Children and Youth is a huge and humbling responsibility. My Office is mandated to offer children and youth a lifeline when they feel that there is no one listening.
This Annual Report describes the activities of a relatively new Office. It is designed to outline a very busy year and is written in a manner more “corporate” than the previous Annual Report. To ensure the “voice” of young people is present, the Report contains a CD created by young people ensuring that the listener has a snapshot of their world.
Over the past year, I have spent a good deal of time travelling across the Province meeting with thousands of young people. As I submit this report, I reflect upon a meeting in Thunder Bay where a group of First Nations young people spoke with passion and eloquence about the difficult task of leaving their homes and communities to attend school in “the big city,” a journey that ended in death for four of their colleagues. I reflect upon a meeting with a group of youth in care in Guelph who spoke about trying to set a course for themselves in the face of the barriers that a lifeincare brings. I reflect upon listening to the students at Centre JulesLéger in Ottawa, a Provincial School for Francophone students who are deaf or hard of hearing, and remember their sense of isolation. I reflect upon the young people in custody at the Roy McMurtry Centre for Youth in Brampton who had the courage to speak up about the conditions they were living in. I reflect upon the meeting with homeless youth in Hamilton who were struggling to find ways to reconnect to their City and find a path for themselves, many struggling through the illness of addiction and poor mental health.
These meetings and so many more, and the increased calls to my Office over the year indicate to me one unassailable fact: too many children fight so hard for rights that come so easily to others.
In these tough economic times when we might be tempted to give in to the language of restraint, we must hold our children just a little closer. It is in these times we must invest in our children.
Irwin Elman
The ProvincialAdvocateforChildrenandYouthAct,2007set out the mandate for the Advocate’s Office as an “independent” office reporting to the Ontario Legislature. The Act states that the Provincial Advocate should:
a) “Provide an independent voice for children and youth… by partnering with them to bring issues forward; b) Encourage communication and understanding between children and families and those who provide them services; c) Educate children, youth and their caregivers regarding the rights of children and youth…and; d) [Be] an exemplar for meaningful participation of children and youth through all aspects of advocacy services”
The legislation sets out requirements for an “annual report” from the Provincial Advocate that reports on expenditures for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2009, and advocacy services, volume and Office activities for the year ending in December 2009. These are included in the following sections:
How We Serve ................................................page5
Casework and systemic advocacy activities Access to Information needed, from a range of ministries and organizations Youth Participation highlights
Who We Serve ...............................................page11
Concerns of children and youth relating to the children’s service system by highlighting significant activities and future actions across the six areas the office is mandated to serve:
Child Welfare Youth Justice Mental Health Provincial/Demonstration Schools First Nations Special Needs
Who We Are ................................................page22
Increasing capacity to be an “independent” voice Responding to a 31 per cent increase in calls Prudent management of financial resources
Followup on Annual Report 200708 ............................page24
Closing message from the Provincial Advocate ....................page26
4
for Children and Youth (OPACY) carries out its activities pursuant to the Provincial Advocate for Children and Youth Act, within all applicable legislation as well as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Canada ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) in 1991. The principles underpinning the Convention guide the manner in which OPACY undertakes its work with children and youth. The four articles reflecting the principles of the Convention are:
Article 2 NonDiscrimination Article 3 Devotion to the Best Interest of the Child Article 6 The Inherent Right of Life, Survival and Development
Article 12 Respect for the Views and the Right of the Child to Express those Views
The Office of the Provincial Advocate operates from the belief that each child or youth has his or her own unique story. People can understand each story through servicespecific events, such as having to ‘live in’ CAS care. These young people also have common needs. These needs are: Access to practical RESOURCESnecessary
for a successful transition to independence.
These may include knowledge, information,
opportunity and specific services such as
housing, education and employment.
Opportunity to develop CONNECTIONto,
and support from, caring adults and other
members of their community. Opportunity
to contribute to and create solutions to life
challenges.
Confidence and support to VOICEhopes,
wishes and at all levels to affect decisions
about their lives.
