Evaluation of the Northern Ontario Development Program (NODP)

Executive Summary

Introduction

This report presents the results of the evaluation of the Northern Ontario Development Program (NODP). This evaluation covers a five-year period from 2020-2021 to 2024-2025 under the following themes: relevance, performance, and efficiency. The NODP provides financial support to projects led by municipalities, First Nations and other organizations and institutions to address long-standing regional economic challenges and promote economic diversification, job creation, and sustainable communities in Northern Ontario.

The evaluation used a mixed-methods approach, drawing on document and literature reviews; administrative, financial, and performance data; 29 key informant interviews; surveys of 73 funded and 24 unfunded applicants; and, four case studies.

Key Findings: Relevance

The NODP helps address Northern Ontario’s economic challenges by funding foundational planning and infrastructure-enabling projects. Northern Ontario faces a range of shared economic development challenges such as population aging, youth out-migration, labour force decline, and skills shortages, especially in small, rural and remote communities. The NODP helps to address the region’s needs by supporting business attraction, community capacity, and helping to address labour shortages. The program funds planning studies, feasibility assessments, and infrastructure enabling investments, such as extending water and road services to industrial parks to attract investment. It also funds projects dedicated to business growth, modernization, and productivity.

The NODP is aligned with federal priorities and the Prosperity and Growth Strategy for Northern Ontario (PGSNO), and its flexible design also allows it to apply those broader priorities while remaining responsive to changing community priorities and emerging challenges, including those experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. The NODP plays a complementary role to other funders by supporting early-stage “soft costs,” such as studies, marketing, and incremental staffing, which are often not covered elsewhere.

Key Findings: Effectiveness

Projects funded through the NODP have generated significant employment and business outcomes. Over the evaluation period, the program supported an annual average of 3,065 full-time equivalent (FTE) positions created or maintained, exceeding the target of 1,800.

The program acts as a financial catalyst, with most projects depending on FedNor support to proceed while successfully leveraging substantial outside investment. Results reports show that 65% of recipients stated their project would not have occurred without FedNor funding, and another 28% reported that the project would have suffered major negative impacts to its scope or quality. Over the evaluation period, every $1 in NODP funding leveraged an additional $1.55 from other sources. While this is lower than the target value of $1.80, the data suggests that leverage is highly dependent on the project type and the capacity of the proponent.

The program also supports long-term capacity by funding planning activities, strengthening partnerships, and investing in human capital through initiatives such as the Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (CIINO) and youth internships. It has also supported the implementation of the Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot in several communities.

The NODP has significantly exceeded targets for supporting equity-deserving groups, particularly through its high level of investment in Indigenous communities. Over the evaluation period, 48% of the NODP funding was directed to projects benefiting special population groups, tripling the program's target of 15%.

Best practices include the program’s field‑based model, which provides personalized, hands‑on guidance from project officers; its investment in human capital through the Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario, which helps move projects from vision to implementation; its ability to generate broad impacts through projects delivered by intermediary organizations; and, increased support for Indigenous-focused projects.

Key Findings: Efficiency

While FedNor spends a higher share of its budget on personnel costs (20.8%) than most other regional development agencies, the department serves a massive geographic area with a low population, which increases the cost of delivering programs. To ensure its limited budget is fully utilized, staff proactively manage cash flow to account for project delays and avoid lapsed funds.

The program generally meets its service standards, acknowledging applications within one day and making payment decisions in an average of 16 days. While the 80-day standard for project decisions was missed during the peak of the pandemic due to the high volume of relief initiatives, it was consistently met in other years.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the following rationale, the evaluation makes two recommendations.

Over the evaluation period, a relatively small number of large projects accounted for a disproportionate share of program results. Currently, FedNor collects final results for the NODP only at the conclusion of multi-year contribution agreements. This reporting cycle distorts performance data, leading the program to technically miss its annual targets even when it is performing well over the long term. Simultaneously, organizations majority-led by equity-deserving groups were less likely to agree that the time and effort required for reporting was appropriate, and there is a significant backlog in two-year follow-up reports.
- Recommendation 1: Determine an approach to optimize the performance measurement framework to improve data accuracy while ensuring that performance reporting requirements remain proportional to project size, risk, and proponent capacity. Improvements could include:
  - Developing a mechanism for annual results collection specifically for large-scale or intermediary-led multi-year projects to mitigate year-over-year data distortion.
  - Determining if performance reporting requirements for certain project types or sizes of contributions can be lessened to better align with proponent capacity.
  - Determining if the current process for obtaining two-year follow-up reports can be modified to increase the completion rate.
Over the evaluation period, the NODP achieved an average leverage ratio of $1.55 for every dollar invested, falling short of the program's $1.80 target. Certain funding opportunities, such as the Regional Competitiveness-implementation (Capital) priority, leverage high levels of funding whereas the overall average is significantly lowered by funding opportunities designed for capacity building, such as the Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario and Youth Internships.
- Recommendation 2: Lower the performance measurement target for leverage to ensure it is reflective of the diverse economic development activities supported by the program.

List of Tables

Table 1: Projects and Contributions by Funding Opportunity, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025
Table 2: NODP Intended Outcomes
Table 3: NODP Budget 2020-2021 to 2024-2025
Table 4: Evaluation Themes and Questions
Table 5: NODP Project Application Results, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025
Table 6: Average Project Costs by Application Result, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025
Table 7: Summary of Key Performance Measures
Table 8: Comparison of Regional Development Agency Expenditures, 2024-2025
Table 9: Share of Funding Lapsed, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025
Table 10: Adherence to Service Standards
Table 11: Two-Year Follow Up Reports

List of Acronyms

AFO	L'Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario
ACOA	Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
BGC	Business Growth and Competitiveness
CanNor	Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency
CED	Canada Economic Development for Quebec Regions
CED	Community Economic Development
CIINO	Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario
EDO	Economic Development Officer
FedDev	Federal Economic Development Agency for Southern Ontario
FedNor	Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario
FTE	Full-time equivalent
G&C	Grants & Contributions
NODP	Northern Ontario Development Program
NOHFC	Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation
O&M	Operations and Maintenance
OLMCs	Official language minority communities
PacifiCan	Pacific Economic Development Canada
PGSNO	Prosperity and Growth Strategy for Northern Ontario
PrairiesCan	Prairies Economic Development Canada
RDA	Regional Development Agency
SMEs	Small and medium-sized enterprises
YI	Youth Internships

1. Introduction

This report presents the results of the evaluation of the Northern Ontario Development Program (NODP). This evaluation covers a five-year period from 2020-2021 to 2024-2025 under the following themes: relevance, performance, and efficiency. This evaluation is conducted in accordance with the Treasury Board of Canada's Policy on Results and the Financial Administration Act, which requires all departments to conduct an evaluation of the relevance of all federal Grants and Contributions programs that have a five-year average actual expenditure of $5M or greater per year.

1.1 Program Overview

The NODP provides financial support to projects led by municipalities, First Nations and other organizations and institutions to address long-standing regional economic challenges and promote economic diversification, job creation, and sustainable communities in Northern Ontario.

Funding Opportunities:

Over the evaluation period, projects were approved under the five types of funding opportunities described below. Following the descriptions, Table 1 shows the number of project and value of NODP contributions by funding opportunity for the period 2020-2021 to 2024-2025.

Community Economic Development (CED):

Community Economic Development (CED) projects support activities that assist in building community and regional foundations necessary for economic growth and wealth creation across various sectors. Through planning and decision-making, community competitiveness, and regional competitiveness components, these projects are intended to advance collaborative initiatives, infrastructure and sector development, and capacity building to enhance economic resilience and competitiveness across Northern Ontario. Over the evaluation period, CED accounted for about 62% of projects and 65% of NODP contributions.

Business Growth and Competitiveness (BGC):

Business Growth and Competitiveness (BGC) projects focus on fostering economic growth and increasing the competitiveness of Northern Ontario's businesses. Through its Investment Attraction and Business and Sector Development components, BGC projects are intended to advance targeted marketing and promotion, diversify the economic base, strengthen partnerships, enhance productivity and competitiveness, and support efforts to address common sector barriers such as access to capital, transportation, logistics, and market limitations. Over the evaluation period, BGC accounted for about 11% of projects and 19% of NODP contributions.

Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (CIINO):

Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (CIINO) projects supported under the NODP enables communities, particularly rural, remote and Indigenous (First Nation/Métis/Inuit) communities to implement community and regional economic development initiatives, leading to increased business investment, job creation, and stronger regional collaboration. This initiative helps communities hire an Economic Development Officer (EDO) to advance identified economic opportunities that support diversification and future revenue growth. EDOs are responsible for consulting, planning, and preparing funding proposals to move these opportunities forward. Recently, guidelines were adjusted to better support capacity building and allow the development of an economic or strategic plan in the first year of the project, and implementation of that plan in years two and three. Over the evaluation period, CIINO accounted for about 10% of projects and 8% of NODP contributions.

