The Socioeconomic Status of First Nation Members on Reserve

A statistical analysis by Sask Trends Monitor

February 2010 Version

Doug Elliott QED Information Systems Inc. 444 19th Avenue Regina, Saskatchewan S4N 1H1 306-522-5515 [email protected] www.sasktrends.ca Monitor Background

„ This report is part of a project that was notionally called “Harvard North”. The research question is whether or not there is a correlation between the well-being of First Nation members and the quality of their governance. In simple terms, does good governance yield above-average socioeconomic status?

„ The project was originally conceived by the Saskatchewan Labour Market Commission but was never formally completed and published. When the Commission was wound down, Sask Trends completed the initial phase of the research and prepared this summary. This material was not reviewed by the Commission and does not represent their views.

„ This part of the research is designed to measure the socioeconomic status of individuals for each First Nation. It was intended to eventually be compared with governance indicators.

„ There were a number of steps involved in the developing the socioeconomic status. • The target group is those individuals whose local level of governance is a Chief and Council. In most cases this will be the on-Reserve population of a single First Nation. In some cases it would include the residents of adjacent communities even though they are technically under the jurisdiction of the provincial government. • The second step was to develop a measure of socioeconomic status. The Statistics census is the most reliable information about the on-Reserve population and because there is no universally accepted definition of socioeconomic status, we focused on the extensive range of indicators available from that source. • The third step is to determine a methodology for combining the individual measures of socioeconomic status into a single indicator that enables one to compare First Nation members with one another.

February, 2010 2 Choosing the

„ For each First Nation, we needed to define the group of individuals whose local level of governance is a Chief and Council. These are the people whose socioeconomic status will be most affected by the governance decisions and institutions for that First Nation.

„ In most cases this will be the on-Reserve population of a particular First Nation but in some cases, the residents of adjacent communities were included even though they are technically under the jurisdiction of the provincial government. The fact that all First Nation members can vote in band elections was ignored.

„ The residents of the Little Red River Reserve were allocated to Montreal Lake. Multi-community First Nations such as and Peter Ballantyne were treated as single First Nations.

„ We included all those who live on Reserve even though some will not be Registered Indians and therefore not technically under the jurisdiction of Chief and Council.

„ We had to exclude the Joseph Bighead First Nation because the First Nation refused to participate in the census. Statistics Canada suppresses data from communities with only a few persons to help maintain the confidentiality of respondents so the following First Nations could not be included in the analysis. - Little Black Bear - The Key - Day Star - Okanese - Nekaneet - Wood Mountain - White Cap - Star Blanket - Ocean Man - Peepeekisis - Sakimay This left us with 56 Saskatchewan First Nations which had most or all of the socioeconomic filblfactors available.

February, 2010 3 Adjacent Communities

„ In a limited number of cases it First Nation Adjacent Community was deemed appropriate to Birch Narrows First Nation include the resident of the Black Lake nearby “adjacent community” Buffalo River Nation St. George' s Hill, wihith th e on Reserve Canoe Lake Cree First Nation , population because in practise Cumberland House Cree Nation Cumberland House their socioeconomic status will English River First Nation be determined by governance Pelican Lake Chitek Lake decisions in the nearby Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation Pelican Narrows Reserve.

„ The adjacent communities chosen are shown on the left.

February, 2010 4 Choosing the Factors to Measure Socioeconomic Status

Measure Notes Income per capita Income per capita is often used as a proxy for the size of the local economy. Growth in income per capita We used a ten-year (1995 to 2005) period to measure changes in income over time. Average household income This is similar to income per capita but it is a measure of spending power rather than the size of the economy. This is the traditional income measure used forfor socioeconomic status. Change in average household As with income per capita, we used a ten-year period to measure changes in income. income Educational attainment This would is the percentage of the adult population (restricted to 25 to 64 years) who have at least a grade 12 education. Employment rate The traditional measure of employment is the proportion of the adult (15 and older) population whowho had a job in May 2005. Change in employment This is growth in employment from 1996 to 2006. Labour force attachment Rather than just a "snapshot" at the time of the census, this is the proportion of the population who worked throughout 2005 in full-time job. Private sector This is the proportion of employment in sectors other than health, education, and government services. Private sector employment is often more indicative of a growing economy than public sector employment. Dependency This is the proportion of personal income that comes from sources other than government transfers, that is, from employment, investments, etc. Housing As a proxy for wealth,this is the proportion of dwellings that are not in need of major repairs.