In its actions, OPACY is both reactive, as it responds to phone calls, email and direct requests, and proactive, in that it engages in outreach to groups of children and youth and initiates public education.
In response to a complaint or call, members of the OPACY ‘casework team’ listen to understand the person’s story and to achieve resolution. The ‘systemic team’ acts when similar, or multiple complaints about a common service are received to identify where broader reviews, as described in legislation, are required. Systemic advocacy
5
Foster Parent/Guardian 1.3% Other 2.8%
Relative
1.9% Grandparent 3.2%
Professional 13.5%
Parent 18%
Client/Self 58.9%
may lead to an OPACY decision to conduct an agency, or program ‘review’.
As its core function OPACY responded to the 3931 calls from children and youth, or those who called on their behalf, who had questions about ‘rights,’ and/or concerns about a violation of those rights. Approximately sixty per cent of the calls received by the Office in 2009 came from young people themselves. This is an increase of ten per cent from the previous year. The Cases by Referral Source chart shows the different groups of people who made calls to OPACY.
The majority of the calls were from, or about, 12 to 17 year olds. Eightyfive per cent related to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services (MCYS) and the supports and services flowing pursuant to the Child and Family Service Act (CFSA). The remainder, as shown in the Cases by Primary Ministry chart, were issues related to other provincial ministries or the federal government.
6
During the past year, OPACY has advanced its focus by formalizing its systemic advocacy work as resources of the Office were realigned under two streams: casework and systemic advocacy.
OPACY ‘casework’, in response to calls, continues to be at the heart of its activities. This casework is different from ‘case management’ procedures carried out by communitybased agencies. The key difference is that a Child and Youth Advocate begins by developing a specific advocacy strategy with the young person and family to create solutions and ultimately leveraging support that leads to a resolution.
OPACY ‘systemic advocacy’ capacity has been strengthened to identify and advance important themes. These themes emerge through the casework and evolve from the information provided by young people through the calls, local discussions, or Hub meetings, where OPACY brings together young people in local communities to discuss issues of importance,
Ministry of Health
1% Ministry of Community and Social Services
Federal Government/out of Province
1.2%
0.6% 3.2% None
Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services
Ministry of Attorney General
0.4%
3.3%
Ministry of Education 4.2%
Ministry of Children and Youth Services 85.4%
and other engagement activities. The activities undertaken stem from an ongoing review of broader concerns or issues raised by children and youth. The team works to develop advocacy strategies, reports, and position papers focused on broader issues that target the underpinning policy and program issues, and that ultimately address the program and service issues that young people bring forward.
Reaching out and involving young people through both individual and systemic work provides an ideal opportunity for an evolving dialogue about human rights and children’s rights as a powerful source of change. Through Hub meetings and engagement activities focused on child and youth participation, OPACY continues to seek out strategies aimed at helping children and youth gain a sense of control over their lives, legitimizing their experience and strengthening their ability to be their own advocate.
Access to Information
The legislation empowers the Advocate to provide an independent voice for children and youth, receive and respond to complaints, conduct reviews and gather information. However, it does not provide an explicit legislated entitlement to the information needed to carry out these duties.
In order to fulfill the mandate, the Provincial Advocate requires clear and detailed information from police services, ministries of the Ontario government, transfer payment agencies, children’s aid societies and the Office of the Chief Coroner.