Youth Internships (YI):

Youth internship projects supported through the NODP strengthen the talent pipeline by helping not-for-profit organizations, Official Language Minority Communities, municipalities, First Nations, and small and medium-sized enterprises across Northern Ontario attract young workers and support their development through economic development and innovation-focused projects. Over the evaluation period, youth internships accounted for about 16% of projects and 3% of NODP contributions.

Capitalization of Communities Futures Development Corporations:

Capitalization of Community Futures Development Corporations projects aim to improve conditions for investment and access to capital in Northern Ontario by providing investment capital to Community Futures Organizations, which then invest in local businesses to create and maintain jobs. Over the evaluation period this was the least utilized initiative of the NODP, representing 1% of projects and 4% of the total NODP contributions. No such projects were approved in 2023-2024 or 2024-2025.

Table 1: NODP Projects and Contributions by Funding Opportunity, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

Budget Component	Funding Opportunity
Budget Component	Community Economic Development (CED)	Business Growth and Competitiveness (BGC)	Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (CIINO)	Youth Internships (YI)	Capitalization of CFDC
Number of Projects	232	41	38	59	5
Percentage of all NODP Projects	61.9%	10.9%	10.1%	15.7%	1.3%
Total NODP Contribution	$84,984,875	$25,234,882	$10,573,715	$4,263,583	$4,950,000
Percentage of all NODP Contributions	65.4%	19.4%	8.1%	3.3%	3.8%

Program Objectives and Expected Outcomes:

Table 2, below, provides the overarching immediate, intermediate, and ultimate intended outcomes of the NODP.

Table 2: NODP Intended Outcomes

Timing	Description
Immediate Outcomes	Northern Ontario communities and businesses have financial resources to respond to economic development opportunities and challenges. Northern Ontario communities and businesses implement economic development activities. Northern Ontario communities and businesses develop capacity to respond to economic development challenges and opportunities
Intermediate (Medium-term) Outcomes	Northern Ontario communities and businesses show improved capacity to respond to economic development challenges and opportunities. Northern Ontario communities and businesses show increased growth and competitiveness.
Ultimate (Long-term Outcomes)	Northern Ontario communities and businesses are economically diverse, viable and sustainable.

Program Resources:

As shown in Table 3, the NODP budget was fairly consistent across the evaluation period, ranging from $20.5M in 2020-21 and $20.8M in years 2021-22 through 2024-25. As FedNor staff are involved in the delivery of multiple programs and since administrative costs are not separated by program, it was not possible to assess the administrative costs and efficiency of the NODP directly.

Table 3: NODP Budget 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

Budget Component	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023	2023-2024	2024-2025
Grants & Contributions (G&C)	$20,539,728	$20,840,000	$20,840,000	$20,840,000	$20,840,000

1.2 About this Evaluation

The Northern Ontario Development Program (NODP) has been evaluated on a five-year cycle in accordance with Treasury Board requirements, with evaluations completed in 2010–2011, 2015–2016, and most recently in 2021–2022. The 2021–2022 evaluation resulted in two key recommendations focused on enhancing support for Indigenous communities and other underrepresented groups, and on further streamlining project approvals and application processes.

Scope and Evaluation Issues:

The NODP activities from April 1, 2020, to March 31, 2025 (fiscal years 2020-2021 to 2024-2025) are included in the scope of the evaluation. Table 4 lists the evaluation themes and questions.

Table 4: Evaluation Themes and Questions

Theme	Evaluation Questions
Relevance	Q1. How well does NODP respond to the economic development needs of Northern Ontario communities, including Indigenous, rural, and remote communities? Q2. To what extent is the NODP consistent with departmental and federal government roles, responsibilities, and priorities?
Effectiveness	Q3. To what extent has the NODP achieved immediate and intermediate intended outcomes? Q4. To what extent has the NODP contributed to the economic diversification, viability and sustainability of Northern Ontario communities and businesses? Q5. How effective is the NODP in supporting equity-deserving groups, including Indigenous communities, women, youth and Francophones? Q6. What best practices or lessons learned can be used to further improve the program?
Efficiency	Q7. To what extent is the NODP delivered in an efficient manner? Q8. How, if at all, could application, reporting, data collection, and monitoring processes be improved?

Lines of Evidence:

The evaluation used a mixed-methods approach, drawing on the following lines of evidence to develop its findings and conclusions. Where relevant, the following legend was used to indicate the proportion of individuals that responded in interviews or surveys in the same manner:

Few: findings reflect less than 25% of the observations.
Some/several: findings reflect at least 25% but less than 50% of the observations.
Half: findings reflect 50% of the observations.
Majority: findings reflect more than 50% and less than 75% of the observations.
Most: findings reflect 75% but less than 90% of the observations.
All/almost all: findings reflect 90% or more of the observations.

Document and Literature Review:

The review included, but was not limited to, foundational program documents, sectoral backgrounders (e.g., broadband, housing, climate change, equity-deserving groups), public-facing materials, as well as external research and statistical sources.

Administrative, Financial and Performance Data Review:

The review included, but was not limited to, administrative datasets on project applications, approvals, completions, and disaggregated metrics (e.g., by region, sector, equity-deserving groups), along with performance measurement tools — such as logic models, indicator profiles, and results reporting forms (e.g., Intended and Final Results Reports, Two-Year Follow-Up Reports) — and service standards data.

Key Informant Interviews:

A total of 29 key informant interviews were conducted with three distinct interview groups: internal FedNor representatives (16), external experts/stakeholders (5), and funding recipients (8).

Survey of Funded and Unfunded Applicants:

A total of 73 funded and 24 unfunded applicants completed the online survey. This represents 35% of the eligible funded and 20% of the eligible unfunded survey population, for an overall completion rate of 30%.

Case Studies:

A total of four case studies were conducted as part of this evaluation These included: a project to renovate a building's basement to create new office and meeting space; a project supporting 25 organizations in the development stage, with a particular focus on Francophone vitality in Northern Ontario; two projects aimed at helping mining supply companies participate in key trade shows; and a project involving the purchase of mining equipment by an Indigenous firm. Please see Annex A for additional information about the case study projects.

2. Findings

This section presents the main findings of the evaluation, organized by the evaluation themes of relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency.

2.1 Relevance

The evaluation included two key questions related to its relevance which focused on how well the NODP responds to the economic development needs of Northern Ontario communities, including Indigenous, rural, and remote communities; and, the extent to which the NODP is consistent with departmental and federal government roles, responsibilities, and priorities.

2.1.1 Responsiveness to Economic Development Needs

The NODP helps to address Northern Ontario’s economic challenges by funding foundational planning and infrastructure-enabling initiatives as well as implementation of economic development focused projects. Northern Ontario faces a range of shared economic development challenges, such as population aging, youth out-migration, labour force decline, and skills shortages, especially in small, rural, and remote communities. Across Northen Ontario, several districts are projected to see double-digit declines in their total labour force by 2030, including Cochrane (16.7%), Algoma (15.5%), and Rainy River (11.6%). The most extreme projection is for the Sudbury District, with a 33% expected decline.^{Footnote 1}

In addition, key sectors are facing a shortage of skilled labour and limited economic diversification. The literature highlights a contraction in the forestry sector, with business locations falling from 1,500 in 2009 to 1,032 in 2024.^{Footnote 2} The mining sector remains critical to the region’s economy but can experience instability through boom-bust cycles and commodity dependency.^{Footnote 3}

However, the region is not homogenous, and some districts are more economically stable than others. For example, districts like Greater Sudbury have relatively stable populations and high post-secondary attainment, while others like the Kenora district face unique challenges, such as the lowest Indigenous education levels among Northwestern districts.^{Footnote 4}

Administrative data shows that 48% of projects (169) reported the development of studies or plans as a direct result of NODP activities, which directly addresses foundational planning needs. Additionally, data collected in Two-year follow-up reports show that 95% of respondents agreed that their NODP funded project improved their capacity to address economic development needs.

Internal interviewees indicate that the NODP addresses the region’s needs by supporting business attraction, community capacity, and helping to address labor shortages. The program funds planning studies, feasibility assessments, and infrastructure enabling investments, such as extending water and road services to industrial parks to attract investment. In fact, over the evaluation period, 12% of NODP projects and 17% of contributions ($21.6M) were specifically tagged for infrastructure, and a total of 109 projects reported developing, modernizing, or expanding physical community assets, including 32 industrial business parks and 46 downtown revitalizations.

For example, the Giyak Mishkawzid Shkagmikwe (GMS) case study highlights a high-impact infrastructure enabling project. The investment enabled GMS, an Atikameksheng Anishnawbek’s economic development corporation, to acquire a mining drill and lease it to its joint venture, Bagone'an JS Drilling Inc.. This move shifted the community from passive partnership to active asset ownership and revenue generation. The investment is creating jobs in the Sudbury Basin, building technical capacity for Indigenous workers to operate advanced drilling equipment, and generating sustained profits that support long-term community priorities and economic self-sufficiency.

