2023 Review of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (CYFSA)

Minister’s Message

Thank you to everyone who made submissions to the first legislative review of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017. As the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services, it is a privilege to oversee social services and support the government’s vision for all children and youth in Ontario to be safe, stable and have access to resources and supports to help them succeed and thrive. 

The first legislative review of this Act is a comprehensive process that has included extensive engagement with children, youth, families, service providers, sector experts and community partners, as well as First Nations, Inuit and Métis communities and organizations across Ontario. We heard from hundreds of individuals and organizations about how the Act affects their lives and how it can be improved to support better outcomes.

This report summarizes the key feedback from our engagements. It covers a range of topics from safeguarding child and youth rights to improving accountability.

Hearing from children, youth, and families who receive services under the Act is one of the priorities for this review. Thank you for sharing your stories and collaborating with us to enhance this work. Your insights and perspectives will play a crucial role as we consider improvements to the legislation.

Thank you again for your contributions to this important work. Together, we will continue to build stronger and more inclusive service systems, and improve outcomes for children, youth, and families across Ontario.

Michael Parsa
Minister of Children, Community and Social Services

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the strong and resilient voices of stakeholders who shared their experiences with services provided under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, and offered their insights and recommendations.

We acknowledge that important existing reports, research and recommendations, including the final reports of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, and Ontario’s Pathways to Safety strategy, remain central to making progress toward reconciliation.

Recommendations from these and other reports provided a foundation for our work on the 2023 review and will continue to help us improve child, youth and family service systems in Ontario. We also remain committed to addressing the consequences of all forms of discrimination and racism, including anti-Indigenous and anti-Black racism, and to ensuring that everyone in Ontario can thrive and reach their full potential.

Introduction

The Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (herein referred to as the CYFSA or “the Act”) has a primary aim of promoting the best interests, protection, and well-being of children in Ontario. The CYFSA governs many of the child, youth and family services that the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services (the ministry) delivers.

This includes providing funds and licences for:

• child welfare
• youth justice services
• secure treatment
• children’s developmental services
• out-of-home care services (also known as residential services)^{footnote 1[1]}
• community support services (including prevention services, counselling, or mental health supports)
• adoption services

Services provided to children and families should respect their diversity and the principle of inclusion, consistent with the Human Rights Code and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It also recognizes that all services to Indigenous children and youth and their families should be provided in a manner in line with their cultures, heritages, traditions, connections to their communities and the concept of the extended family.

The Act requires that the minister conduct a review of the legislation every five years and report on the results to the public. This is the first review of the CYFSA since it came into force in 2018. It has provided an important opportunity to assess the effectiveness and relevance of the legislation, and to solicit input on areas for improvement.

The last review of the former Child and Family Services Act conducted in 2015 focused on improving outcomes for children and youth and modernizing the language in the Act. The 2015 review led to the CYFSA being introduced in 2017.

The CYFSA and its associated regulations can be found online at www.ontario.ca/laws.

Continuing to make progress

Since the CYFSA came into force, the government has continued to amend the Act to improve child and family services in Ontario. Some major changes to the CYFSA and its regulations over the past five years include:

• 2018 – The age of protection was raised from 16 to 18, enabling youth up to the age of majority to receive support from a children’s aid society.
• 2020 – Part X came into effect which sets the rules that sevice providers must follow to protect privacy and enable access to personal information records.
• 2021 – Anti-human trafficking-related amendments were proclaimed, which strengthened the authority of children’s aid societies to intervene in child sex trafficking cases.
• 2022 – Indigenous-specific amendments were introduced to establish a legislative framework to better reflect the central and unique role that First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples play in the well-being of their families. Work on regulatory proposals to support the implementation of these amendments is ongoing.
• 2023 – Quality Standards Framework (QSF) regulatory provisions designed to strengthen the quality of care for children and youth in out-of-home care settings and enhance requirements for licensees and placing agencies (including children’s aid societies) came into effect on July 1.
• 2023 – Regulatory amendments were introduced to support the youth leaving care policy and the corresponding Ready, Set, Go (RSG) Program, which connects eligible children and youth in the child welfare system with additional supports to prepare for life after leaving care. The RSG Program expands supports to allow eligible youth to receive continued care until the age of 23 and helps to connect youth to pathways to employment and/or study.
• 2024 – The Supporting Children’s Futures Act, 2024 (SCFA) received Royal Assent in June 2024, amending the CYFSA and other Acts to improve the safety, well-being and privacy of children and youth receiving services under the CYFSA. The legislative and associated regulatory changes strengthen oversight of licensed out-of-home care settings, enhance children’s aid societies’ oversight by requiring more frequent visits to children in care, create a framework that provides strengthened privacy protections for children with previous involvement in the child welfare system, set out the right for a child in care to be informed about the Ontario Ombudsman, and provide clarification to improve the sharing of information by service providers with professional colleges.