In the past year, the Provincial Advocate has entered into a formal access to information protocol with MCYS. OPACY pursued this agreement when the ministry refused to provide access to information in 2008. Despite the new interim guideline the Ministry recently withheld 3 investigation reports related to allegations of
| excessive use of force against young people at | Bay which will explore issues as to how First |
| youth justice facilities. | Nations youth are impacted when attending |
| school far away from their home | |
| OPACY will: | communities. The group of youth who are |
| ❚Seek amendments to the Provincial Advocate | advising OPACY had the opportunity to share |
| for Children and Youth Act to ensure the | their list of recommendations with the |
| Advocate has access to the information | leadership of NishnawbeAski Nation (NAN) |
| needed to fulfill his mandate. | and Northern Nishnawbe Education Council |
| (NNEC). NAN and NNEC have heard and are | |
| Youth Participation | working with this group of young people |
| As required by the Act, OPACY views the | towards implementing their |
| “…participation of children and youth through | recommendations. |
| all aspects…” as vital to its work. The following | |
| are examples from the past year. | • As part of its outreach, 20 students, |
| including those not typically engaged, i.e., | |
| • With the 20th Anniversary of the United | those who had been suspended or expelled, |
| Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child | community partners, a research team and |
| taking place this past year, OPACY worked | OPACY supported young people to have a |
| with key national and international partners to | voice through the Westview Review which |
| host a weeklong provincial strategy to engage | used ‘Photovoice’ a participatory action |
| young people and communities in a | research tool. This review was a |
| discussion about children’s rights and rights | recommendation in the 2008 report of the |
| education. The week culminated with more | Toronto District School Board’s School |
| than 200 children and youth from across the | Community Safety Advisory Panel established |
| province attending ‘National Children’s Day’ | after the death of Jordan Manners. See |
| at the Ontario Legislature. See page 9 for | page 10 for photo examples. |
| some of the key events. | |
| • Community Hub sessions were held in | |
| • OPACY has standing at the Reggie Bushie | seven locations across the province (Toronto, |
| Inquest into the death of a youth in Thunder | London, Sudbury, Ottawa, Hamilton, Niagara |
8
WESTVIEW REVIEW: EXAMPLE OF YOUTH PHOTO.
and Guelph) to engage children and youth in discussion about the topics ranging from children’s rights, issues and concerns relating to the service system, policing, education and the work of OPACY.
OPACY will:
❚ Hire community development staff to expand its capacity to engage youth, the community, and government and to expand public education activities.
❚ Work to expand partnerships with local, provincial and national agencies and organizations to focus on youth participation and children’s rights.
❚ Launch a ‘Travelling Art Show’ that pairs photography and the powerful written narratives of young people who spent several months participating in a unique community development project. The young people used photography as a way to reflect on, and talk about, their school, education and community.
❚ Release its report titled The Westview Review: A Participatory Action Project in Ontario’s Education System.
Children’s Mental Heal13.7%
divisions of the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, received almost equal numbers of calls, despite the much larger number of children and youth involved in the child welfare system. The sections on the six mandate areas, below, provide details about the size of the population served and the types of complaints most likely to be part of calls from young people.
A) Child Welfare
Child Welfare System: Child welfare, the largest sector within the Ontario children’s social services system is comprised of 53 children’s aid societies (CASs). Five of these are northern Aboriginal children’s aid Societies serving 63 of Ontario’s 134 First Nation communities on and off reserve. A sixth Aboriginal children’s aid society works with Aboriginal children and families in the City of Toronto.
In the 200809 year, CASs had 24,659 open protection cases and provided substitute care for 27,152 children. A child who is living in care is unable to live with parents or extended
12
Police/Courts 1.5% Developmental Delay/Autism
Provincial/Demonstration Schools 0.9%
3.9% Other Out of Provincial/Federal11.4%
0.6% Youth Justice 23.6%
th
Cases by Ministry Program
Group/Foster Home
Child Welfare
21.9%
23%
family and resides for a few weeks or as long as several years in one of approximately 5,000 group home beds or in one of the approximately 11,000 beds in 7,244 foster and kinship homes.
OPACY Themes: During the past year, the majority of the child welfare activities related to one of the following themes:
i) frustration with how the CAS worker addresses needs; does not respond quickly enough to calls/needs, not being treated with respect, CAS won’t change worker
ii) dissatisfaction with residential placement; too far from home, cultural differences, youth requests change, options not “available”, worker unable to “advocate”/to influence CAS, and concerns about the quality of care
iii) Plans of Care do not meet needs; lack of effective transition plans, disagreement about termination of plans of care at age 16.