„ A total of eleven indicators were chosen using the available data from the census. They are a combination of single year snapshots (2006) and trends over time (1996 to 2006).

February, 2010 5 Combining the Factors

„ This is a statistical question. How does one combine the eleven individual measures into a single indicator for socioeconomic status? How does one “add” average income to the percentage with a post-secondary education?

„ There are lots of sophisticated statistical ways to do this but we used a simple one that is easy to understand and explain. Each of the indicators is ranked from 1 to 58 (the number of First Nations). The socioeconomic status is the simple average of the eleven rankings.

„ One of the advantages of this methodology is that some of the extremes arising from small sample sizes do not adversely affect the result.

„ The highest possible ranking would be 1 and the lowest possible 58. In fact, the rankings ranged from 7 to 49.

February, 2010 6 The Eleven Indicators

For each of the eleven indicators, the First Nations are ranked from low to high in this section. Income per Capita

Mosquito Island Lake Red Earth Witchekan Lake James Smith Lac La Ronge Total Personal Income per Capita Saulteaux 2005 Yellow Quill Pelican Lake Mistawasis Shoal Lake Moosomin Canoe Lake Fishing Lake Big River Muskowekwan Montreal Lake Birch Narrows Thunderchild Kawacatoose Ahtahk ak oop Peter Ballantyne Red Pheasant Wahpeton Makwa Kinistin Sturgeon Lake One Arrow Gordon Keeseekoose Cote Hatchet Lake Beardy' ss& & Standing Buffalo Muscowpetung Piapot Carry The Kettle Pasqua Onion Lake Sweetgrass Waterhen Lake Clearwater River Little Pine English River Kahkewistahaw Ochapowace Poundmaker Buffalo River White Bear Flying Dust Muskeg Lake Black Lake Cowessess Cumberland House Fond du Lac Muskoday $0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000

February, 2010 8 Changes in Income per Capita

James Smith Mistawasis Island Lake Mosquito Witchekan Lake Change in Personal Income per Capita Lac La Ronge Clearwater River After Adjusting for Inflation Ahtahkakoop 1995-2005 Gordon Hatchet Lake Waterhen Lake Sturgeon Lake Pasqua Standing Buffalo Flying Dust Beardy's & Okemasis Moosomin Yellow Quill Piapot Big River Saulteaux Red Pheasant Kawacatoose Ochapowace White Bear Fishing Lake Peter Ballantyne Buffalo River Poundmaker Canoe Lake Shoa l La ke Cowessess Fond du Lac Sweetgrass Cote Muskowekwan Keeseekoose Little Pine Carry The Kettle Thunderchild English River Onion Lake Muskoday Muskeg Lake Cumberland House Pelican Lake Montreal Lake Makwa Sahgaiehcan Kahkewistahaw Black Lake Birch Narrows Red Earth -50% -25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175%

February, 2010 9 Average Household Income

Moosomin Mosquito Fishing Lake Standing Buffalo Yellow Quill Saulteaux Average Household Income Cote in 2005 Kinistin Island Lake Ahtahkakoop Little Pine Montreal Lake One Arrow Piapot Keeseekoose Poundmaker Gordon Kawacatoose Carry The Kettle Muskowekwan Bigge River Pasqua Thunderchild Wahpeton Waterhen Lake Beardy's & Okemasis Red Pheasant Ochapowace Sweetgrass White Bear Sturgeon Lake Muscowpetung Makwa Sahgaiehcan Kahkewistahaw Muskeg Lake Lac La Ronge Shoal Lake Witchekan Lake James Smith Canoe Lake Peter Ballantyne Birch Narrows Mistawasis Buffalo River Cowessess Red Earth Clearwater River Onion Lake Flying Dust Hatchet Lake Cumberland House Muskoday Pelican Lake English River Black Lake Fond du Lac $10,000 $15,000 $20,000 $25,000 $30,000 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000

