Assessment of Saskatchewan Assistance Program

ISSUE STATEMENT: This briefing examines the history, expenditures, performance

measurements, and utilization variables of the Saskatchewan Assistance Program (SAP) and
provides recommendations toward relieving expenditure pressures and improving performance
measurements.
BACKGROUND:

Historical Information
In 1978 The Saskatchewan Assistance Act was passed, providing the legislative foundation for
income support via the Saskatchewan Assistance Plan (SAP). Since then, SAP, now the
Saskatchewan Assistance Program, has been the province’s main basic income support
program.1 SAP is under the authority of the Ministry of Social Services (MSS).
SAP provides income support for families and individuals who cannot meet basic living costs for
a number of reasons including: disability, illness, low-income, or unemployment.2 SAP
eligibility requires recipients be Saskatchewan residents and Canadian citizens (some exceptions
apply), aged 18+, have a “budget shortfall”, and produce evidence of their financial need. 3

SAP provides allowances for disability, shelter, shared accommodation or room rentals, home
ownership cost assistance (e.g. property tax benefit); special needs benefits for extra cash needs;
and coverage of utilities costs. Under SAP, recipients can opt to have their utilities and rent paid
directly by the Ministry of Social Services.

In 2002-03, the Transitional Employment Allowance (TEA) was introduced to provide support
for people with low incomes who are more readily employable than SAP recipients. The
Saskatchewan Assured Income for Disability Program (SAID) was then introduced in 2009-10 to
provide income support for people with significant and enduring disabilities. SAP, TEA, and
SAID comprise the three main income assistance programs in the province. Depending on
which administrative category an individual or family falls under, the expenditures associated
with their case will vary. It is therefore useful to, at times, analyze SAP in comparison to TEA
and SAID.

Since the release of the Saskatchewan Plan for Growth: Vision 2020 and Beyond (SPFG) in
2012, all Ministry of Social Services plans present strategies that align with SPFG priorities. Of
particular relevance to income assistance is the strategy to support economic growth by
providing connections between job seekers and job opportunities. In 2015-16, the government
began making statements about redesigning and simplifying income assistance programs to
improve client service.

1
RSS 1978, c S-8 | The Saskatchewan Assistance Act | CanLII; Saskatchewan Assistance Plan Case Files series -
Provincial Archives of Saskatchewan (saskarchives.com).
2
The Saskatchewan Poverty Reduction Strategy.
3
Saskatchewan Assistance Program Policy Manual May 2021.

Prepared by Timothy Johnson

2021.11.16 www.schoolofpublicpolicy.sk.ca
ANALYSIS4:

Administration Related Expenditures

Case volumes for the three income assistance programs (IAPs) are, in part, contingent upon a
person’s relative eligibility for the other programs. Clients may fall under one of the three
programs, but never two simultaneously.
Between 2011/12-2018/19, the average annual SAP expenditure was roughly 175 million, while
TEA annual costs were about 30 million.5 Average annual SAID expenditures between 2014/15-
2018/19 was around 211 million.6 The average annual expenditures for all Income Assistance
and Disability Services (IADS) between 2011/12-2018/19 was 689 million.
These graphs show the percentage of SAP spending from IADS expenditures in 4 years7:

Per the “Explanations for Significant Variances” in MSS plans between 2012-2019, the main
drivers of SAP administration expenditures are caseload volumes and cost-per-case averages.
Caseload Volume: This graph shows the comparative percentage of total caseload volumes
across the three programs from 1996/97 to 2018/19.8 The rationale for the graph is that SAP
recipients have historically been transferred to both TEA and SAID. For Ministry expenditure
purposes, TEA (grey) is less expensive than SAP (red) and SAID (blue) is more expensive.

4
All calculations used in this briefing can be found here.
5
The MEAN SAP total actual expenditure between 2011-12 – 2018-19 was 174,820,000.
6
The first few years of SAID expenditures were excluded to avoid ‘period-of-case-transfer’ skew.
7
Totals used to calculate these figures were taken from Social Services Annual Reports for respective years.
8
Only SAP, TEA, and SAID are considered “Income Assistance Programs” in this line graph.

2
Caseload Volume CAGR: The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for caseload volumes was
also calculated to display SAP’s rate of case volume growth in relation to TEA and SAID.