These, and other changes to the Act, along with ongoing policy and program enhancements, aim to improve the experiences and outcomes of children, youth and families receiving services under the CYFSA.

About the review

Focus Areas

To prepare for the 2023 review, the ministry conducted an extensive literature review that consisted of analysis of relevant reports, articles, recommendations from inquests, and feedback shared with the ministry over the past five years.

The 2023 review and engagement built on six key areas:

• Child and youth rights: Assessing how rights are respected when receiving services (mandatory focus for the review).
• First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples: Evaluating progress on Indigenous-led models of child and family services and assessing how well services are meeting obligations such as providing culturally appropriate services and consultation with communities (mandatory focus for the review).
• Equity and anti-racism: Addressing overrepresentation in services and further embedding equity and anti-racism within the Act.
• Prevention and community-based care: Increasing access to holistic prevention, early identification and early intervention services, including a focus on family well-being, community-based care and protection from sexual exploitation.
• Quality services: Continuing to improve the quality of services, with a particular focus on out-of-home care, youth leaving care and anti-human trafficking.
• Accountability: Enabling greater accountability through oversight, governance, financial performance, data, and outcomes measurement.

Overview of Engagement

The 2023 review sought the participation of diverse voices and perspectives on opportunities to improve the CYFSA through the engagement period from May to July 2023.

To lead the engagement process, the ministry developed two discussion guides – one for service providers and sector experts and the other for children, youth and families receiving services under the Act.

Public Engagement

To allow for wide-ranging public participation, the ministry launched a digital platform, including an online survey and a dedicated email address for the public to share their feedback. We received 25 written submissions and 203 survey responses.

Sector Engagement

The ministry convened 16 cross-sector virtual roundtable discussions with service providers, sector experts and organizations that provide services under the CYFSA.  Invitations were primarily shared through umbrella organizations to encourage participation across a variety of services covered under the Act.

To ensure a diversity of voices, we hosted two sessions for service providers primarily serving Black populations, one session for organizations serving 2SLGBTQIA+ individuals, one session for organizations serving newcomers and two sessions in French.

Approximately 230 participants attended one or more roundtable sessions.

Further, the ministry engaged the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies and its members as well as the Association of Native Child and Family Services Agencies of Ontario and its members. The ministry also met with several other key stakeholders such as the Premier’s Council on Equality of Opportunity, stakeholders representing the private adoption sector, the Ontario Ombudsman’s Office, the Office of the Chief Coroner of Ontario, and the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario.

Children, Youth and Family Engagement

To gain the perspectives of children, youth and families across the province, we partnered with community agencies to host sessions with their client groups, including sessions for children and youth with special needs, newcomers, Black, Indigenous, Francophone and 2SLGBTQIA+ clients. There were 39 child, youth and family engagement sessions with a total of 454 participants.

Additionally, ministry staff hosted individual interviews with 74 youth in 11 different youth justice facilities across Ontario to hear their unique perspectives and experiences.

First Nations, Inuit, Métis and Urban Indigenous Engagement

The ministry undertook distinct engagement with First Nations, Métis, Inuit and urban Indigenous representatives and service providers through the ministry’s Ontario Indigenous Children and Youth Strategy Technical Tables. The ministry also supported community-led engagements so that members could share their experiences in a more comprehensive and culturally appropriate manner. The ministry received 11 written submissions from Indigenous representatives resulting from these engagements.

This legislative review is only one process through which Indigenous peoples can engage with the ministry to consider reforms regarding Indigenous child welfare and well-being and feedback is welcome at any time.

Feedback on the CYFSA

Given the diversity of voices and perspectives, along with the complexity of the topics discussed, it is important to note that this report provides a high-level overview of the main themes raised during engagements. Through the engagement process, participants shared many suggestions for improvements to child and family services in Ontario. For example, the need to balance the tension between rigid requirements and flexibility to prioritize the best interests of a child. This report only summarizes the input, feedback and suggestions we heard concerning legislative changes to the CYFSA and its regulations; it does not present the government’s approach to any future legislative reforms. The detailed feedback we received through engagements will be considered in future policy and program changes. Thank you to everyone who provided feedback.