February, 2010 10 Changes in Average Household Income

Montreal Lake Ahtahkakoop Clearwater River Hatchet Lake Island Lake Change in Average Household Piapot Peter Ballantyne Income from 1995 to 2005 Buffalo River After Adjusting for Inflation Moosomin Beardy's & Okemasis Red Pheasant Ochapowace Waterhen Lake Standing Buffalo Mosquito Gordon Poundmaker Big River Yellow Quill Witchekan Lake Cowessess Lac La Ronge Kawacatoose Canoe Lake Flying Dust Fishing Lake Pasqua Sturgeon Lake Cote Fond du Lac SlSaulteaux Shoal Lake White Bear Muskeg Lake Birch Narrows Keeseekoose Cumberland House English River Mistawasis Black Lake Carry The Kettle Little Pine Pelican Lake Muskoday James Smith Sweetgrass Muskowekwan Thunderchild Makwa Sahgaiehcan Onion Lake Kahkewistahaw Red Earth -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200%

February, 2010 11 Dependency

Mosquito Island Lake Fishing Lake Yellow Quill Moosomin Saulteaux Red Pheasant Percentage of Personal Makwa Sahgaiehcan Income NOT from Mistawasis Carry The Kettle Government Transfers Cote 2005 Montreal Lake Big River Shoal Lake One Arrow Poundmaker Witchekan Lake Kinistin Kawacatoose Birch Narrows Musk ow ekw an Wahpeton Ahtahkakoop Thunderchild Piapot Keeseekoose Hatchet Lake Gordon Clearwater River Red Earth Sturgeon Lake Beardy's & Okemasis Peter Ballantyne Standing Buffalo Little Pine Pelican Lake Sweetgrass James Smith Lac La Ronge Pasqua Canoe Lake Kahkewistahaw Muscowpetung Waterhen Lake Ochapowace Onion Lake Cumberland House Buffalo River Cowessess Muskeg Lake English River Flying Dust White Bear Fond du Lac Black Lake Muskoday 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

February, 2010 12 Completed Education

Birch Narrows Moosomin Clearwater River Hatchet Lake Black Lake One Arrow Island Lake Mistawasis Fond du Lac Makwa Sahgaiehcan Buffalo River PtfthPltiPercent of the Population Lac La Ronge Aged 25 to 64 Saulteaux Shoal Lake With at Least Grade 12 Peter Ballantyne 2006 Muskowekwan Big River Thunderchild Yellow Quill English River Onion Lake MitMosquito Little Pine Waterhen Lake Sweetgrass Red Earth Muscowpetung Fishing Lake Montreal Lake Cote Ahtahkakoop Keeseekoose Kawacatoose Sturgeon Lake Gordon Carry The Kettle Red Pheasant Canoe Lake Witchekan Lake Ochapowace Cumberland House White Bear Piapot Kahkewistahaw Pelican Lake Beardy's & Okemasis James Smith Wahpeton Kinistin Standing Buffalo Poundmaker Muskeg Lake Pasqua Muskoday Flying Dust Cowessess 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

