can be confident in making program design decisions that align with the department’s acceptance of risk, including for foreign affairs programs. Work already underway at the department on business process transformation will be an important part of this. 

The need for adaptation and an investment of staff time to work with different types of implementing partners: One of the elements of risk management for a program like GALI is working with small partners, Indigenous organizations and other non-traditional implementing partners. While partnering with these organizations was an appropriate approach for working in this context, it also required a greater level of effort from staff to develop relationships and support partners to meet corporate and reporting requirements. Notably, this included the need to adapt working methods for Indigenous partners, who in some cases were also small organizations. This is especially relevant as federal government expectations for working with Indigenous organizations and rights-holders have evolved in recent years. In order to effectively implement these types of adaptations and provide support to small partners, a greater investment of staff time should be expected compared to programs working with high-capacity partners with a long track record of working with GAC. The evaluation and audit also highlighted that the department lacks clear guidance and support in terms of Indigenous engagement processes, which would help ensure alignment with GAC's Action Plan on Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples and effective program delivery.

The audit highlighted that, while appropriate steps were taken to deliver the program in accordance with the Treasury Board submission and the program terms and conditions, the program's procedures for assessing, implementing and monitoring projects were not fully documented. This underscored the need to formalize corporate processes to support knowledge retention and broader departmental transformation initiatives.

Recommendations and considerations

Evaluation Recommendations

1. It is recommended that the program address gaps in key communication materials to ensure accessibility of program information and improve program awareness and reach both within and outside of GAC.
   Supported by findings 10 and 13
2. It is recommended that the program maintain and build in more flexibility in implementation, notably in key policy and funding instruments such as the Treasury Board submission or terms and conditions, to improve delivery and take into account the unique context of the Arctic.
   Supported by findings 2,3,6,7 and 8

Evaluation and audit recommendation

3. It is recommended that the program address gaps in engagement with Indigenous organizations and rights holders, including with respect to the distinction-based approach, and enhance access to relevant Arctic and Indigenous resources to align with Reconciliation priorities and best practices.
   Supported by findings 14, 15 and 16

Audit recommendation

4. It is recommended that the program document processes related to project management to support consistent practices and knowledge retention.
   Supported by finding 5

Considerations for GAC

Greater level of effort required by program staff to manage low-monetary value projects with low-capacity partners:  Through its programming, the Global Arctic Leadership Initiative primarily worked with low-capacity partners to manage several short-term, low-value projects (typically lasting a year or less). The evaluation found that this situation required significant effort on the part of GALI staff to help partners meet funding and reporting requirements, while at the same time devoting substantial resources to coordination, ensuring smooth project delivery, and achieving program objectives. Given this context, the department should consider incorporating these factors into program design and resource allocation to ensure alignment with the level of effort required for effective program and project implementation.

The Arctic as a complex and unique environment: GALI operates in the Arctic, where the unique challenges of remote communities, working with small local organizations and the need for culturally adapted approaches with Indigenous partners add complexity to program and project implementation. The department should consider factoring in the unique context of the Canadian Arctic in designing and adapting programs and allocating adequate resources to ensure effective implementation.

Departmental support for Indigenous engagement: Implementing GALI requires meaningful engagement with Indigenous organizations, partners and rights-holders, which demands significant effort, tailored approaches and programmatic flexibility. While some departmental guidance and support exist, and GAC has initiated a broader co-development process with OGDs, Indigenous partners and rights-holders to establish policy guidelines on Indigenous engagement on international issues, practical and tailored guidance and support for program implementation remain limited. The department should consider offering tailored tools and support and ensure programs have the required flexibility to effectively and respectfully engage with Indigenous partners, organizations and rights-holders.

Balancing risk management and due diligence with streamlining processes and reducing partner burden: Current initiatives underway in the department, as well as any future initiatives, should take into account the particular needs of foreign affairs programs, as is the Grants and Contributions Transformation Initiative. The department and the program should consider how foreign affairs programs might obtain equal access to relevant centralized departmental financial expertise as do international development assistance programs, to ensure that staff have the support they need to implement the Transformation agenda of enabling smart risk-taking while ensuring due diligence.

Annexes

Annex A: Timeline of GALI and its predecessors' events and policies

Annex B: Partners/Rights-holders map of GALI context

Figure 7:

This map shows the network of partners and rights-holders connected to GALI. Light blue boxes represent those who received GALI funding during 2020-21 to 2023-24, while dark blue boxes indicate those who do not receive funding but are still engaged in the broader network.

Annex C: GALI logic model excerpt related to 2020-21 to 2024-25 funding^{Footnote 3}

Ultimate outcome

Change for beneficiaries

1000 Strong, self-reliant people and communities working together for a vibrant, prosperous and sustainable Arctic region at home and abroad, while expressing Canada’s enduring Arctic sovereignty 

Goal: Canadian Arctic and Northern Indigenous peoples are resilient and healthy.