Focus Area #1: Child and Youth Rights

The CYFSA stipulates that services provided to children and families should be child-centred. The Act sets out the rights of children and youth receiving services under the Act as well as requirements to protect these rights. Recent amendments to the Act, including regulations that came into effect on July 1, 2023 on the Quality Standards Framework, have sought to further strengthen protections for child and youth rights.

Overall, feedback highlighted that there are opportunities to continue strengthening how the legislation upholds and respects the rights of children and youth, and to clarify existing provisions that apply when receiving services under the Act.

Ensuring children and youth understand their rights and can get help

We heard that changes to the Act or its regulations may be needed to address gaps in terms of children and youth understanding their rights. Children and youth described having different experiences learning about their rights when receiving services. Although some youth noted that they had basic knowledge of their rights, most told us that their rights were not explained in a way that they could easily understand. Some youth told us that their rights were read to them or that they were handed information without any explanation or follow-up. Feedback emphasized that rights need to be better communicated so that children and youth can advocate for improvements to their care. To achieve this, participants suggested the need for minimum requirements for the use of accessible, age-appropriate and child and youth-friendly methods (such as videos) to convey this information. We also heard that information on rights ought to be provided and discussed on an ongoing basis while children and youth receive services, rather than only happening when they enter care or when a service provider thinks it is necessary.

We heard that when children and youth feel that their rights are not respected, many are not aware of their ability to file a complaint with the Ombudsman’s Office. Others who were aware of this process believed that the support they would receive would not be timely or meaningful and that the process would be difficult to navigate and time-consuming. Many shared that they have not tried to raise their complaints with the Ombudsman’s Office or with frontline workers because they felt they would not be heard.

Increasing child and youth voices

Participants consistently shared that children and youth experience better outcomes when they have a voice in decisions affecting them. However, a majority of children and youth participants expressed that they did not feel their voices were prioritized in decisions related to their care. This was noted as being especially true for younger children and those with special needs.

Children and youth told us that they felt they should be regularly included in all discussions about their care, including invitations to meetings and participation in the development of treatment plans and plans of care. We heard that there is a need for greater clarity on how the views of children and youth should be considered and how the additional support of professionals or therapists would help younger children and those with special needs meaningfully participate in their care.

Participants also recommended that the Act could do more to ensure children and youth have access to an adult ally or advocate, preferably from their community, who could support them through their plan of care and other major decisions. We also heard that caregivers and families should be given the opportunity to better advocate for their child or youth’s care.

Modernizing rules on consent

Feedback highlighted that there are opportunities to increase the alignment of the CYFSA with other legislation such as the Health Care Consent Act, 1996 and Personal Health Information Protection Act, 2004 in the context of consent to health services. We heard that there is confusion about which legislation applies when a child or youth consents to health care services, particularly as it relates to mental health services. We also heard that consent in the CYFSA could be modernized to focus more on individual capacity and less on age as a determining factor. Feedback also noted that updates to consent-related provisions could also seek to remove barriers to accessing counselling and other services for children under 12 when there is a lack of support from their legal custodians to receive those services.

Young people told us about instances where their information was shared by frontline workers or service providers without their consent in contravention of existing requirements in the Act. Youth called for better compliance and improvements to consent practices relating to personal information. We also heard that there is a need for greater clarity and improved standards to guide decision-making related to consent in complex situations, such as when youth refuse services that may be in their best interests or when older youth with a developmental disability may lack the capacity to consent.

Strengthening rights of children and youth in care

The CYFSA and its regulations outline extensive rights and protections for children and youth in care. Feedback indicated that there are opportunities for further improvements to continue to enhance these rights and protections.

We heard that there is more the Act can do to support a child’s right to identity, family, and community connection. Some participants noted that continuity of care is often prioritized over cultural identity in determining the best interests of the child. Feedback suggested that decisions about placements may prioritize timeline considerations over the need for maintenance of community and cultural connections and that identity should be more of a priority in decision-making. Feedback also indicated a need to ensure that decisions about cultural matching always involve people from the child’s community. It was suggested that current legislative and regulatory requirements on cultural connections could be strengthened to ensure children and youth in care, or formerly in care, are able to decide whether to maintain relationships with their birth families and communities.

Being unable to connect with family regularly, such as through telephone calls, was a concern raised by youth residing in youth justice settings. Although the Act stipulates that youth have the right to call home, they reported that there were often barriers to being able to exercise that right. It was suggested that existing standards around access to telephone use should be more strongly enforced.