February, 2010 13 Employment Rate

Mistawasis Moosomin Island Lake Mosquito Red Pheasant Clearwater River Percent of the Population Birch Narrows Aged 15 and older Shoal Lake Red Earth Who Were Employed Fishing Lake in May 2006 Beardy's & One Arrow Keeseekoose Sturgeon Lake English River Ahtahkakoop Kawacatoose Big River Wahpeton Cote Thunderchild HthtLkHatchet Lake Buffalo River Sweetgrass Yellow Quill Saulteaux Carry The Kettle Montreal Lake Gordon Muskowekwan Peter Ballantyne Black Lake Little Pine Lac La Ronge Waterhen Lake Piapot Poundmaker Kinistin Muscowpetung Makwa Sahgaiehcan James Smith Canoe Lake Standing Buffalo Onion Lake Ochapowace Witchekan Lake Cumberland House Pelican Lake Fond du Lac Kahkewistahaw Pasqua Cowessess Flying Dust Muskoday White Bear Muskeg Lake 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

February, 2010 14 Growth in Employment

Clearwater River Birch Narrows Wahpeton Keeseekoose Beardy's & Piapot Growth in Employment Ochapowace 1996 to 2006 Muscowpetung English River Waterhen Lake Buffalo River Standing Buffalo Mistawasis Kawacatoose Fishing Lake Ahtahkakoop Lac La Ronge James Smith Moosomin Sweetgrass Carry The Kettle Cowessess Canoe Lake Saulteaux Red Earth Kinistin Yellow Quill Hatchet Lake Gordon Red Pheasant Fond du Lac Little Pine Black Lake Cumberland House Poundmaker Cote Island Lake Muskoday Pelican Lake Montreal Lake Muskowekwan Flying Dust Thunderchild Muskeg Lake Shoal Lake White Bear Peter Ballantyne Pasqua Onion Lake Big River Makwa Sturgeon Lake Witchekan Lake Mosquito One Arrow Kahkewistahaw -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160%

February, 2010 15 Labour Market Attachment

Mosquito Saulteaux Mistawasis Cote Sturgeon Lake Percentage of Adults Montreal Lake Makwa 15 and Older Thunderchild Employed Throughout Yellow Quill 2005 on a Full - Time Birc h Narrows Big River Basis Canoe Lake Pelican Lake Moosomin Poundmaker Keeseekoose Little Pine Shoal Lake Red Earth Kahkewistahaw Peter Ballantyne Island Lake Muskowekwan Witchekan Lake Carry The Kettle Fishing Lake Onion Lake Black Lake Buffalo River Lac La Ronge Gordon Cumberland House Ahtahkakoop Kawacatoose White Bear English River Beardy's & Sweetgrass Waterhen Lake Red Pheasant Clearwater River Muskeg Lake Standing Buffalo James Smith Piapot Flying Dust Muskoday Pasqua Hatchet Lake Cowessess Ochapowace Fond du Lac 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

February, 2010 16 Private Sector Employment

Birch Narrows Moosomin Keeseekoose Hatchet Lake Shoal Lake Muscowpetung Percentage of Employment Mosquito in the Private Sector, 2006 Kinistin Kawacatoose (i.e. not in health care, Red Pheasant education services, or Witchekan Lake Mistawasis public administration) Big River Muskeg Lake Pasqua Saulteaux Cote Muskowekwan Clearwater River Cowessess Red Earth Ahta hka koop English River Peter Ballantyne Canoe Lake Buffalo River Island Lake Sturgeon Lake Kahkewistahaw Thunderchild Gordon Black Lake Wahpeton Standing Buffalo Poundmaker Makwa Sahgaiehcan Fishing Lake James Smith Beardy's & Waterhen Lake Montreal Lake Piapot Lac La Ronge Fond du Lac Ochapowace Little Pine Flying Dust Carry The Kettle Muskoday Yellow Quill Sweetgrass Onion Lake Cumberland House Pelican Lake One Arrow White Bear 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

