Migrant Integration Services in Canada: Adapting to the Changing Landscape

What is lacking is better performance reporting on outcomes along with an updated evaluation (last one dates from 2020:

…Key findings

Federal spending: The budget of the IRCC Settlement Program, which funds integration services almost exclusively for permanent residents, grew by 70 per cent between 2016-17 and 2023-24, approaching $1.2 billion in 2024-25. A government-wide expenditure review will reduce the Settlement and Resettlement Program budget to $935.7 million in 2026-27.

Admission reductions: The federal government reduced annual permanent resident targets to 395,000 for 2025, down from 500,000 in 2024. Following the introduction of Canada’s first-ever limits on temporary resident admissions, the number of temporary foreign workers fell 48 per cent, and new international students dropped 60 per cent in the first nine months of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024.

Language training cut: IRCC will discontinue funding for language instruction above Canadian Language Benchmark (CLB) level 4 as of September 2026. In Ontario, one-third of language learners study at the intermediate and higher levels (CLB 5+).

Settlement sector strain: A survey of 48 service provider organizations in the Toronto region conducted before the further cuts from the expenditure review were announced found that 69 per cent anticipated laying off staff due to federal funding reductions.

Refugee claimants left out: Despite 295,819 pending refugee claims as of September 2025 and an 80 per cent acceptance rate, refugee claimants remain ineligible for IRCC Settlement Program services.

Provincial variation: Ontario and British Columbia fund integration services beyond the scope of the federal program. Ontario’s well-established programs served 185,600 clients in 2023-24. Following a significant budget increase, B.C.’s redesigned Newcomer Services Program and new Safe Haven program served over 64,000 clients in 2024-25.

Cities diverge: Toronto has a proactive newcomer strategy and kiosks providing services regardless of immigration status. Vancouver has no formal policy by design, relying instead on an equity and accessibility lens applied across city services.

Recommendations

The author presents four recommendations:

• Engage the settlement sector: To inform the program review that is part of the expenditure review, give a mandate to one of IRCC’s sectoral committees to hold targeted consultations and propose specific changes, making fuller use of sector expertise in policy development.
• Reverse the language training cut: IRCC should restore funding for language instruction above CLB 4 and signal that, as of April 2029, service providers will be eligible to deliver instruction up to CLB 8 under the Settlement Program.
• Expand eligibility to refugee claimants: IRCC should allow service providers to support refugee claimants under the Settlement Program, potentially requiring organizations to co-finance part of costs from non-federal sources.
• Hold a national forum: Convene governments, practitioners and experts to assess the effectiveness of Canada’s migrant integration model, explore improvements and raise public awareness about the need for renewal.

Source: Migrant Integration Services in Canada: Adapting to the Changing Landscape