We heard concerns over the use of physical and mechanical restraints in youth justice and out-of-home care settings and that provisions governing their use should be strengthened and enforced. Participants emphasized that using restraints can cause trauma for the child or youth being restrained as well as for those who witness the use of restraints. Feedback identified that restraints were seen to be used inconsistently and in situations where other approaches may be more suitable. We also heard that the use of secure de-escalation (previously known as secure isolation) should be minimized to the greatest extent possible to reduce the possibility of causing further harm and trauma to children and youth.

Some participants also highlighted that there is a need to define, clarify and restrict the use of psychotropic drugs when used as chemical restraints. We heard that more clarity is needed to ensure that medications are administered in accordance with the principles of free and informed consent without any persuasion or risk of punishment for children and youth who withhold consent. Participants noted concerns with over-medication of children in out-of-home care settings as an inappropriate way to manage behaviour when mental health supports would be a more appropriate approach to meaningfully support their well-being. We also heard the need to clarify the right of youth to keep their own prescription medication, such as birth control pills, in their possession.

Defining and clarifying additional rights

Feedback highlighted several additional rights that require further clarification. We heard that the CYFSA should clarify the right to receive clear information for children and families prior to entering into a voluntary agreement (a service plan between families and children’s aid societies). It was also suggested that these children, youth and families should have the same procedural rights and access to legal counsel as those in child protection proceedings to ensure that they have a voice. This would include children and youth who have remained at home or with relatives while receiving services.

We also heard that strengthening Francophone language rights is an ongoing priority for Francophone communities. Feedback suggested that the CYFSA should clearly outline a right to Francophone legal counsel and workers and, where applicable, ensure alignment with rights articulated under the French Language Services Act, 1990.

Focus Area #2: First Nations, Inuit and Métis (FNIM) Peoples

The CYFSA includes, as one of its purposes, that FNIM peoples should be entitled to provide their own child and family services, wherever possible. The Act sets out a range of requirements and distinct obligations concerning services for First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth, families, and communities, including provisions requiring notice and consultation with an FNIM child’s bands and communities.

Alignment with the Federal Act, An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families (also known as Bill C-92)

We heard feedback on the need to align the CYFSA with the federal legislation, An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families, 2020 (the Federal Act). One of the stated purposes of the Federal Act is to “affirm the inherent right of self-government, which includes jurisdiction over child and family services.”

Overall, Indigenous representatives and communities expressed optimism about the Federal Act and believe it will support positive changes for Indigenous children, youth, and families. We heard from representatives that corresponding changes to the CYFSA would be critical to ensure the ongoing implementation of the Federal Act in Ontario. It was suggested that this includes recognizing Indigenous Governing Bodies and Coordination Agreements in provincial law to ensure that these models can operate effectively and without barriers. We heard that this could also include incorporating new principles and standards set out in the Federal Act within the CYFSA. For example, the principle of substantive equality: clarifying that socio-economic conditions cannot be grounds for apprehension, prioritization of prevention services in alignment with requirements in the Federal Act, and a commitment to the preservation of Indigenous languages.

Supporting Indigenous-led models of child and family services and strengthening collaboration

Feedback from Indigenous representatives and communities noted a lack of trust and ongoing misalignment between the CYFSA and Indigenous cultural, ethical and community values. For example, some communities noted that the legislation’s focus on child and youth well-being does not align with their values of focusing on the best interests of families and collective healing.

We heard that the CYFSA should explicitly acknowledge and address the harm of past discriminatory policies on Indigenous communities. For example, participants want to see direct references to residential schools and the Sixties Scoop, policies that involved the mass removal of Indigenous children from their families, in the CYFSA, along with a commitment to critically evaluate how current approaches to child and family services are supporting reconciliation.

Overall, we heard that jurisdiction over child and family services is a key priority for Indigenous communities because it may improve outcomes for Indigenous children, youth, families and communities. Indigenous representatives identified issues and concerns with how the CYFSA is applied and how the Ontario government’s approach to developing child welfare policies is perceived to limit community control over child and family services. Representatives’ feedback continued to call for Ontario to legislate how it will engage with Indigenous communities through collaborative partnerships and co-development.

Indigenous representatives and service providers also shared concerns about ongoing issues related to how CYFSA-governed service providers share information and work with communities. We heard repeated concerns about the lack of compliance with existing notice and consultation requirements under the Act by children’s aid societies and out-of-home care providers.

Representatives identified several opportunities to strengthen how the CYFSA recognizes, supports, and prioritizes Indigenous community control over child and family services. This could include embedding new or enhanced notification and consultation requirements to involve a prevention-focused Indigenous service provider, representatives of a child’s bands and FNIM communities earlier, such as “at the first point of contact with a family rather than at the point of crisis”.