February, 2010 17 Housing Condition

Mistawasis One Arrow Muskeg Lake Muskoday Shoal Lake Cumberland House Percentage of Houses Ochapowace in need of Black Lake Standing Buffalo Major Repairs (2006) Kinistin Montreal Lake Cowessess Buffalo River Beardy's & Okemasis Fond du Lac Gordon Pasqua Kahkewistahaw Yellow Quill White Bear Hatchet Lake PdkPoundmaker Pelican Lake Wahpeton Thunderchild Cote Sturgeon Lake Red Earth Fishing Lake Kawacatoose Mosquito Little Pine Peter Ballantyne Witchekan Lake Red Pheasant English River Ahtahkakoop Lac La Ronge Keeseekoose Carry The Kettle Sweetgrass Piapot Muskowekwan Muscowppgetung Onion Lake Clearwater River Moosomin Birch Narrows James Smith Big River Canoe Lake Flying Dust Waterhen Lake Island Lake Makwa Sahgaiehcan Saulteaux 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

February, 2010 18 Summary Measures

The 56 First Nations are divided into four groups according to the average ranking of the eleven indicators.

Low rankings indicate better socioeconomic statistics than high rankings. Note that differences of one or two in the average rankings are probably not significant. Highest Rankings

Muskoday 7.0

Average of Eleven Cumberland House 12.4 Socio Economic Indicators

Muskeg Lake 13.5

White Bear 15.1

Kahkewistahaw 15.5

Fond du Lac 16.2

Cowessess 16.5

Flying Dust 17.3

Black Lake 18.3

Onion Lake 18.4

Pelican Lake 19.2

Pasqua 21.5

Ochapowace 21.5

0 5 10 15 20 25

February, 2010 20 Medium to High Rankings

Sweetgrass 24.5 Average of Eleven Socio Economic Indicators English River 25.8

Little Pine 26.4

Standing Buffalo 26.7

Poundmaker 27.0

James Smith 28.2

One Arrow 28.3

Carry The Kettle 28.5

Buffalo River 28.6

Red Earth 29.1

Makwa Sahgaiehcan 29.5

Thunderchild 29.9

Beardy's & Okemasis 30.6

20 22 24 26 28 30 32

February, 2010 21 Medium to Low Rankings

Gordon 30.9

Average of Eleven Sturgeon Lake 31.1 Socio Economic Indicators Peter Ballantyne 31.1

Canoe Lake 31.1

Kinistin 31.5

Piapot 31.5

Waterhen Lake 31.7

Witchekan Lake 32.0

Muskowekwan 32.0

Montreal Lake 32.1

Shoal Lake 32.7

Wahpeton 33.1

Hatchet Lake 33.6

Lac La Ronge 33.7

Muscowpetung 33.9

25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

February, 2010 22 Lowest Rankings

Cote 34.9

Average of Eleven Red Pheasant 36.3 Socio Economic Indicators Kawacatoose 36.3

Keeseekoose 37.0

Yellow Quill 37.3

Fishing Lake 37.9

Clearwater River 38.9

Big River 39.3

Mistawasis 39.4

Ahtahkakoop 39.5

Birch Narrows 40.2

Saulteaux 43.9

Mosquito 45.3

Island Lake 46.9

Moosomin 49.4

30 35 40 45 50 55

February, 2010 23 Comparison with Education

„ There is a view that is widely held that education is the key to improved socioeconomic status. This view is encapsulated by the expression that education is the “new buffalo”.

„ The next step in the analysis was to see if there was a correlation between the level of completed education and the overall socioeconomic status indicator to justify such a view. The percentage of the population 25 to 64 years of age with at least grade 12 was taken as the measure of educational attainment.

„ Note that there is a mobility problem with measuring educational attainment among the on-Reserve population. If those who obtain their grade 12 or a post-secondary education have to leave the Reserve to find employment (and this will be necessary for many Reserves), then the educational attainment of the on-Reserve population will be lower than if theyyy had stayed. For this reason it would be better to measure the educational attainment of all those who were born and raised on Reserve rather than just those who are currently living there. Unfortunately this kind of data isn’t available.

„ In the figure on the next page, each dot represents a First Nation and the dotted line indicates the correlation . There is correlation between completed education and socioeconomic status but the relationship is not as strong as might be expected. Several First Nations have average levels of education but a low socioeconomic status rank. The three top ranked First Nations do not have the highest level of education.