By funding dedicated human capital through Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (CIINO) and youth internships, the NODP helps support the internal capacity of rural and Indigenous communities. The program helps rural and Indigenous communities build long-term capacity by funding Economic Development Officers and youth interns to implement economic development opportunities. While the Indigenous population is the fastest-growing segment of the labour force, they face severe barriers, such as lower post-secondary attainment levels in certain districts (e.g., Kenora), reinforcing the need for targeted capacity supports like CIINO. As well, the region faces persistent youth out-migration due to limited access to education and social infrastructure, making youth retention a key tool for retention.^{Footnote 5}

The NODP’s intentionally broad and flexible design allows the program to remain responsive to shifting community priorities and adapt to emerging economic development challenges, such as those seen during the COVID‑19 pandemic. Internal staff characterize the program as "nimble and adaptable" to shifting local needs and government priorities without requiring major design changes. For example, in 2021 the NODP approved a $300,000 contribution under the Community Economic Development stream to Destination Northern Ontario to develop and implement the Workforce Development & Industry Training Recovery Program in response to the impact of the pandemic on the tourism sector.

Also of note is the increased emphasis on aligning program delivery with federal goals for economic reconciliation, evidenced through a rising number of Indigenous-led and owned project proposals. Internal staff observed that demand for Indigenous-led projects has "skyrocketed," driven by First Nations creating their own development corporations. Over the evaluation period, 31% of NODP projects and 33% of contributions (approximately $42.4M) were recorded in NODP administrative data as being of direct benefit to Indigenous Peoples.

While the NODP effectively supports local initiatives, its overall impact on regional economic development is constrained by a relatively small, static budget and rising project costs. Administrative data confirms that the NODP Grants and Contributions budget has remained static at approximately $20.8 million per year throughout the evaluation period. Meanwhile, some internal staff noted that projects with infrastructure components have become harder and more expensive to deliver due to inflation and supply chain delays, leading to higher funding requests that strain the limited budget. Furthermore, survey results show that 17% of funding recipients explicitly suggested expanding the program's total budget and funding periods to better reflect the scale of economic development needed in the region. A case study of a project undertaken to renovate a commercial building helps to show this pressure, as unexpected costs for an engineered steel beam and hidden furnace deficiencies required a formal amendment to increase the FedNor contribution by 27% (i.e., from $56,000 to over $71,000). Of course, the NODP budget is limited, and among unsuccessful applicants surveyed, 46% of withdrawn projects were due to an inability to secure full financing, suggesting that the scale of NODP support may sometimes be insufficient to leverage the remaining funds needed for projects to advance.

Table 5 shows the number of project applications approved, cancelled, withdrawn and rejected over the evaluation period, as well as the percentage of total applications that were approved. As shown, between 48% and 68% of project applications were approved in each year of the evaluation, demonstrating that demand for the NODP exceeded the program’s ability to fund all applications.

Table 5: NODP Project Application Results, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

Application Result	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023	2023-2024	2024-2025
Project approved	81	86	58	70	80
Project cancelled	8	2	3	0	3
Project withdrawn	41	22	11	32	26
Project rejected	13	16	16	44	22
Total	143	126	88	146	131
Percentage approved	57%	68%	66%	48%	61%

Table 6 shows the average total project cost by application result and fiscal year. Total project costs include NODP contributions as well as other sources of funds. It also shows that, over the course of the evaluation period, the average cost of projects rejected ($2,268,161) or withdrawn ($3,864,550) were higher than the average cost of approved projects ($882,561), which highlights the NODP’s limited ability to support larger projects while also supporting a wide range of applicants with its limited budget. The data also demonstrates a general upward trend of total project costs among projects approved, with the highest average project costs for approved applications ($1,041,395) occurring in the final year of the evaluation (2024-2025). While not included in the table, administrative data also show that the average approved NODP contribution has not increased alongside total project costs. As a share of total project cots, it declined over the evaluation period, reaching its lowest level (35%) in the final year. This suggests that the NODP is limited in its ability to increase the level of support provided to projects in response to the rising cost pressures.

Table 6: Average Total Project Costs by Application Result, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

Application Result	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023	2023-2024	2024-2025	All Years
Project approved	$857,055	$751,000	$920,806	$860,497	$1,041,395	$882,561
Project cancelled	$94,664	$50,017	$376,667	N/A	$164,275	$155,010
Project withdrawn	$1,483,068	$2,427,204	$4,872,160	$7,571,086	$3,847,992	$3,864,550
Project rejected	$6,317,653	$1,388,995	$1,038,679	$2,076,132	$1,792,901	$2,268,161
Among all applications	$1,490,308	$1,113,559	$1,417,606	$2,697,667	$1,704,550	$1,727,645

2.1.2 Alignment with Roles, Responsibilities, and Priorities

The NODP is well aligned with federal priorities and the Prosperity and Growth Strategy for Northern Ontario (PGSNO) due to its broad and flexible design. The broad nature of the program’s guidelines allows it to support various policy themes, including innovation, reconciliation, and climate action, without requiring major redesign. The program is viewed as central to the PGSNO, specifically supporting shared priorities such as community resilience, Indigenous economic development, and workforce attraction. Project officers noted that they can frequently connect a single NODP project to multiple PGSNO priorities simultaneously. Case studies support this notion, for example, the Daki Menan Lands and Resources Corporation project was explicitly cited as aligning with the PGSNO by building economic development capacity in a rural Indigenous community while investing in community infrastructure.

Funded projects directly support departmental priorities by targeting key economic sectors and demographic groups identified in federal strategies. Administrative data shows that projects are tagged with priority areas such as community capacity (24%), tourism (23%), agri-food (8%), and mining and mining supply and services (6%). The program supports the federal priority of economic reconciliation, with 31% of projects and 33% of departmental contributions (approximately $42.4M) specifically associated with Indigenous Peoples. The program’s reach also extends to other equity-deserving groups identified in federal strategies, in fact, 62% of survey respondents from funded organizations indicated they were majority-led by a member of an equity-deserving group.

The NODP serves a complementary role by filling early-stage "soft cost" gaps that other provincial and federal programs, such as those offered by the Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation (NOHFC), do not cover. Most key informants identified the NOHFC as the primary co-funding partner on projects also funded by the NODP. Of the 375 projects funded by the NODP over the evaluation period, 100 are shown to also have received funding through the Province of Ontario, with the vast majority of those contributions being made through the NOHFC.

Other federal and provincial programs and departments are co-funders of specific projects. For example, the case study focused on a project led by the Daki Menan Lands and Resources Corporation shows that the Indigenous-led project successfully "stacked" a 75.6% contribution from FedNor with funds from the proponent and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry to modernize a community asset. In a project led by Lac Seul First Nation to demonstrate and implement a biomass project, NODP funding was combined with funding from Natural Resources Canada’s Clean Energy in Rural and Remote Communities Program. Throughout the evaluation period, as the number of Indigenous-led projects funded by the NODP has increased, the commonalty of Indigenous Services Canada being a co-funder to the NODP has also increased. Additional programs focused on economic development in Northern Ontario include the Rural Ontario Development Program, FedNor’s Regional Economic Growth through Innovation program, and others.

Interviewees characterized the NODP as complementary rather than duplicative to the other funders, such as the NOHFC and Indigenous Services Canada. This is because the NODP funds planning and feasibility ("soft costs"), while the NOHFC focuses on capital investment and infrastructure ("hard costs"). In addition, the NOHFC does not support operational costs such as incremental salaries. Interviewees noted that the NODP fills a critical gap because many other funders are unwilling to support the foundational studies and business plans required to make a project viable for larger-scale implementation. This is consistent with NODP administrative data which shows that 48% of all completed NODP projects (169) resulted in the development of studies or plans, including feasibility studies and business plans. Funding recipient interviewees reported that they turned to the NODP because they lacked the internal capital for the project (7) or because other funders were not as supportive (4). For example, the case study of Northern Ontario Mining Showcase notes that FedNor’s support was crucial because the Ontario provincial government initially denied support to the project because the events were held outside of Northern Ontario. However, it is worth noting that the NODP budget is relatively small when compared to the $110 million annual budget of the Government of Ontario’s Northern Ontario Heritage Fund Corporation.

Previous evaluations (including those in 2010, 2016, and 2022) also concluded that the NODP does not overlap with other government programs because its Terms and Conditions establish formal mechanisms for collaboration between partners.

2.2 Effectiveness

The evaluation included four key questions related to its effectiveness, focussing on the achievement of immediate and intermediate intended outcomes, the contribution of the NODP to economic diversification, viability and sustainability, its effectiveness in supporting equity-deserving groups, and the best practices or lessons learned that could further improve the program.