Feedback also identified opportunities to enable better data collection and information sharing with Indigenous communities that align with principles of Indigenous data sovereignty. Further, representatives raised the opportunity to enhance requirements for collaboration, consultation and co-development with Indigenous communities before making any changes that impact Indigenous children, youth and families.

Providing culturally appropriate services to FNIM children, youth and families

Indigenous representatives and service providers recommended strengthening the provision and availability of culturally appropriate services for FNIM children, youth and families.

Participants shared that, despite existing requirements, there continue to be challenges in accessing culturally appropriate child and family services. Feedback emphasized the desire to strengthen the CYFSA’s focus on family well-being and to better prioritize Indigenous family preservation and reunification - for example, by strengthening early intervention requirements and enabling more flexibility to prioritize family healing.

We heard that there is a need for the Act to further improve processes that ensure that the distinct rights of Indigenous children and youth are explained and respected. For example, requiring that all Indigenous children and youth have access to a community-based adult ally or advocate was raised as an opportunity to ensure Indigenous children and youth have their rights respected and a voice in their care.

We also heard that increasing access to culturally appropriate services can be supported by continuing to prioritize and enable customary care; ensuring that cultural services are meaningful and Indigenous-led; and adopting new and stronger requirements for training on colonialism, anti-Indigenous racism, the residential school system and Indigenous cultures for CYFSA-governed service providers.

Focus Area #3: Equity and Anti-Racism

Advancing equity and reducing overrepresentation

The preamble to the CYFSA includes a commitment to the principles that services under the Act should respect diversity and that awareness of systemic racism should inform service delivery. The feedback raised concerns about overrepresentation in services governed by the CYFSA, and suggested legislative changes.

Feedback emphasized the importance of recognizing that historic and present-day systemic racism, as well as continued discrimination based on protected grounds under the Ontario Human Rights Code (including race, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity and expression), could contribute to higher risk of involvement in child welfare and youth justice involvement and/or inequitable experiences and outcomes for some children, youth and families.

Participants highlighted that the Act should do more to address the overrepresentation of certain communities (such as Black, Indigenous, 2SLGBTQIA+) starting at the point of referral and across the service continuum. We heard that there are opportunities to improve requirements across the Act to better support decision-makers and mitigate the ways in which personal biases of frontline workers, judges and others can impact overrepresentation. Feedback also indicated that ongoing mandatory training for workers on cultural competency and trauma-informed care is needed, and that, where possible, the Act should be amended to better clarify expectations on the role of equity in decision-making.

Participants shared that the Act should do more to acknowledge the impacts of systemic barriers, biases and racism. We heard that there were concerns with the policies, standards, tools and assessments under the Act that guide service delivery, and feedback emphasized the need for requirements for routine equity-focused reviews of these tools. The Eligibility Spectrum, in particular, was noted as posing equity challenges when used to assess eligibility for child protection services.

Improving outcomes of Black children, youth and families

Black children, youth, and families are disproportionately overrepresented in services under the Act, such as child welfare and youth justice. Participants urged changes to the Act to demonstrate Ontario's commitment to combating anti-Black racism in these services. They recommended that the Act acknowledge Black identities, anti-Black racism and the historical discrimination against Black communities. Additionally, they suggested that the Act should clearly outline specific requirements for providing services to Black children, youth and families.

We heard that this could include requiring the application of an anti-Black racism framework in the delivery of services. Proposed improvements could expand on current anti-Black racism initiatives within sectors governed by the CYFSA, such as the One Vision One Voice Program, which aims to tackle anti-Black racism in the child welfare system. Other relevant initiatives include those outlined in Ontario’s Anti-Racism Strategic Plan, the Ontario Black Youth Action Plan and Ontario’s Anti-Black Racism Strategy.

Ensuring access to identity-affirming and culturally appropriate care

Despite existing legislative requirements, we heard that children and youth in care continue to experience challenges in maintaining connections to their cultures, communities and identities. Feedback noted that enhancements to the Act and its regulations could further clarify requirements for access to extended family and community, meaningful cultural engagement opportunities, or services and resources that are responsive to a youth’s needs and identities. We heard that children and youth with intersecting identities often experience these challenges more acutely. Participants noted that there were inconsistencies in the provision of culturally appropriate care, and youth shared that participation in cultural activities was sometimes treated as a reward instead of a need or a right.