February, 2010 24 Socioeconomic Status vis-à-vis Completed Education

Socioeconomic Status Ranking Compared with Educational Attainment

0 better

Muskoday 10 Cumberland House

Fond du Lac Black Lake Onion Lake 20 socioeconomic status rank 30

40

Saulteaux Mosquito Island Lake 50 Moosomin

60 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% percent of the population 25 to 64 with at least grade 12

February, 2010 25 Proximity to Urban Centres

„ There are some theoretical economic advantages if a Reserve is located close to a major urban centre because: • a market for First Nation consumer goods and services is nearby; and • First Nation members can live on Reserve and commute to work in the larger economy in the urban centre.

„ The next step was to compare the socioeconomic status ranking with proximity to an urban centre. The proximity measure chosen is Statistics Canada’s “urban influence” classification. Communities are classified into one of seven categories: • 1 to 3 are part of an urban centre • 4 = strong influence • 5 = moderate influence • 6 = weak influence • 7 = no influence In the classification scheme, “influence” is measure by commuting patterns so in order for the first nation to be classified, for example, as having a moderate influence from an urban area, it must take advantage of the proximity.

„ Only one of the 56 First Nations is part of an urban centre – Wahpeton – and only two have a strong influence – Sweetgrass and Muskoday.

February, 2010 26 Socioeconomic Status vis-à-vis Urban Influence

Average Socioeconomic Status Ranking by Urban Influence „ The three Reserves that are either part of or strongly influenced by an urban centre 35 have better socioeconomic status, an average ranking of 30.9 21.6. 29.6 30 28.9 „ Among the other 53 Reserves socioeconomic influence seems to have the stttatus opposite effect, namely poorer rank 25 rankings among those closer to an urban centre. 21.6 „ The tentative conclusion one 20 could draw from this imperfect data would be that proximity to an urban centre can improve socioeconomic status. 15 But the improvement will happen only if the Reserve is very close to the urban centre better and only if the First Nation 10 takes advantage of the Strong influence Moderate Weak influence No influence proximity. (3 FNs) influence (26 (16 FNs) (11 FNs) FNs)

February, 2010 27 Treaty Land Entitlement

Average Socioeconomic Status Ranking by Presence of TLE „ In 1992, Saskatchewan, Canada, and Settlement (prior to 2000) 25 First Nations signed the Treaty Land Entitlement Framework 35 Agreement (TLE). TLE First Nations receive approxi matel y $ 516 milli on over 12 years to purchase land to add to its reserves. 29.9 30 29.5 „ The socioeconomic status of these 25 First Nations plus Nekaneet which signed in 1992 and Cowessess and 25 socioeconomic status Carry the Kettle which signed in 1996 rank was compared with First Nations that did not have a TLE.

20 „ The presence of a TLE settlement clearly has no effect on socioeconomic status.

15 „ The amount of the settlement for the better 28 First Nations with a TLE settlement is compared with socioeconomic 10 status on the next page. There is no With a TLE Settlement Without a TLE apparent relationship with the amount Settlement of TLE and socioeconomic status .

February, 2010 28 Socioeconomic Status vis-à-vis TLE Amounts

Socioeconomic Status Ranking Compared with Amount of TLE Settlement

0 better

10

Muskeg Lake Cowessess Onion Lake 20 socioeconomic status rank 30 PBCN trend Yellow Quill 40

50 Moosomin

60 $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 Value of TLE Settlement ($K)

February, 2010 29 Outstanding Research Issues

„ There is no consensus about whether the two large multi-community First Nations – La Ronge and Peter Ballantyne – should be treated as a single observation (as they are in this draft) or as separate communities.

„ There is no measure of cost of living so First Nations in the far North have higher average incomes than those in the South by virtue of the higher social assistance payments and wage rates.

„ Some “special circumstances” (e.g. Red Earth’s individual incomes) need to be documented.

„ We have yet to arrive at a proxy for “access to resources ” or for “good governance” which are thought to have an effect on socioeconomic status.

February, 2010 30