SAP
CAGR SAP CAGR
96/97- TEA CAGR SAID CAGR SAP CAGR since TEA and
Measure 18/19 2002/03-2018/19 2009/10-2018/19 Since TEA SAID
CAGR: -4.44% 14.45% 25.65% -4.42% -4.72%

These figures reflect the ongoing goal to “[make] Saskatchewan the best place in Canada for
people with disabilities by expanding the Saskatchewan Assured Income for Disability
program”, as expressed in statement(s) from the Ministry and outlined in Plans and Reports
between 2012-2019.9 Also reflected in these figures is the desire to transition clients into the
labour force through programs like Accelerated Connections to Employment, JobsFirst, and
Employment Services for Parents. Clients may therefore get directed toward TEA instead of
SAP.
Cost per case: One rough way to measure the cost of each SAP case is by dividing total SAP
actual expenditures for a year by total SAP cases in that same year. The sum of that equation
provides an average ‘cost per case’ for that year. This average ‘cost per case’ was generated for
each year from 2011/12-2018/19, the mean of which is 11,450$ per SAP case. There were
122,893 total SAP cases between 2011/12-2018/19. [1]

Another way to measure cost per case is to look at the maximum possible cost for a single case
of SAP on average. Between 1986 and 2019 the average maximum annual benefit for a single
person with a disability on SAP was $12,540 (in constant 2019 dollars taking inflation into
account).

Administrative Expenditures10: Administrative costs associated with delivering SAP involve:

employee salaries, information management, ongoing capital/supplies investment required to run
offices (equipment, property costs), and more.

Program Performance by Ministry Performance Management Plan

Performance Measures: This table provides a timeline for performance measurements used by
MSS for all income assistance programs, including SAP.

9
Ministry of Social Services’ Plan 2013-14.
10
A very rough total for annual administrative expenditures could be arrived at by subtracting the total amount
given to all SAP recipients in that year from the program’s total actual expenditures for that year. What is ‘left over’
would be a very rough representation of the ‘administrative expenditures’. Total amount received by recipients was
not found for this briefing, nor could a substitute be reasonably estimated.

3
 2012- 2013- 2014-
Year 13 14 15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
IAER (3% for 3% IAER (IADR)
SAP and TEA) for SAP & TEA 75% 6- 85% 6-
Performance & 65% 6-Month & 65% 6-Month Month Month
Measurement IADR IADR IADR enrolment enrolment enrolment enrolment

IADR: From 2012/13 to 2017/18 MSS used the Income Assistance Dependency Rate (IADR) to
track the “proportion of Saskatchewan’s off-reserve population aged 0 to 64 years who depend
on social assistance for some or all of their income.”11 In 2016/17-2017/18 the IADR was
renamed the Income Assistance Enrolment Rate (IAER) before being phased out as a
performance measurement the following year.
Between 2012/13-2017/18 the average annual IADR was around 5%. Only between 2015/16-
2016/17 did MSS state an explicit target. This target was a 3% or lower enrolment rate for SAP
and TEA recipients combined. By MSS performance targets, SAP was successful with respect to
IADR for the years where targets were set.
‘Six-month rule’: As per the table above, in 2015/16, MSS Annual Plans began to set target
percentages for “clients without barriers to employment [to] leave income assistance within six
months of enrolment.”12 However, the 2014/15 MSS Report reported that 72% of recipients left
IAP within 6 months- a year before either the ‘six-month rule’ or its target percentage were
explicitly outlined in Plans.
2014/15 reported 72% following a plan that set no specific target. 2015/16 again reported 72%
from a plan to reach 65% by 2018.13 2016/17 reported “more than 80%” after another plan to hit
65% by 2018. 2017/18 reported 74% after setting an updated 75% target through March 2021.
2018/2019 reported 72% with a plan to hit 85% through March 2022.
Income assistance programs (including SAP) failed to meet six-month rule targets in 2017/18
and 2018/19. This measure accurately reflects the rate that clients “leave income assistance
within six months of enrolment.” A discussion of the efficacy of these measures to adequately
evaluate SAP’s performance will follow in a later section.