To improve outcomes, participants emphasized the importance of acknowledging identity and culture in service planning as well as recognizing culture as a protective factor. We heard that more work is needed to ensure compliance with existing regulations on cultural connection and to enhance cultural competency training requirements for professionals in the child and youth sector.

Focus Area #4: Prevention and Community-Based Care

Strengthening early intervention, family preservation and family reunification

The CYFSA stipulates that prevention, early intervention and community support services should be considered, where possible, as the least disruptive course of action.

Feedback highlighted that the Act may not provide sufficient guidance on what constitutes early intervention and prevention services or how these should be provided. We heard that the Act could improve guidance for how societies provide or refer families to early intervention, prevention, and community support services when a child still lives at home.

Conflicting perspectives on whether prevention services are best delivered by children’s aid societies or by community-based agencies were also shared. Although prevention and early intervention are the most frequent types of services that children’s aid societies provide, participants noted that the CYFSA does not contain sufficient prevention-focused standards and compliance measures concerning the approach to the delivery of these services. We heard that this, along with different regional and community contexts, leads to significant inconsistency in how children’s aid societies work with families across the province.

Participants expressed that defining and clarifying these services in the legislation would strengthen the ability to support the well-being of families. Youth justice participants also shared that they were only able to access critical supports, such as counselling, after being involved in the system and that their outcomes would have been improved if they had earlier access to these supports.

When a child is taken into care by a children’s aid society, we heard that there are opportunities to further strengthen how the Act guides decisions to prioritize placements, where appropriate, with kin or other individuals from a child or youth's community. Feedback also included suggestions to establish more standardized expectations relating to support for family reunification, and to better recognize the importance of meaningful and culturally appropriate supports for young people involved in the youth justice system.

In the feedback about the current timelines for permanency for children and youth in care, we received mixed opinions on their appropriateness. Some participants emphasized the importance of timely permanency planning, supporting it with attachment theory, and explained that it's essential for healthy child development and emotional well-being. However, others pointed out the need for the Act to incorporate more flexibility in these plans. They suggested allowing timeline extensions in cases where families are engaging with services aimed at reunification, rather than pushing for adoption. This flexibility, as noted by participants, would enhance support for families and help maintain important familial, cultural, and community connections.

Reducing unwarranted child protection reports

The CYFSA requires that everyone who has reasonable grounds to suspect that a child is in need of protection has a duty to immediately report their suspicion to a children’s aid society. This includes a child who is or may be suffering from abuse or neglect. For people who perform professional or official duties with children (for example, teachers, doctors, or police officers), failure to report abuse or neglect in the course of professional duties is an offence under the Act.

We heard that while the duty to report requirement is important, there are challenges with its application. Feedback raised that there may be a lack of clarity about what constitutes a need to report, and that a reporter’s decision-making is often driven by their concerns about liability of failing to report. It was noted that these challenges, along with conscious and unconscious biases of the reporter, can cause unwarranted overreporting – especially for Black and Indigenous families.

We heard a broad consensus that reducing unwarranted reports to child welfare would leave more time for child welfare staff to focus on families that require the involvement of children’s aid societies. To reduce unwarranted reports, participants noted that more clarity is required on reporting guidelines, as well as the opportunity to strengthen accountability for reporters (such as by requiring reporters to provide their names or stipulating penalties associated with knowingly making a false report). In contrast, we also heard that increased accountability measures may be problematic in a human trafficking context, for instance, when there is already a reluctance to report. Feedback noted that careful consideration of these opportunities is needed to ensure the ongoing safety of children. It was also suggested the Act could include requirements for reporters, especially those that are working professionals, to make reasonable efforts to connect families with support services in addition to making a report to a children’s aid society.

Participants asked for stronger distinctions between “unmet needs” versus “neglect” when children’s aid societies are considering whether to open a child protection case. It was suggested that the CYFSA should stipulate that poverty does not constitute grounds for child protection and that children should not be removed from their homes for socio-economic reasons.

Focus Area #5: Quality Services

Increasing the quality and consistency of child protection services

Participants raised several concerns related to the quality of care provided to children, youth and families in need of protection services. We heard that policies and procedures can differ among children’s aid societies, which can lead to inconsistencies in the experiences of children, youth and families receiving services. One example mentioned was that societies and families find it challenging to meet stipulated timeline requirements with safety planning.

In addition, participants raised concerns about the lack of clear guidance to support meaningful collaboration and shared responsibility between children’s aid societies and community-based agencies.

To improve the experience of children and families, participants suggested reducing unnecessary administrative requirements, including streamlining reporting requirements in the Act and its regulations and strengthening provisions for sharing information across sectors.