2.2.1 Achievement of Immediate and Intermediate Intended Outcomes

Projects funded through the NODP have generated significant outcomes across multiple areas, including employment creation, business growth, and the development and enhancement of community assets such as industrial parks and downtown revitalization initiatives. The NODP has made considerable impacts in the form of creating and maintaining jobs. Over the evaluation period, the program reported an annual average of 3,065 FTEs created or maintained, significantly exceeding the target of 1,800. Overall, completed projects reported a total of 5,588.6 FTEs created and 9,737.7 FTEs maintained. The highest number of jobs created were in trades, transportation, and equipment operation (1,190 FTEs), followed by manufacturing and utilities (822.4 FTEs). The Business Growth and Competitiveness stream was the most efficient at generating and maintaining employment, with a cost of only $3,400 per job created or maintained, compared to the average cost of $7,923 across all completed projects. This is likely because Business Growth and Competitiveness projects tend to be focused on efforts to grow businesses, which results in higher FTE maintenance and creation, compared to other projects which may be focused on capacity building and thus maintain or create fewer FTEs while committing a higher share of project funds directly to wages for project-supported positions.

In addition, 38% of projects reported the direct creation, maintenance, expansion or modernization of businesses, totaling 1,130 businesses created, 1,790 maintained, and 1,234 expanded or modernized. With respect to community assets, 31% of projects resulted in the development, modernization or expansion of physical assets, including 32 industrial/business parks and 46 downtown revitalization projects. Results reports show that 69% of projects met or exceeded their anticipated results.

As shown in the Table 7, it can be difficult to assess performance in any given year. FedNor administers multi-year contribution agreements, and final results are requested and reported at the end of each agreement. Results are not reported to the department on an annual basis for direct recipients of FedNor under these agreements. As a result, performance measures related to job and business outcomes tend to vary considerably from year to year. Based on an annual assessment, the NODP did not meet its target for creating or maintaining full time equivalent positions in fiscal years 2021-2022 or 2023-2024, but exceeded the target in other years, and surpassed it overall when full time equivalent positions are averaged across the full evaluation period.

Table 7: Summary of Key Performance Measurement Indicators

Performance Measurement Indicator	Result/Fiscal Year
Performance Measurement Indicator	Target	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023	2023-2024	2024-2025	5-Year Annual Average
Ratio of funds leveraged from other sources through NODP contribution agreements	1.80	1.48	1.73	1.07	1.59	1.84	1.55
Percentage of NODP funding directed to projects benefitting special population groups^{Footnote 6}	15%	21%	48%	46%	59%	69%	48%
Full-time equivalent positions created or maintained	1,800	5,263	839	3,088	765	5,372	3,065
Businesses created, maintained, expanded and modernized	500	869	208	2,114	272	691	830

The program acts as a financial catalyst, with most projects depending on FedNor support to proceed while successfully leveraging substantial outside investment. Results reports show that 65% of recipients stated their project would not have occurred without FedNor funding, and another 28% reported that the project would have suffered major negative impacts to its scope or quality. This is consistent with evaluation survey findings in which 78% of survey respondents gave the program a "high attribution," stating that their project outcomes would likely not have occurred at all without FedNor funding. In one case study, the proponent stated that if there were a category higher than "high attribution," they would choose it, as the project and its subsequent rental income would never have been realized without FedNor.

Over the evaluation period, every $1 in NODP funding leveraged an additional $1.55 from other sources. While this is lower than the target value of $1.80, the data suggests that leverage is highly dependent on the type of project. For example, projects associated with certain funding opportunities significantly exceeded the target, such as the Regional Competitiveness-implementation (Capital) priority under the Community Economic Development stream, which leveraged $3.69 for every $1 invested. However, the overall average is reduced by funding opportunities designed for proponents with limited resources and constrained capacity, such as the Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario ($0.24 leverage) and Youth Internship (YI) ($0.57 leverage). Administrative data notes that Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario projects are funded at up to 90% of total costs, meaning substantial outside leverage is intentionally not required for projects. The evaluation document review found that many Northern Ontario communities, particularly First Nations, face a lack of consistent and stable access to financial capital, requiring programs like NODP to provide higher contribution percentages (often 90%) to make projects viable.

2.2.2 Contribution to Diversification, Viability and Sustainability

The program supports long-term community capacity by facilitating strategic planning and establishing new collaborative partnerships. As previously noted, 48% of projects (169 in total) developed studies or plans, including 63 business plans and 53 feasibility studies. Beyond business plans and feasibility studies, the program funded 66 engineering studies, 47 strategic community economic development plans, 45 tourism marketing strategies, and 25 workforce attraction strategies. A review of Two-year follow-up data provided by 26 previous proponents shows that of the 164 plans and studies developed through their projects, 55% were fully implemented and 26% were partially implemented within two years of project completion.

Meanwhile, nearly all (95%) recipients surveyed two years after project completion agreed that their NODP-funded project improved their organization's capacity to address economic development needs. In the sample of 33 projects with available two-year follow-up reports, recipients reported that 2,984 full time equivalent positions remained in existence, and an additional 1,858 full-time equivalent positions were created since the initial funding ended. At the two-year mark, 62% of recipients stated that they expected further job retention or growth, and 33% anticipated new investments resulting from project implementation over the subsequent three years. However, it is important to note that not all projects required to submit a two‑year follow‑up report had done so at the time of the evaluation.

Long-term community capacity is also supported through collaboration and partnerships. Performance measurement data collected at project completion shows that 40% of projects (141) established or maintained partnerships, with the most frequent collaborators being private sector partners (269), municipalities (254), community-based organizations (141), and First Nations (107).

Over the evaluation period, the NODP funded five projects which contributed to the implementation of the Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot (RNIP) and, by extension contributed to the subsequent Rural Community Immigration Pilot and Francophone Community Immigration Pilot. These pilot programs, led by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, aim to bring the benefits of immigration to rural communities across Canada by helping employers connect with new talent and retain existing skilled workers to address critical labour shortages, including within Northern Ontario.

Through the NODP, participating municipalities in Northern Ontario received funding to strengthen their capacity to attract, integrate and retain newcomers, including French-speaking and bilingual immigrants. For example, the City of Greater Sudbury received over $480,000 to develop, implement and administer a local workforce development and retention strategy, as well as to secure specialized expertise to support the research, development and implementation of the Sudbury RNIP Program. Similarly, the NODP supported the Thunder Bay Community Economic Development Commission to advance the Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot by engaging and educating employers on immigration pathways and marketing in-demand positions. The project exceeded all its targets and assisted 745 businesses expand their workforces. These efforts continue to generate meaningful impacts. According to a study by the Northern Policy Institute, in 2025 the City of Greater Sudbury supported 551 principal applicants through the Rural Community Immigration Pilot and Francophone Community Immigration Pilot, successor projects to the RNIP that were approved near the end of the evaluation period.

The NODP facilitates economic diversification by helping communities reduce reliance on single industries through the development of emerging sectors like tourism and value-added manufacturing. There are 38 communities in Northern Ontario that rely on a single industry, where the dominant industry employs more than one-third of the population; notably, 84% of these are First Nation reserves or communities with predominantly Indigenous populations.^{Footnote 7} Based on the needs of the region, the NODP has identified several priority sectors, for example, community capacity, tourism, agri-food, mining and mining supply and services, forestry, and others. Administrative data indicates that in addition to having identified priority sectors, the program actively funds projects that align with the priority sectors, as well as the priorities in the Prosperity and Growth Strategy for Northern Ontario (PGSNO). For example:

Tourism is a commonly funded priority area, accounting for 23% of all projects ($16.9M), that aligns with the PGSNO’s recognition of tourism as a vital pillar for economic diversity and its commitment to Indigenous-led tourism initiatives. In 2021, the NODP approved a $917,506 contribution under the Community Economic Development stream to Indigenous Tourism Ontario for the “Indigenous Ingenuity Traveling Exhibition” project, which involved coordination and hosting of an indigenous themed touring exhibition to promote Indigenous culture and history, and support local Indigenous tourism operators.
Agri-food projects accounted for about 8% of NODP projects funded over the evaluation period, and align with the PGSNO’s goal to develop regional food systems that are resilient, innovative, environmentally sustainable, and beneficial for the local economy. In 2022, the NODP approved a $1,846,662 contribution through the Business Growth and Competitiveness stream to the Sault Ste. Marie Innovation Centre to fund the “Sustainable New Agri-Food Products and Productivity (SNAPP) Program” from 2023 to 2026. SNAPP provides funding to Northern Ontario agriculture and food producers and businesses towards the purchase of equipment and/or materials that will result in the creation of innovative food or agricultural products new to the business; enhance productivity and/or improve efficiency or resource use through innovation in the process or technology to improve products or processes; or reduce ecological impact and carbon footprint through innovation in the process or technology while enhancing profitability.
Mining and mining supply and services projects accounted for about 6% of NODP projects funded over the evaluation period and align with the PGSNO’s focus on critical mineral development and new mine exploration. In 2023, the NODP approved a $931,500 contribution under the Community Economic Development stream to Sioux Lookout Friendship Accord to develop a regional Indigenous Engagement Strategy for mineral development in Northern Ontario. Developing the strategy included hiring of a project coordinator, a consultation leader, two consultation specialists, and a researcher, to work with industry, provincial and federal governments, and member communities to develop mining, forestry, energy, and large industrial and commercial project opportunities.
Forestry is a historically significant sector in Northern Ontario. The NODP supports the sector, in alignment with the PGSNO which seeks to transform the industry through Indigenous partnerships and innovative uses for by-products like biomass. Over the evaluation period, about 6% of NODP projects were focused directly on the sector, including a $198,000 contribution made in 2021 under the Business Growth and Competitiveness stream to Michipicoten First Nation to hire a community forestry technician to implement a Community Forestry Strategy.