Significant System Events
services system: the Residential Placement and Advisory Committees (RPAC) and the Child and Family Service Review Board (CFSRB). Advocates have followed up with child welfare agencies, the ministry and service providers to ensure that recommendations made by RPAC and the CFSRB have been implemented.
– both parents and children – receive the
13
B) Youth Justice
Youth Justice System: The youth justice system must balance public safety with meeting the needs of young people through community and custodybased services and supports. Services and supports include probation, alternatives to custody programs, open and secure custody and reintegration resources. The youth justice system is a courtmandated component of the children’s service system. The residential system includes approximately 1,300 beds in 69 custody/detention facilities. Three new facilities recently opened in the north and one in Brampton.
MCYS has completed the transition of the youth justice system into a system separate from adults. Additionally, it is shifting resources from residential to community based programming. The youth justice system is also attempting a culture shift to ‘relationship custody’, which promotes positive and professional relationships between staff and young people,
OPACY Themes: During the past year, the majority of the youth justice activity related to one of the following themes:
i) access to the Advocate’s Office; young people told advocates are “on vacation for the summer,” no posters in units, staff refusing to put calls from the Advocate through to the young people, calls to advocate delayed or denied
ii) lack of programming; little access to programming that would assist in the rehabilitation or reintegration of youth
iii) poor staffyouth relationships; staff have not embraced relationship custody, staff are disrespectful, staff are not good role models, staff spending majority of time with other staff and not with the youth
iv) safety; frequency of peeronpeer violence, staff message that young people need to be able to “handle themselves” vs. role of staff to protect and supervise v) neglect of basic care; limited access to drinks including cups of water, small meals, unclean bedding, cold facilitiesdifficulty accessing blankets
vi) lack of proper investigations; young people allege excessive force was used against them; thorough and proper investigations to determine whether staff acted appropriately or inappropriately in a particular situation; unable to ascertain whether additional safety measures should be taken at the facility.
15
Significant System Events • OPACY requested, and received
• The Youth Justice Services Division fulfilled its pledge to close all youth justice units housed in adult correctional facilities. This move was strongly supported by OPACY, as is MCYS’s focus on the philosophy of relationshipcustody.
cooperation from Youth Justice Services
Division to ensure that staff and program
operators at youth justice facilities throughout
Ontario received direction to respect the right
of young people to receive visits and speak
privately with the Provincial Advocate.
16
OPACY will:
❚ Complete its review of the use of secure isolation in youth justice facilities across the province. The outcomes of this evaluative process will be shared in a formal report to be created by OPACY.
❚ Continue to monitor the progress being made on complaints brought forward by young people against the Roy McMurtry Center and will conduct a review of the Centre in conjunction with its first anniversary of operation.
❚ Monitor the province’s commitment to implementation of ‘relationship custody.’
C) Mental Health
Mental Health System: The children’s mental health service component of the broad children’s service system is provided, for the most part, to children and families on a voluntary basis. Funded agencies and institutions provide a range of both residential and nonresidential counselling and support. Children and youth get services from more than 260 mental health agencies, 17 hospitalbased outpatient programs and two government operated programs. In rural, remote and underserved communities, videoconferencing technology provides consultation through the Ontario Telepsychiatry Program.
OPACY Themes: During the past year, the majority of the mental health activity has related to one of the following themes:
i) waiting lists to access treatment service; lack of dual diagnosis services, per diem homes with no real capacity, lack of resources for First Nations and in the north
ii) lack of supports for youth to transition; from residential to independent living, latency to adolescence to adult
iii) regional discrepancy; resources vary by region, lack of resources in the north.
Significant System Events
OPACY will: ❚Complete and make public its study and paper on ‘ConsentandCapacity’, and develop and provide a public education program as part of a broader OPACY focus on children’s mental health.
❚ Advocate for increased provincial psychiatric consultation capacity for children and youth, both in person and through video conferencing.
D) Demonstration/Provincial Schools
Demonstration/Provincial Schools System: The Ministry of Education is responsible for Ontario’s provincial and demonstration schools for the deaf, blind, deafblind and severely learning disabled and students with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), as mandated under section 13 of the EducationAct. There are currently eight schools serving children and youth: three for the deaf; one for the deafblind; one Francophone school for the deaf, with learning disabilities; and, three demonstration schools.