Feedback was received from children, youth and their families who have had negative interactions with frontline workers. For example, children and youth told us that workers did not always appear to be knowledgeable about available supports that would help them. Participant feedback highlighted that minimum qualifications and requirements for ongoing professional development for frontline workers, and limits on worker-to-client ratios, should be established to improve service standards and would result in better supports for families. At the same time, participants also cautioned that changes affecting frontline workers may exacerbate challenges related to the hiring and retention of workers, particularly in remote areas.

Continuing to enhance the quality of care provided in out-of-home care settings

Participants also noted that there continue to be challenges in the quality of care provided to children and youth living in out-of-home settings.

Overall, we heard that there is a desire to strengthen legislative requirements around culturally appropriate placement decisions to ensure they are informed by child and youth perspectives. Further, it was noted that service providers would like to see more rigorous safety planning standards, specifically relating to suicide prevention, and greater clarity in the development of care plans.

Participants also recommended that the ministry address disparities in the quality of care for children and youth with special needs, those living in settings operated by outside paid resources (organizations operating group and/or foster homes without a direct contractual relationship with the ministry but which are licensed to provide out-of-home care), and people living in rural or remote communities. We also heard a recommendation for greater clarity in the Act to define and stipulate requirements for treatment care settings, including the types of specialized care that children living in these settings should receive.

With respect to foster care, feedback highlighted the need to change provisions under the Act that guide the screening of foster parents (e.g., introducing requirements such as youth-led evaluations or annual screenings) and minimum standards to better support their capacity to provide high-quality care. We also heard that more check-ins with children who are in foster care settings could help prevent placement breakdowns. Young people in youth justice facilities shared that providers ought to be required to ask youth for their perspectives about the quality of care received and to include youth input when developing case management plans.

Some participants provided positive feedback about new requirements under the Quality Standards Framework and noted that they may meaningfully address a number of challenges. Many participants indicated, however, that more time is needed to evaluate whether additional steps are required to improve the quality of care in out-of-home settings.

Improving the quality of services when children and youth leave care

We heard that there are opportunities to strengthen the Act’s focus on supporting youth who are leaving care, for example, by requiring more coordinated access to services such as counselling, employment supports, housing and life skills. These suggestions complement Ontario’s Ready, Set, Go program, launched in April 2023. It was noted that this program will better support the transition to adulthood.

We heard that for children and youth who have been adopted through a children’s aid society, there is insufficient direction in the Act to ensure consistent and meaningful openness practices across or within children’s aid societies. Participants noted that openness in society adoptions is widely understood as a best practice and that openness arrangements can be a protective factor to support the well-being of adopted children by helping them to maintain connections to their community and culture. This was noted as being especially important for Black and Indigenous children.

Feedback on adoption also included requests for stronger rules under the Act to guide the provision of supports for birth and adoptive families. For private adoptions, this would include regulating the profession of birth parent counsellor to provide stronger protections for expectant parents, who can be highly vulnerable, and clarifying the different ways to complete an adoption under the Act. Feedback suggested that for children and youth adopted through a children’s aid society, there are ways to decrease the risk of adoption disruptions. These include enhancing the monitoring and support of adoption placements, as well as providing adoptive families with better access to detailed information about the child's needs before adoption. This would enable adoptive families to make more informed decisions regarding the support they will need to effectively care for the child.

Improving the response to forms of gender-based violence

We heard that there may be legislative opportunities to improve how the child protection system responds to and supports survivors of human trafficking, sexual exploitation, and exposure to intimate partner violence. Almost half of all substantiated investigations of child maltreatment in Ontario involve exposure to intimate partner violence. Participants raised concerns with existing policy directives and agreements that aim to increase collaboration between sectors and that these may not be adequate to achieve meaningful outcomes.

With respect to supports related to gender-based and intimate partner violence, we heard that there are opportunities to improve the ways that the Act and its regulations enable the child welfare system to respond to intimate partner violence and reduce harm. Participants shared that there is a need for children’s aid societies and workers to have a stronger mandate to act as advocates for survivors, including in court processes. Feedback also noted that the Act could clarify exposure to intimate partner violence as grounds for child protection, better protect survivors from being blamed for the actions of their abuser, and reconsider policies requiring children and survivors to maintain contact with perpetrators for the purpose of consent to services.

Feedback on child sex trafficking focused on increasing the ability of children’s aid societies to intervene and prevent situations from reaching a crisis point. For example, feedback suggested implementing more requirements related to training for frontline workers to increase recognition of trafficking for earlier reporting. We also received recommendations to improve regulations for relocating children and youth who are victims of child sex trafficking, with the goal of providing them with better access to services and support.