2.2.3 Supporting Equity-Deserving Groups

The NODP has significantly exceeded targets for supporting equity-deserving groups, including Indigenous Peoples, women, youths, Francophones, and others. Over the evaluation period, 48% of the NODP funding was directed to projects benefiting special population groups, tripling the program's target of 15%.^{Footnote 8} In addition, 62% of surveyed funding recipients indicated their organization is majority-led by an equity-deserving group, including women (41%) and First Nations (21%). Nearly half (48%) of all surveyed organizations have a specific mandate to serve one or more equity-deserving group.

Projects tagged as benefitting Indigenous Peoples accounted for 31% of all approved projects and 33% of total contributions (approximately $42.4 million). In the 2023-24 fiscal year alone, Indigenous-tagged projects represented 49% of all approved projects and 53% of departmental contributions. These investments also appear to be strategically concentrated in foundational projects and specific regions. For example, projects targeting Indigenous Peoples are significantly more likely to be in the Community Economic Development (CED) stream (73% of Indigenous projects vs. 57% of other projects) and the Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (14% of Indigenous projects vs. 8% for others). Within the CED stream, Indigenous projects focus heavily on community competitiveness capital (44% of Indigenous contributions vs. 19% for others) and planning and decision-making (33% of projects vs. 17% for others). Administrative data indicates that Indigenous-led projects are particularly strong in the Northwest region, where they account for 64% of projects, and 71% of NODP contributions, associated with that office.

As noted above, survey data shows that many projects are led by women or have a specific mandate to serve women. Administrative data indicates that over the evaluation period about 2% of projects and 5% of NODP contributions were specifically tagged as being of direct benefit to women.^{Footnote 9} For example, the NODP provided a $3,236,674 contribution to the PARO Centre for Women’s Enterprise as ongoing funding for the continuation of the Women's Enterprise Centre Northern Ontario (WECNO) project to enhance support to women entrepreneurs in growth-oriented businesses.

The program also effectively supports youth-focused initiatives. Over the evaluation period, the Youth Internship initiative provided $4.2 million for 59 projects, helping not-for-profits and small and medium-sized enterprises in key sectors hire young professionals. Beyond the youth internship initiative 8% of all NODP projects ($13.6M) were specifically designed to benefit youth and young adults.

The evaluation also found that the NODP remains highly accessible to Francophone communities. The program contributed approximately $2.8 million to projects specifically tagged for Francophones during the evaluation period. When surveyed, 89% of respondents who lead or serve Francophone populations agreed they had appropriate access to information and support in the official language of their choice. The Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario case study highlighted how the NODP uses intermediaries to reach smaller Francophone entities, funding 25 different organizations and creating 45 jobs. In addition to providing financial support ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 per year, the project proponent offered technical guidance, mentorship, and assistance with business and HR planning, enabling organizations to hire staff, maintain operations, and expand services that support the vitality of Northern Ontario’s Francophone communities, including women, youth, and immigrant entrepreneurs."

The "hands-on" delivery model and personalized support from project officers are critical factors in making the program accessible for organizations with less capacity or experience accessing federal programs. Internal staff report that they provide more hands-on guidance to organizations from equity-deserving groups that may have less experience with federal application processes. External stakeholders emphasized that for many clients in remote or Indigenous communities, project officers are critical for navigating complex government systems and interpreting eligibility rules that might otherwise be a barrier. Project officers conduct direct outreach by traveling to remote communities and attending regional gatherings, such as the Chiefs of Ontario meetings, to support potential applicants interested in development and growth. Survey data shows that respondents from equity-deserving group-led organizations were more likely to agree that the eligibility and application processes were easy to understand (87% vs. 79% for other groups). One case study of an Indigenous led project showed that the project was supported by the program through three formal contract amendments. However, the amendments were not just administrative; they were necessary to accommodate on-the-job training for First Nation crew members, which was viewed as a high-priority outcome despite increasing project costs. The proponent explicitly credited the creativity and flexibility of their FedNor officer for allowing them to use a First Nations contractor, which directly supported local skill development.

2.2.4 Best Practices and Lessons Learned

The following best practices and lessons learned emerged from the evaluation:

Targeted guidance from Project Officers: As noted above, the program's field-based model, characterized by personalized, hands-on guidance from project officers, is a critical best practice for ensuring accessibility in remote and lower-capacity communities. External stakeholders and funding recipients emphasize that the field-based approach is what makes the program effective, as officers help applicants navigate complex government systems. Project officers provide tailored assistance to organizations that lack experience with federal processes, ensuring guidance is matched to the specific capacity of the client. Proponents praised officers for being "helpful, accessible, knowledgeable, and offering strong ongoing support" throughout the process, and characterized staff as "top-notch" in terms of providing the technical guidance needed to move a project from a concept to a successful outcome. In fact, survey data shows that respondents from equity-deserving group-led organizations were more likely to agree that eligibility and application processes were easy to understand (87% vs. 79% for others), which internal staff attribute to the more intensive, tailored guidance provided to these groups. In the Daki Menan Lands and Resources case study, the recipient specifically identified "support from FedNor officer" as a key factor in the project's success. Similarly, the AFO recipient noted that officers were always available to clarify guidelines and expectations.
The Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (CIINO). This funding opportunity serves as a model for sustainable capacity building. Internal interviewees identified CIINO as a "best practice" and one of the most impactful innovations in the NODP portfolio because it provides the human capital necessary to move from visioning to implementation of economic opportunities and investment attraction. Among Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario funding recipients surveyed, 73% stated the funding was relevant specifically because it provided organizational capacity and staffing, allowing them to hire or retain Economic Development Officers they otherwise could not afford.

Indigenous-tagged projects are nearly twice as likely to be CIINO than for other groups (14% vs. 8%). FedNor staff view CIINO as a key mechanism for addressing the higher support needs of Indigenous governments in proposal development and implementation. A key lesson provided by anecdotal evidence is that some communities struggle to sustain these positions once the funding phases out, suggesting a potential need for additional capacity-building supports alongside the funding. It is also worth noting that despite the positive views expressed about CIINO, only 44% of CIINO projects reported meeting or exceeding all targeted results, which is significantly lower than the 76% rate for the Community Economic Development stream or 72% for the Business Growth and Competitiveness stream. The impact of COVID-19 and the general economic situation were the most commonly cited factors hampering success in the results reports of these projects. Since CIINO intentionally targets lower capacity proponents, CIINO projects reported the lowest leverage in the program, raising only $0.24 for every $1 in FedNor contributions. Despite these limitations, when outlier job creation projects are removed from the data, CIINO is the most efficient funding opportunity for creating or maintaining jobs, with a cost of $10,581 per job reported created or maintained.
Leveraging intermediary organizations to generate broad impacts. Certain projects deliver disproportionate impacts, and funding "intermediary organizations" can create a multiplier effect, allowing the NODP to support dozens of smaller, specialized projects through a single administrative lead. Performance measurement data shows that certain projects deliver disproportionate job creation or other impacts. For example, two projects alone accounted for 55% of all jobs reported created (3,095 full time equivalent positions) during the evaluation period, while five projects reported 73% of all jobs maintained. This concentration of impact is also evident in business development, where five outlier projects, accounting for 7% of NODP contributions over the evaluation period, were responsible for 42% of all businesses created, maintained, expanded or modernized across the entire program. One of these disproportionately impactful projects was an investment of $1,266,000 by NODP to support the expansion of the Northern Ontario Enterprise Gateway also known as Northern Ontario Angels (NOA). NOA was created as a not-for-profit corporation in 2005 as a catalyst to establish angel investment groups and create a gateway to facilitate connections between entrepreneurs and investors. In the final results report for the three-year project ending in 2020-2021, the organization reported that they had created 2,250 full time equivalent positions and maintained another 1,781, along with creating, maintaining, expanding or modernizing 207 businesses.