Utilization Variables
Variables: According to the Ministry, the main utilization variables that consistently impact case
volume for income assistance programs are population changes, the general state of the
economy, demand for labour, and disability rates.14 All of these variables influence SAP case
volumes on an annual basis.
Another crucial determinant for SAP caseload volume is the relative efficacy of service delivery
across other Ministry programs. If a SAP client can be transferred to TEA and find lasting

11
Ministry of Social Services Annual Report for 2013-14.
12
Ministry of Social Services Plan for 2017-18.
13
The two years reports feature verbatim quotations regarding the 72% rate.
14
Ministry of Social Services Plan for 2014-15

4
employment through programs like Accelerated Connections to Employment, JobsFirst, and
Employment Services for Parents, that person is unlikely to require future income assistance.
The success of the Ministry and Government’s social spending over the long term could also
lead to a reduction in need for income assistance. The extent to which government can improve
education, healthcare, and housing outcomes for vulnerable citizens could greatly impact the
need for income assistance in future years.
Another key variable for utilization is the criteria for income assistance by which a client’s
eligibility is assessed. The Ministry directed more clients to TEA in 2018/19 than any previous
year.
Estimates: In 2018/19, the actual average expenditure cost per SAP case was $11,778. The
average expenditure cost per TEA case was 8,995.15
Given that the range in the last five years for SAP case numbers is 861 (6% of the total SAP case
volume in 2018), it is reasonable to estimate the costs of the cumulative impact of changes in the
economy, varying demands for labour, disability rates and similar-service competition in a worst
case scenario would be at least 6%. In 2018/19, a 6% increase in case volumes would have
meant an increase of 10.1 million in SAP expenditures.
If 5% more SAP cases were categorized as TEA cases in 2018/19, that would have amounted to
an 8.5 million dollar reduction in SAP expenditures. The inverse is also true, if that same number
of recipients were directed to SAP instead of TEA, SAP expenditures would rise by 8.5 million.
The ministry would save 2 million dollars in the first scenario.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
Expenditure Pressures: Broadly, the government has an array of available tools to relieve IAP
expenditure pressures that go beyond creative administrative categorization. For example, the
Plan For Growth describes the province as having “some of the highest crime rates in Canada.”16
It notes that, since 2007, Saskatchewan has “added 200 new police officers and increased the
number of prosecutors.” The annual salary for an officer with the Regina Police Service (RPS)
goes from $52,000 to $88,192 with four increases in the first five years of employment. Based on
the RPS current pay scale, the cost of 200 new officers is 71.6 Million over five years.
At the same time, recent Ministry Plans focus on the importance of the Poverty Reduction
Strategy which encourages innovative policies to tackling income security,
housing/homelessness, early childhood development, education/skills training, employment, and
health/food security.
Reconciling government’s competing views on determinants of crime and consequences of
poverty would enable more collaborative strategies toward reducing income assistance program
expenditures.

15
These numbers are simply the total expenditures divided by the total number of cases.
16
Saskatchewan Plan for Growth (2012)

5
Performance Measures: In 2012-13, the Ministry acknowledged one key risk with using the
IADR, which is that “a reduction in caseload could signal unmet need or goal unachieved.”17 The
same issue applies to the ‘6 month rule’ measure. With both measures, there is no assessment of
whether SAP or other IAPs meet the actual needs of recipients or the larger population. Instead,
they simply describe enrolment patterns.
A simple way to improve the ‘six-month rule’ would be to add a measure of the percentage of
recipients that ‘leave’ income assistance to employment. This would improve accountability and
goal-measurement accuracy.
MSS has adopted the federal government’s official poverty measure, the Market Basket Measure
(MBM) as part of its performance measurements for its Poverty Reduction Strategy (PRS).
MBM describes the amount of money required to meet basic needs like nutrition, shelter,
clothing, and transportation. The average extent to which the maximum SAP annual payment for
a single person with a disability fell below MBM standards18 between 1986 and 2019 was
$10,650. In other words, single SAP recipients with a disability were provided (on average) the
financial resources to meet 54% of the cost of their basic needs each year.
Moving Forward: Considering MBM standards, all SAP and IAP recipients should be allowed
to keep any other income that they can make while receiving social assistance until their total
income meets current regional MBM standards. If MSS accepts this standard of poverty
measurement in the one case, it should be applied uniformly across all MSS programs.
In the spirit of the MBM and cost efficiency, the administrative rigours of income verification
and eligibility vetting could be simplified by becoming more lenient. This may lead to increased
case volume but could lower administrative costs per case.
Lastly, if a move toward greater user responsibility is in the works, all recipients should be given
an option of continuing to access SAP in the way in which they have become familiar. The
addition of optional online service access for users could help to alleviate cost-per-case pressures
by reducing recipients’ reliance on caseworkers to navigate the program.

17
Ministry of Social Services Plan 2012-13, p 12.
18
In 2019 dollars for a person living in Saskatoon.