There are approximately 660 students attending these schools: the majority live in the school residence during the week.
OPACY Themes: During the past year, the majority of the demonstration/provincial schools activity has related to one of the following themes:
i) dissatisfaction with the residential component of the schools; some young people/potential new students denied admission to the school
ii) communication and systemic barriers for OPACY and the young people in these schools; youth not always told about OPACY, limited youth access to OPACY.
Significant System Events
(LSQ) are in short supply. OPACY has faced a number of barriers in accessing ASL and LSQ resources to provide translation services for young people accessing our resources and as part of bringing this group of young people into events involving youth participation.
OPACY will:
❚ Expand its capacity to communicate using ASL and LSQ.
❚ Continue meeting with the Ministry of Education regarding services and OPACY experience with Schools for the Deaf and Deaf Blind.
❚ Develop a youth participation strategy with students at Provincial and Demonstration schools.
E) First Nations
First Nations System: There are 134 First Nations communities with members living on and off reserve across Ontario. It is well documented that many of these communities face challenges associated with inadequate housing, extreme poverty, social isolation and the lack of a range of services and supports for children and families. In many First Nations communities, children’s social services are practically nonexistent. There are five designated northern children’s aid societies and one in Toronto, all serving Aboriginal communities. There are also seven premandated Aboriginal family service agencies working towards designation.
Funding allocations for children and youth services do not reflect the real costs of providing services in remote communities or the significantly higher and more complex needs of many Aboriginal children and families. The Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies undertook, at the request of MCYS, the Northern Remoteness study of funding needs for Tikinagan Child and Family Services and Payukotayno James Bay and Hudson Bay Family Services. This continues to be an issue and based on the 2009/10 allocations to CASs the gap between what these two Aboriginal agencies spent last year and their funding for this year increased.
The hearings of the Canadian Human Rights Commission Tribunal into a complaint addressing the historic and ongoing inequities in funding provided to First Nations communities for child welfare will bring attention to the issue.
OPACY Themes: During the past year, the majority of the First Nations activity has related to one of the following themes:
i) lack of, or inappropriate service in the
North; Thunder Bay flyin high school,
crisis response doesn’t build capacity,
advocacy is labour intensive ii) lack of, or inappropriate service in urban and southern communities.
It is evident from the First Nations Identification by Ministry Program chart that First Nations children and youth call about the same four programs as the general population, i.e., Youth Justice, Child Welfare, Children’s Mental Health and Group/Foster Homes, but have made 75 per cent more calls related to Child Welfare than the general population.
Significant System Events
19
Other 5.8%
Provincial
Children’s Mental Heal13.5%
15.5%
Youth Justice 18.7%
20
/Demonstration Schools 2.6%
th
First Nations Identification by Ministry Program
Group/Foster Home
Child Welfare 41.3%
advocated by local community leadership, young people and others including OPACY, the Federal Government made a commitment to build a new school for the Attawapiskat First Nation by identifying capital funding for this critically needed school.
• OPACY continued active membership in the North South partnership, a coalition of service organizations in the south and Chiefs in the north.
OPACY will:
❚ Continue to work with the Chiefs of Ontario and other northern and First Nations communities to develop its strategy for the north.
❚ Facilitate, in partnership with New Mentality, First Nations youth engagement and a response to the Ministry of Health’s EveryDoorIsTheRightDoordiscussion paper.
❚ Continue to maintain its involvement in the Reggie Bushie Inquest.
F) Special Needs
Special Needs System: The term ‘special needs’ includes but is not necessarily limited to physical, intellectual, emotional, developmental disabilities, and chronic, severe or terminal illness. Services and supports are provided through unconnected agencies and direct funding options that support a wide range of disparate diagnoses. These diagnoses complicate service provision when they occur in a young person who is also getting service as part of another “mandate” group, e.g., a young offender with special needs. Services do not function as an interconnected system. <