The impacts generated over time by the City of Temiskaming Shores Northern Ontario Mining Showcase trade show pavilion project demonstrate that sector-specific support such as this is, according to the project proponent, a “recipe that works”. The project serves as an example of a sector-specific "flagship" project that uses a single administrative lead to benefit a vast number of smaller entities. By mandating the inclusion of businesses from across the entire region, the project effectively supported over 100 Northern Ontario small and medium-sized enterprises through a single FedNor investment. Because of the success of generating an estimated 10:1 return on investment, that is, generating $100 million in new sales while helping to create and maintain 900 jobs over the last decade, project recipients have encouraged FedNor to consider what additional sectors could benefit from this model.
The intermediary model is further highlighted by the AFO "Effet multiplicateur" project, which targeted Official Language Minority Communities. This project provided non-repayable contributions to 25 different Francophone organizations, which in turn created 45 jobs and maintained 21 others. A critical factor in the project’s success was the administrative lead’s provision of technical guidance. The case study showed that the intermediary functioned not only as a funding conduit but as a capacity building partner, mitigating administrative barriers that often constrain smaller organizations’ participation in federal programs.
Increased support for Indigenous-focused projects. The NODP is increasingly supporting wealth-generating initiatives led by Indigenous economic development corporations, a best practice that strengthens community ownership, accelerates revenue generation, and enhances long-term economic autonomy, as demonstrated by the Giyak Mishkawzid Shkagmikwe exploration drill project. This approach is complemented by the intentional modification of CIINO guidelines to better align with Indigenous planning realities, specifically by supporting strategic planning in the first year followed by project implementation in years two and three. As well, the program has increased its support for multi-use centres to help build foundational infrastructure required for broader economic activity and service delivery in remote and Indigenous communities.

2.3 Efficiency

The evaluation included two questions within the theme of efficiency, seeking to understand the extent to which NODP is delivered in an efficient manner, and how, if at all, application, reporting, data collection, and monitoring processes can be improved.

2.3.1 Use of Funds

FedNor tends to spend more on personnel costs as a share of total expenditures than other Regional Development Agencies. FedNor personnel deliver all departmental programming, and so it is not possible to describe the costs associated only with NODP. Instead, department-level expenditures have been used to assess the relative efficiency of delivering programming. Table 8, below, shows that in 2024-2025, 20.8% of FedNor expenditures were for personnel, compared to 74.8% for transfer payments. This is a higher proportion being spent on personnel than most of the other regional development agencies except for the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency (CanNor) (23.1%). Of note, both FedNor and CanNor are responsible for providing economic development funding to large geographic areas with low populations, which can increase delivery costs. Another reason for the higher share of personnel costs may be that overall funding is lowest for FedNor. While not a perfect relationship, in general the higher the total expenditures, the lower the share spent on personnel. This relationship is demonstrated in the table, which is ordered from largest agency to smallest.

Table 8: Comparison of Regional Development Agency Expenditures, 2024-2025^{Footnote 10}

Expenditure Category	Expenditures ($ millions) by Regional Development Agency
Expenditure Category	ACOA	PrairiesCan	CED	FedDev	PacifiCan	CanNor	FedNor
Transfer Payments	$314.33	$312.05	$282.43	$216.07	$100.22	$55.18	$47.93
Personnel	$77.76	$45.34	$49.91	$37.49	$25.25	$18.69	$13.35
Other	$8.38	$5.3	$5.29	$5.04	$11.08	$7.11	$2.78
Total	$400.47	$362.69	$337.63	$258.60	$136.55	$80.98	$64.06
Transfer payments as percentage of Total	78.5%	86.0%	83.7%	83.6%	73.4%	68.1%	74.8%
Personnel as a percentage of Total	19.4%	$12.5%	14.8%	14.5%	18.5%	23.1%	20.8%

Internal key informants noted that significant effort is made to ensure that available funds are spent. Project officers conduct regular check-ins with clients and hold monthly meetings with payments officers to monitor progress. They also proactively manage cashflow risk by intentionally over-programming their budgets. To do this, they apply an internal “discount” to account for expected project slippage and delays, and closely track commitments to ensure that under-spending in some projects is offset by others. These processes help minimize the risk of year-end lapses. Table 9, below, shows the average percentage of allocated funds lapsed by regional development agencies over the evaluation period, which supports the notion that FedNor has demonstrated strong performance in expending their allocated funding as opposed to allowing funds to lapse. While the value shown for FedNor in the table is not specific to the NODP, it is included to show the comparison to the performance of other Regional Development Agencies.

Table 9: Share of Funding Lapsed, 2020-2021 to 2024-25^{Footnote 11}

Category	Regional Development Agency
Category	ACOA	PrairiesCan	CED	FedDev	PacifiCan	CanNor	FedNor
Percentage of allocated funding lapsed	4.9%	14.8%	12.3%	4.8%	18.2%	5.7%	4.8%

2.3.2 Adherence to Service Standards:

The NODP generally meets its service standards, though decision-making timelines were delayed during the peak of the pandemic. The NODP has three service standards with targets that it aims to meet 90% of the time: acknowledge receipt of an application within three working days; provide a decision on applications within eighty working days of receipt of a fully completed application; and, render a payment on claim submissions within thirty-five working days. The first two standards were in effect through the entire evaluation period, while the thirty-five working day payment standard was introduced in 2022-2023. Performance against these targets for the evaluation period are included in Table 10.

Over the evaluation period, the NODP received 589 valid applications. The program acknowledged 99.8% of applications within the three-day standard, with acknowledgements issued within a single working day. The 35-day standard for payment decisions was met for 89% of all claims submitted. Funding recipients highlighted the ability to access advance funding at the onset of their projects as a best practice of the NODP, as it enabled them to immediately launch their projects and also assisted to unlock or leverage other funding sources.

Over the evaluation period, decisions on applications were provided after an average of 63 working days. Many were provided sooner; among the 76% of all project decisions that met the 80-day service standard, the average decision was provided after 36 days. As shown in Table 10, the service standard for project decisions was not fully achieved in 2021-22. While the overall average for that year was 90.5 days, performance varied significantly: 57% of projects received decisions in an average of 38.3 days, whereas the 43% that missed the standard had an average decision time of 159.6 days. Some of the delays were attributed to the transition to digital environments at the onset of the pandemic period, the exceptionally high volume of short-term pandemic relief initiatives administered concurrently with core programming, and limited staff to manage increased workflows. In all other years of the evaluation period, the 80-day service standard was met with relative ease. Some project types continued to face challenges, particularly those under the Community Economic Development Regional Competitiveness (Non-Capital) component, which only met the standard 62% of the time across all regions.

Table 10: Adherence to Service Standards

Service Standard	Fiscal Year
Service Standard	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023	2023-2024	2024-2025
Acknowledge receipt of an application within three (3) working days	Met (1.0)	Met (2.3)	Met (0.9)	Met (1.0)	Met (1.2)
Provide a decision on applications within eighty (80) working days of receipt of a fully completed application	Met (70.2)	Missed (90.5)	Met (41.7)	Met (57.6)	Met (46.7)
Render a payment decision on claim submissions within thirty-five (35) working days^{Footnote 12}	N/A	N/A	Met (16.7)	Met (15.5)	Met (16.6)

There appears to be a notable difference in how successful and unsuccessful applicants perceive program efficiency with respect to timeliness and service standards. Among funding recipients, 73% of those surveyed agreed that the timeliness of project approval was appropriate, and many interviewees noted that NODP decisions are generally quicker than those of other funders. However, among rejected applicants surveyed, just 36% agreed that the timeliness of the project decision was appropriate.

Among funded projects, 87% of those surveyed agreed that the timeliness of receiving project funds was appropriate.

2.3.3 Funding Application, Reporting and Data Collection:

Organizations whose applications were rejected tended to find the NODP eligibility and application process difficult to understand. While 84% of successful applicants surveyed agreed somewhat or strongly that it was easy to understand NODP eligibility and application process, the rate was just 36% among those surveyed about a rejected application. Furthermore, based on a small sample of survey respondents, it appears that more could be done to support unsuccessful applicants in better understanding program and application requirements. Of the 11 respondents surveyed about a rejected project, seven indicated that they received feedback from FedNor on their application. Of those seven, however, just two said that the feedback was helpful for improving future applications. When asked to elaborate, one respondent who said that the feedback was useful said they had been told that their project was not as strongly aligned with eligibility criteria as others approved projects, and the other respondent said they were told that their project proposal was for an ineligible expense (i.e. vehicle purchase).

However, results also suggest that efforts made by project officers to support clients from small organizations or with less capacity have been effective, as a greater share of survey respondents from organizations led by equity-deserving groups agreed that the eligibility and application process were easy to understand (87% compared to 79% of other organizations).

While occurring near the end of the evaluation period, the newly introduced client portal is expected to continue to provide efficiency gains. Internal interviewees identified the new client portal as a key efficiency gain, noting it improves project application processes, project tracking, avoids email backlogs, and allows for the reuse of information between forms.

2.3.4 Reporting and Data Collection

Survey results indicate that most funding recipients view the reporting requirements as appropriate. However, organizations that are majority‑led by equity‑deserving groups are more likely to find them burdensome. For instance, 86% of organizations not led by a member of an equity‑deserving group agreed that the reporting requirements were reasonable in terms of both the type of information requested and the time and effort involved. In comparison, among respondents from organizations majority‑led by equity‑deserving groups, 76% agreed that the type of information requested was reasonable, and 71% agreed that the time and effort required was reasonable.

Differences in perceptions were also evident across NODP funding opportunities. All recipients in the Business Growth and Competitiveness stream and the Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario agreed that the reporting requirements were appropriate. In contrast, only 66% of Youth Internship recipients and 68% of Community Economic Development recipients shared this view.

