CAP and CAP-YI

What is Community Access Program (CAP)?

The community access program (CAP) was first introduced in 1995 to “help provide Canadians with affordable access to the Internet and the services and tools it provides” [1]. It became a cornerstone of the federal Connecting Canadians program which was introduced in September 1997.

What are the goals of CAP?

The goal of the Connecting Canadians program was “to make Canada the most connected nation in the world, to make Canada a world leader in developing and using an advanced information infrastructure to achieve our social and economic goals in the knowledge economy” [2].

In the 1997 Liberal Party policy platform, CAP was presented as a community economic development (CED) initiative [3]. Within two years, the goals associated with Connecting Canadians and CAP had moved well beyond the idea of connectivity as access and infrastructure to support CED to the idea of connectivity as a vehicle for social cohesion.

In facilitating the ongoing challenge of realizing these goals, CAP has become a critical part of the infrastructure of many communities across Canada.

What other programs are involved?

CAP was one initiative under the Connecting Canadians program that also included other made-in-Canada on-line access programs such as SchoolNet, VolNet, and Smart Communities, as well as e-commerce, Canadian content, and government on-line projects.

How is CAP delivered and where are the sites located?

CAP sites are most commonly located in schools, libraries, community centres and friendship centres and operate through partnerships with provincial/territorial governments and non-profit organizations. As a result of various program adjustments since 1994, CAP has evolved into 13 different provincial/territorial projects. Each province or group of provinces follows a different model for the administration and delivery of this program.

How much does CAP cost at the federal level?

Industry Canada documents peg the cost of the CAP program between 1995-96 and 2006 at $337,200,000 [4]. Now, in 2008, the Connecting Canadians initiative has been largely disbanded. While the CAP program is still alive, it has suffered major budget cuts in recent years. Once encompassing 8 800 sites across Canada [5], the number of active sites in 2004-5 was 3786 [6]. The program was scheduled to end March 31, 2004, but some intensive advocacy on behalf of affected communities kept the program alive until at least the end of the 2008-09 fiscal year. However, there has been a great deal of uncertainty and every year, program renewal seemed to hang upon a slim thread. In 2007, the funding ended on March 31 and was not formally renewed until June 6, leaving CAP site administrators, volunteers and users across the country in the lurch for 9 weeks.

Most recently, administrators were advised that, as of July 31, 2008, the CAP program, which had always resided in the Spectrum, Information Technologies and Telecommunications Sector (SITT), would be formally transferred to the Regional Operations Sector of Industry Canada. They were assured that this was an internal and administrative change and that it would not result in any changes to CAP.

Now, more clearly located within a department tasked with encouraging community economic development, supporting the social economy and participation in the digital economy, perhaps the program has found a home. Garth Graham, one of the directors of Telecommunities Canada, a national affiliation of community networks, cautions that “we’ll have to wait to see whether the orphan CAP has now been adopted by loving parents or merely warehoused in foster care”.

Who uses CAP sites?

Two recent surveys of CAP users have provided extensive detail on characteristics of users. A 2004 Industry Canada/Ekos survey collected information from 7000 users [7]. A 2008 survey by researchers with the Canadian Research Alliance for Community Networking collected information from 84 users in 6 provinces/territories [8].

Both surveys showed that there were slightly more women than men and that many users were youth. 41% of respondents in the CRACIN survey were under 30 years of age; 29% of users in the Industry Canada survey were under 24.

Both surveys showed that 56% of CAP users had an income under $29,000. Among respondents to the CRACIN survey, almost 26% had an annual household income of less then $9,999 per year – well below the poverty line by any definition. The majority of those in this category were women.

The CRACIN survey also showed that community networks are heavily used by immigrants both for communications and skills training, as well as social and cultural enrichment.

Despite the low incomes, education levels among the CRACIN respondents were reasonably high, with 25% reporting that they had Bachelor’s degrees. Among immigrants, this rose to 33%.

What are CAP sites used for?

Beyond the obvious use of CAP sites for e-mail and web searching, a high number of respondents to the CRACIN survey reported using the sites to type letters, search for information on local events, search for government information and search for health-related information. Sites are also well used to facilitate community-wide volunteering activities. Staff and volunteers play a crucial role in facilitating these activities.

The survey was particularly interested in how the sites facilitated personal networking and face-to-face interaction. Over 80% of users indicated that use of the computers at the site had helped them stay in contact with both local and non-local friends and family. It appears that the sites were also instrumental in helping these users extend their local social networks. 49% of the respondents indicated the site had helped them meet new people — a very good indication that community networks are meeting places that contribute to social cohesion in the community.

There is a heavy use of these sites for employment related courses and enhancement of job finding skills. 40% of the CRACIN respondents had taken at least one course at the site [9].

Why does CAP matter

CAP is a necessary part of a national ICT strategy. Governments around the world have recognized their obligation to remedy major disparities in access to new communications technologies. The Final Report of the Telecommunications Policy Review Panel (TPRP) recognized the continuing need for such remedies in Canada. It recommended that there be a national information and communications technology (ICT) adoption strategy “focused on using ICTs to increase the productivity of the Canadian economy, the social well-being of Canadians and the inclusiveness of Canadian society” [10].

It also noted that such an adoption strategy needed to be focused on the acquisition of new skills as well as physical access to the tools. According to recent research, the role played by these new actors on the community stage appears to be much more significant than originally thought. There is growing evidence that these sites are important hubs around which communities help their members find economic and social stability.

Given the use of social cohesion as one of the policy goals for the federal involvement in connectivity programs, new evidence of social as well as economic benefits should be carefully considered in policy decisions about the role such services play in Canadian communities, the level of support they should be accorded, and who should assume responsibility.

References

[1] Industry Canada. (2005a) Departmental performance report 2004 – 2005. http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/dpr1/04-05/IC-IC/IC-ICd4506_e.asp

[2] Manley, John. “Canada and the Internet Revolution: Connecting Canadians. Speech to the annual meeting of the Trilateral Commission, Washington, D.C. 1999. http://www.trilateral.org/annmtgs/trialog/trlgtxts/t53/man.htm

[3] Liberal Party of Canada. Securing our Future Together; Preparing Canada for the 21st Century. Ottawa, Liberal Party of Canada, 1997.

[4] Industry Canada. (2005a). ibid.

[5] Industry Canada (2005a). ibid.

[6] Industry Canada. (2005b). Strategic outcome: Competitive industry and sustainable communities. (Departmental program review 2004-2005). http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/dpr1/04-05/IC-IC/IC-ICd4503_e.asp#pri17

[7] Ekos Research Associates. (2004). Evaluation Study of the Community Access Program (CAP). Industry Canada. Audit and Evaluation Branch, January 16. http://www.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/ae-ve.nsf/en/01420e.html

[8] Moll, Marita and Melissa Fritz. (2008). Mapping new territory on-line and off: A snapshot of community network users, their activities and their impacts. Report on the CRACIN Survey of Community Network Users. Forthcoming www.cracin.ca

[9] Ibid.

[10] Telecommunications Policy Review Panel. (2006). Final Report. Ottawa: Industry Canada. http://www.telecomreview.ca/epic/site/tprp-gecrt.nsf/en/h_rx00054e.html