Intermediate Outcomes

changes in performance, behaviour or practice

1100 Increased contributions to international Arctic research, discussions, and events by Northern Canadians, including indigenous peoples, women and youth.  

Immediate Outcomes

changes in capacity, skills, ability, knowledge

1110 Increased participation of Northern Canadians, including Indigenous peoples, with UArctic education and research programs.

1120 Enhanced access for Canadian Arctic and Northern youth to participate in international Arctic policy and programming.

Goal: An international rules-based order in the Arctic that responds effectively to new challenges and opportunities.

Intermediate Outcomes

changes in performance, behaviour or practice

1200 Increased contribution in international Arctic decision-making by Northern Canadians, including Indigenous peoples, women and youth.

Immediate Outcomes

changes in capacity, skills, ability, knowledge

1210 Enhanced capacity of the Canada-based Indigenous Permanent Participants (PPs) to engage in Arctic foreign policy and programming.

1220 Increased GAC capacity for communication and advocacy, including Canadian missions abroad, on Canada’s international Arctic policy to domestic and international audiences.

Intermediate Outcomes

changes in performance, behaviour or practice

1300 Enhanced Canadian engagement in strengthening international Arctic forums, including at the Arctic Council in areas of human, social, economic development and environmental protection.

Immediate Outcomes

changes in capacity, skills, ability, knowledge

1310 Increased capacity for Canada to advance the work of the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG).

1320 Increased capacity for Canada to contribute to the Arctic Council’s (AC) initiatives that benefit our North.

Annex D: Evaluation questions and sub-questions

Annex E: Examples of GALI-funded projects by pillar

Pillar: Artic Council

Project title: Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna 2023-24

Recipient: Conservation of Artic Flora and Fauna (CAFF)

Budget: $548,840

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: This project supports Canada’s participation in CAFF programs by funding Indigenous inclusion in the Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative, seabird tracking research, circumpolar biodiversity monitoring, and an Indigenous Canadian Fellowship to enhance expertise and engagement in Arctic conservation.

Project title: Support to Artic Council Secretariat 2024

Recipient: Artic Council Secretariat (ACS)

Budget: $155,000

Fund type: Grant

Project summary: This project supports Canada’s 2023 contribution to the ACS, enabling key administrative, coordination and stakeholder engagement activities outlined in its work plan.

Pillar: Sustainable Development Working Group

Project title: SDWG Secretariat Host

Recipient: Université Laval (ULaval)

Budget: $5.5M over 5FYs

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: This project aims to establish a Secretariat to coordinate SDWG activities, provide administrative support and represent the SDWG, as well as a Project Fund managed by Laval University to secure additional funding for projects aligned with the SDWG’s Strategic Framework 2017-2030.

Pillar: Indigenous Permanent Participants

Project title: Support to ICC at Arctic Council 2021-24

Recipient: Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC) Canada

Budget: $2.1M

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: This project aims to enhance Inuit self-determination and strengthen the ICC’s positions by raising awareness on key Inuit issues, supporting its participation in the Arctic Council and promoting engagement opportunities with government and Inuit rights organizations.

Project title: Support to GCI at Arctic Council 2021-24

Recipient: Gwich'in Council International (GCI)

Budget: $1.9M 

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: This project aims to strengthen the GCI's capacity and participation in Arctic Council Working Group projects, to support GCI's contribution to the implementation of the ANPF and to advance GCI's strategic capacities and articulation of priorities.

Project title: Support to AAC at Arctic Council 2021-24

Recipient: Arctic Athabaskan Council (AAC) Canada

Budget: $825,025 

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: This project aims to enhance the well-being of Athabaskan People in Canada by strengthening their engagement in international Arctic events, increasing the AAC’s research capacity and participation in Arctic Council Working Groups, and engaging with Arctic Forum stakeholders to reflect Athabaskan People’s interests in votes and declarations.

Pillar: Artic and Northern Youth

Project title: Northern Youth - Students on Ice

Recipient: Students on Ice (SOI)

Budget: $549,305

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: The project aims to increase youth voices in Arctic policy and issues by having over 200 Canadian youth participate in capacity and knowledge-building activities.

Project title: Artic Frontiers

Recipient: Artic Frontiers

Budget: $858,000

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: This project aims to support up to 180 Canadian Arctic and Northern youth by enhancing capacity, knowledge and global engagement via the Arctic Frontiers conference, the Emerging Leader programs and Alumni programs.

Project title: Arctic Resilient Communities Youth Fellowship

Recipient: Institute of the North (ION)

Budget: $1M

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: The project implements a 9-month fellowship program that immerses 21 Arctic Indigenous and rural Northern youth fellows in diverse experiential learning opportunities.

Pillar: The University of the Arctic

Project title: Support to UArctic, Yukon U, 2021-23

Recipient: UArctic and Association

Budget: $1.2M

Fund type: Contribution agreement

Project summary: This project aimed to enhance circumpolar and Indigenous knowledge sharing in the North by increasing participation opportunities for Northern Canadians, including Indigenous Peoples.