Further evidence of some funding recipients finding reporting requirements excessive can be seen in the completion rate of Two-year follow-up reports. Of the 364 projects completed between 2020-21 and 2024-25, 126, 35% did not have a report due at the time of the evaluation and eight (2%) were exempt from two-year reporting. This leaves 230 required to have submitted a two-year report, of which 58, or just 25% had provided a report. While these numbers, shown below in Table 11, may have shifted during the course of the evaluation and are influenced by the NODP’s ability to collect this data in a timely manner, they show that many proponents are choosing not to spend their time participating in Two-year follow-up reports.

Table 11: Two-Year Follow Up Reports

Status	Fiscal Year
Status	2020-2021	2021-2022	2022-2023	2023-2024	2024-2025	Total
Number of Two-Year Follow-Up Reports Received	27	17	14	0	0	58
Number of Exemptions from Two-Year Follow-Up Report	4	1	3	0	0	8
Number of Agreements Where Two-Year Follow-Up Report Is Not Due	0	0	0	54	72	126
Number of Two-Year Follow-Up Reports Overdue	44	38	64	26	0	172

3. Conclusions and Recommendations

Based on the findings, this section presents the evaluation conclusions and recommendations.

3.1 Conclusions

The evaluation makes the following conclusions related to the themes of relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency.

Relevance:

Overall, the evaluation finds that the NODP is highly relevant to the economic development needs of Northern Ontario, a region facing severe demographic pressures including a projected 33% decline in the total labour force in some districts by 2030. The program helps recipients address issues related to labour shortages, limited economic diversification, and capacity constraints in rural, remote, and Indigenous communities. Its support for planning, feasibility work, and infrastructure-enabling investments responds to documented regional needs, particularly in communities that lack the internal resources to undertake economic development initiatives on their own. It addresses documented regional gaps by supporting business attraction, community capacity, and skilled labour shortages.

The NODP is strategically aligned with the Prosperity and Growth Strategy for Northern Ontario. It can support local and federal priorities, while maintaining stable delivery. It plays a complementary role among other funders, including by supporting early stage “soft costs” that other funders may not support. While demand for funding exceeds available resources and the program’s impact is limited by a static annual budget of $20.8 million and rising costs due to inflation and supply chain delays, the evidence demonstrates that the NODP continues to fill an important role for Northern Ontario’s economic development.

Effectiveness:

Over the evaluation period, NODP has been effective in achieving its intended immediate and intermediate outcomes, including in the generation of significant employment, creating or maintaining an average of 3,065 positions annually. However, because of the way that outcomes are recorded for multi-year projects, the program missed its employment targets in two of the five evaluation years despite the five-year average exceeding the target. The same was true for the creation, maintenance, expansion and modernization of businesses.

On average, every dollar in NODP funding leveraged an additional $1.55 from other sources. The program met the performance target for leveraging in one of the five years covered by the evaluation. This limited performance against the target is primarily a result of low-leverage, capacity building program activities in the overall performance measure.

The program is particularly strong in supporting equity-deserving groups, substantially exceeding its targets for Indigenous and other underrepresented populations. Over the evaluation period, 48% of NODP funding was directed to projects benefiting special population groups, tripling the program's target of 15%. In the 2023-24 fiscal year alone, Indigenous-tagged projects represented 49% of all approved projects and 53% of departmental contributions. Funded projects show high representation of equity-deserving groups in project leadership.

Best practices include the program's field-based model, characterized by personalized, hands-on guidance from project officers; the provision of human capital necessary to move from visioning to implementation of economic opportunities and investment attraction made possible through Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario; leveraging intermediary organizations to generate broad impacts through a multiplier effect where the NODP is able to indirectly support many smaller, specialized projects through a single administrative lead; and, increased support for Indigenous-focused projects.

Efficiency:

Overall, key informants reported that the NODP is delivered in an efficient manner. While FedNor spends a higher share of its budget on personnel costs (20.8%) than most other regional development agencies, this is likely because it serves a massive geographic area with a low population, which increases the cost of delivering programs. To ensure its limited budget is fully utilized, staff proactively manage cash flow by "over-programming" and applying an internal “discount” to account for project delays. This approach has helped FedNor maintain strong performance of spending its allocated funding rather than letting it lapse.

The program generally meets its service standards, acknowledging applications within one day and making payment decisions in an average of nine days. While the 80-day standard for project decisions was missed during the peak of the pandemic due to the high volume of relief initiatives, other years show this target being met easily. Applicants were generally satisfied with timeliness, however when it comes to the application process only 36% of rejected applicants felt it was easy to understand, and few found the feedback provided by FedNor helpful for improving future applications.

While most successful recipients find reporting requirements acceptable, organizations led by equity-deserving groups reported finding them more onerous on average. Finally, there is an issue with long-term data collection; only 25% of required two-year follow-up reports were submitted, signaling a difficulty in compelling recipients to provide post-project data.

3.2 Recommendations

Based on the following rationale, the evaluation makes two recommendations.

Over the evaluation period, a relatively small number of large projects accounted for a disproportionate share of program results. Currently, FedNor collects final results for the NODP only at the conclusion of multi-year contribution agreements. This reporting cycle distorts performance data, leading the program to technically miss its annual targets even when it is performing well over the long term. Simultaneously, organizations majority-led by equity-deserving groups were less likely to agree that the time and effort required for reporting was appropriate, and there is a significant backlog in two-year follow-up reports.
- Recommendation 1: Determine an approach to optimize the performance measurement framework to improve data accuracy while ensuring that performance reporting requirements remain proportional to project size, risk, and proponent capacity. Improvements could include:
  - Developing a mechanism for annual results collection specifically for large-scale or intermediary-led multi-year projects to mitigate year-over-year data distortion.
  - Determining if performance reporting requirements for certain project types or sizes of contributions can be lessened to better align with proponent capacity.
  - Determining if the current process for obtaining two-year follow-up reports can be modified to increase the completion rate.
Over the evaluation period, the NODP achieved an average leverage ratio of $1.55 for every dollar invested, falling short of the program's $1.80 target. Certain funding opportunities, such as the Regional Competitiveness-implementation (Capital) priority, leverage high levels of funding whereas the overall average is significantly lowered by funding opportunities designed for capacity building, such as the Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario and Youth Internships.
- Recommendation 2: Lower the performance measurement target for leverage to ensure it is reflective of the diverse economic development activities supported by the program.

Annex A: Case Studies Summary

The following Annex provides a summary of the four case studies undertaken to inform the evaluation.

Case Study #1 - Daki Menan Lands and Resources Corporation:

The project was titled “Renovations to building for forestry activities” and was funded through the Community Economic Development Stream. It was approved in November 2022, with a total project cost of $96,500, and an NODP contribution of $71,500.
The Daki Menan Lands and Resources Corporation (DMLRC) is a social enterprise affiliated with the Temagami First Nation (TFN) on Bear Island. Its mandate is to promote economic development for TFN, with a focus on natural resource management and developing available forest resources.
With support from the Northern Ontario Development Program (NODP), DMLRC renovated the basement of a commercially zoned building it had previously converted from residential to office use. The project created three offices, a washroom, storage space, and a meeting room, and included the purchase and installation of office equipment. The rationale for the project included the fact that there is limited office space in the region. The renovation expanded a community asset supporting the forestry sector and was projected to generate $18,000 in annual rental revenues.
The project required three formal amendments due to timing and cost changes, including the addition of an engineered steel beam, soft costs for engineering and design, addressing a hidden furnace/duct deficiency, and additional contractor time to provide on-the-job training to First Nation crew members. FedNor funding ultimately covered 75.67% of eligible costs. The recipient stated that the project would not have occurred without FedNor support, and credited the creativity and flexibility of their FedNor officer for allowing them to use a First Nations contractor, which directly supported local skill development.
One construction job was created, and on-the-job training opportunities were provided. Rental revenues now exceed $24,000 annually. The project directly supported an Indigenous organization and contributed to the viability of TFN forestry operations.

Case Study #2 L'Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario (AFO):

The project was titled “Effet multiplicateur Nord” and was funded through the through the Community Economic Development Stream. It was approved in August 2020, with a total project cost of $920,203, and an NODP contribution of $884,018.
The Assemblée de la francophonie de l’Ontario (AFO) is the convening body and political voice of Ontario’s Francophonie, representing 744,000 Franco-Ontarians. It acts as lead for the community strategic plan Vision 2025, integrating priorities across four pillars: growth and vitality, attraction and retention, participation and celebration, and coordination and organization. At the time of application, AFO had 10 full-time employees and 4 contractual staff, and is governed by an 11-member Board, including two representatives from Northern Ontario.
The project was a redistribution fund aimed at supporting new revenue-generating and participation initiatives in sectors such as IT, arts and culture, tourism, digital, and the social economy. The project targeted Francophones in Northern Ontario, with a focus on women entrepreneurs, youth entrepreneurs, and Francophone immigrants.
Through non-repayable contributions ranging from $5,000 to $25,000, the project supported 25 organizations in Northern Ontario. In addition to financial support, AFO provided technical assistance, including mentorship, feasibility analysis, start-up funding, and support for human resources and business planning.
AFO requested $1,111,840 from FedNor, representing 96% of total project costs. The recipient indicated the project would not have been possible without NODP funding, as all funds were redistributed to Northern organizations. Demand exceeded available funding.
The project exceeded employment targets, resulting in 45 jobs created and 21 maintained across arts, culture, immigration, and economic development sectors. One business was maintained that would otherwise have closed. Twenty strategic alliances were created or maintained. COVID-19 and labour shortages affected implementation, though recipients adapted.
The project contributed to strengthening the vitality and economic development capacity of Francophone communities in Northern Ontario. While funding timelines created delays, AFO reported clear guidance and ongoing availability of FedNor officers.

Case Study #3 - Corporation of the City of Temiskaming Shores:

The case study was comprised of two related projects to deliver the “Northern Ontario Mining Showcase” pavilion at two of the world's leading mineral exploration and mining conventions: the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum (CIM) and the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (PDAC). Both were funded under the Business Competitiveness and Growth stream. The CIM project was approved in July 2022, with an NODP contribution of $412,000 for a $442,000 project. The PDAC project was approved in September 2022, with an NODP contribution of $745,000 for an $800,000 project.
The Corporation of the City of Temiskaming Shores is a municipality of approximately 10,000 residents and serves as the economic and service hub for a regional population of 32,500 across Ontario and Quebec.
These projects, described as a “flagship” initiative, provide a large, highly technical pavilion designed for the mining supply and services sector. The objective was to showcase Northern Ontario small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), increasing their capacity for market expansion and global competitiveness. FedNor covered nearly all of eligible supported costs for both projects. The City indicated that the events would not have occurred in their proposed form without FedNor funding.
The NOMS pavilions reduce participation costs for Northern businesses (approximately $750 compared to $8,000 without support), which was particularly impactful for smaller firms. CIM 2023 included 46 exhibitors and attracted over 5,000 attendees. PDAC 2023 filled all 110 exhibit spaces and attracted over 25,000 attendees. The projects resulted in increased leads and sales, strengthened alliances, and further export opportunities.
According to the proponent’s research, continued FedNor investment over the past 10 years has generated an estimated 10:1 return on investment, resulting in $100 million in new sales and helping to create and maintain 900 jobs.

Case Study #4 – Atikameksheng Anishnawbek First Nation:

The project was titled: "Giyak Mishkawzid Shkagmikwe – Drill" and was funded under the Community Economic Development Stream. It was approved in February 2024, with a total project cost of $639,110 and an NODP contribution of $575,199.
Giyak Mishkawzid Shkagmikwe ( GMS) is a for-profit economic development corporation fully owned by Atikameksheng Anishnawbek and was incorporated in 2022. GMS’ mandate includes the development of commercial business opportunities to build the prosperity of the Nation as a whole, based on Atikameksheng’s treaty rights. More broadly GMS is committed to growing the Nation’s economic capabilities while creating employment, training, and business opportunities for Debendaagziwaad.
Supported by the Northern Ontario Development Program (NODP), the project involved the acquisition of an exploration drill for mining. The drill is owned by GMS and leased to its joint venture, Bagone'an JS Drilling Inc., for use in resource exploration and mine development. The purchase was described as a strategic move to own equipment rather than only participate in a venture, allowing GMS to earn a stronger share of revenues.
As a newly established company with no revenue history, GMS was assessed as medium/high risk; however, the financial commitment of Atikameksheng Anishnawbek supported project viability. The recipient indicated the project would not have proceeded without FedNor support, describing the non-repayable contribution as critical to “get our feet under us.”
The scope of work for the project included securing the purchase of the drill, receiving its delivery, and finalizing the lease agreement with Bagone'an. The final results report confirms that the drill was purchased, the joint venture expanded, and a strategic alliance maintained. Over the next two to five years, the project is expected to create six new jobs in the Sudbury Basin and generate revenues to be reinvested in the business and community.
The project demonstrates a strong contribution to Atikameksheng Anishnawbek’s economic development and is well aligned with the Nation’s Community Comprehensive Plan and Economic Development Strategic Plan. According to the proponent, FedNor’s administrative processes functioned effectively, featuring manageable reporting obligations and prompt disbursement of funds.

Footnotes

Footnote 1

Moazzami, B. (2019). Northern Projections: Human Capital Series – Greater Sudbury. Northern Policy Institute. Retrieved from: https://www.northernpolicy.ca/article/publications-search-245.asp?Category=38765.

Return to footnote 1 referrer

Footnote 2

Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario (2024). "Improving Targeted Supports for Emerging and Priority Sectors Forestry Backgrounder."

Return to footnote 2 referrer

Footnote 3

Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario (2024). "Improving Targeted Supports for Emerging and Priority Sectors Mining Backgrounder."

Return to footnote 3 referrer

Footnote 4

Moazzami, B. (2019)

Return to footnote 4 referrer

Footnote 5

Moazzami, B. (2019)

Return to footnote 5 referrer

Footnote 6

Projects with a ‘Targeted Population’ tag for: ‘2SLGBTQI+’, ‘Francophone’, ‘Indigenous peoples’, ‘Newcomers to Canada and immigrants’, ‘Women’, ‘Racialized people’, and ‘Youth and young adults’ have been including in calculating the value shown for this performance measure.

Return to footnote 6 referrer

Footnote 7

Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario (2024). “Rural Development Backgrounder.”

Return to footnote 7 referrer

Footnote 8

This result also exceeds the value found in the 2020-2021 Evaluation of the NODP (30%).

Return to footnote 8 referrer

Footnote 9

The difference between survey and administrative data likely reflects both survey sample composition and the fact that organizations may serve multiple equity-deserving groups, while individual projects are not always specifically designated as benefiting women.

Return to footnote 9 referrer

Footnote 10

Source: Government of Canada. GC InfoBase. Retrieved from https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/ems-sgd/edb-bdd/index-eng.html#infographic/gov/gov/financial.

Return to footnote 10 referrer

Footnote 11

Source: Government of Canada. GC InfoBase. Retrieved from https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/ems-sgd/edb-bdd/index-eng.html#infographic/gov/gov/financial.

Return to footnote 11 referrer

Footnote 12

This service standard became active starting in 2022-2023.

Return to footnote 12 referrer

Evaluation of the Northern Ontario Development Program (NODP)

On this page

Executive Summary

Introduction

Key Findings: Relevance

Key Findings: Effectiveness

Key Findings: Efficiency

Conclusions and Recommendations

List of Tables

List of Acronyms

1. Introduction

1.1 Program Overview

Funding Opportunities:

Community Economic Development (CED):

Business Growth and Competitiveness (BGC):

Community Investment Initiative for Northern Ontario (CIINO):

Youth Internships (YI):

Capitalization of Communities Futures Development Corporations:

Table 1: NODP Projects and Contributions by Funding Opportunity, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

Program Objectives and Expected Outcomes:

Table 2: NODP Intended Outcomes

Program Resources:

Table 3: NODP Budget 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

1.2 About this Evaluation

Scope and Evaluation Issues:

Table 4: Evaluation Themes and Questions

Lines of Evidence:

Document and Literature Review:

Administrative, Financial and Performance Data Review:

Key Informant Interviews:

Survey of Funded and Unfunded Applicants:

Case Studies:

2. Findings

2.1 Relevance

2.1.1 Responsiveness to Economic Development Needs

Table 5: NODP Project Application Results, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

Table 6: Average Total Project Costs by Application Result, 2020-2021 to 2024-2025

2.1.2 Alignment with Roles, Responsibilities, and Priorities

2.2 Effectiveness

2.2.1 Achievement of Immediate and Intermediate Intended Outcomes

Table 7: Summary of Key Performance Measurement Indicators

2.2.2 Contribution to Diversification, Viability and Sustainability

2.2.3 Supporting Equity-Deserving Groups

2.2.4 Best Practices and Lessons Learned

2.3 Efficiency

2.3.1 Use of Funds

Table 8: Comparison of Regional Development Agency Expenditures, 2024-2025Footnote 10

Table 9: Share of Funding Lapsed, 2020-2021 to 2024-25Footnote 11

2.3.2 Adherence to Service Standards:

Table 10: Adherence to Service Standards

2.3.3 Funding Application, Reporting and Data Collection:

2.3.4 Reporting and Data Collection

Table 11: Two-Year Follow Up Reports

3. Conclusions and Recommendations

3.1 Conclusions

Relevance:

Effectiveness:

Efficiency:

3.2 Recommendations

Annex A: Case Studies Summary

Case Study #1 - Daki Menan Lands and Resources Corporation:

Case Study #2 L'Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario (AFO):

Case Study #3 - Corporation of the City of Temiskaming Shores:

Case Study #4 – Atikameksheng Anishnawbek First Nation:

Table 8: Comparison of Regional Development Agency Expenditures, 2024-2025^{Footnote 10}

Table 9: Share of Funding Lapsed, 2020-2021 to 2024-25^{Footnote 11}