Focus Area #6: Accountability

The accountability of CYFSA-governed services was a key area of focus in many engagement sessions. Overall, participants identified significant concerns with the current oversight, governance and accountability of services provided under the CYFSA, especially those delivered by children’s aid societies and out-of-home care providers.

Increasing oversight of frontline workers

Feedback highlighted that children, youth and families’ experiences with frontline workers vary considerably. While some youth and families shared positive experiences, many others shared challenges they faced with their workers – these included inappropriate behaviours, breaches of privacy and confidentiality, as well as feelings that workers did not care or were not sufficiently knowledgeable to help.

Children and youth shared several suggestions for how the Act can increase oversight of frontline workers. These included requiring regular opportunities for children and youth to provide feedback on their workers, requiring routine worker reviews to identify potential improvements, and increasing requirements for supervision and additional consequences for violations of the Act. We also received feedback expressing concerns about insufficient oversight of workers, particularly those in frontline roles who are not registered social workers or affiliated with a professional regulatory college. Addressing these concerns would need to be balanced with other workforce considerations.

Improving the complaints process and listening to feedback from children, youth and families

We heard from children, youth and families that feedback mechanisms are inconsistent across service providers and that workers do not always create safe spaces for children and youth to speak up. Participants recommended enhancing the voices of youth and families by implementing mandatory requirements for children’s aid societies to actively seek and consider their feedback. This could be achieved through regular experience surveys, focus groups, or by increasing youth and family representation on Boards of Directors of children’s aid societies.

Children and youth also shared that the complaint process is too difficult, slow, and time-consuming. There was concern that young people do not have a safe and youth-friendly place to raise their issues about services and providers. Youth told us they often felt belittled and unheard throughout the complaint process and would like to have better access to allies and advocates who will listen and help in an age-appropriate way. In addition, we heard that youth may not want to complain because of the risk of unfair treatment following a complaint. Feedback indicated that simplifying the complaints process and improving guidelines for how service providers and the Ombudsman’s Office respond to complaints would improve the experiences of children and youth.

Improving accountability of Children’s Aid Societies

Feedback highlighted ongoing challenges with accountability, consistency of service delivery and compliance by children’s aid societies. We heard concerns that accountability agreements and reporting requirements may not provide sufficient ministry oversight of society operations, nor have sufficient impact on the experiences and outcomes of those who receive services.

Participants noted that there are currently multiple organizations involved in various aspects of children’s aid societies, including the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, the Office of the Chief Coroner, the Child and Family Services Review Board, the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario, the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies, the Association of Native Child and Family Services Agencies of Ontario, and the ministry. We heard that this complex network makes information sharing complicated, leads to significant duplication of work, and reduces the effectiveness of overall accountability. Participants noted that changes such as establishing a single lead organization for accountability in the legislation could reduce complexity and streamline reporting. Participants also shared that there is a need for more society accountability, which includes improving the strength and capacity of boards to provide more effective governance.

Concerns were raised about ongoing challenges with societies’ compliance with requirements under the Act. There was mention of inconsistency across societies in the collection of identity-based data and lack of compliance with rules on minimum communication with bands and FNIM communities. Suggestions made by participants include greater clarity and stricter enforcement of existing compliance requirements, alongside stronger consequences for societies that fail to adhere to these requirements. We heard of important and complex tensions in some areas such as the intersection of oversight and Indigenous-led service provision that require careful consideration.

Improving accountability of out-of-home care licensees

Part IX of the CYFSA and the regulations set out rules that govern out-of-home care licensees, but according to some participants, the provisions are challenging to interpret, track, and implement. We heard that some children and youth in out-of-home care settings did not feel that complaints were sufficiently investigated. Feedback noted a need for stronger oversight of licensed out-of-home care providers through more unannounced inspections and more clarity on standards for objective decision-making with respect to the granting of licences.

Data Collection, Performance Measurement and Personal Information

We heard significant feedback that highlighted data collection, performance measurement, and disclosure and protection of personal information. Part X of the CYFSA, which came into effect in 2020, modernized the privacy and data management guidelines under the CYFSA. Participants mentioned that Part X enables significant improvements to the data and privacy landscape in children and youth services, but also pointed to several gaps and opportunities to improve guidance to service providers. Although this area was not initially identified as a focus area of the review, we heard clearly that there are opportunities to continue to make progress.

Improving data collection and identity-based data collection

We heard that the collection of data and personal information is inconsistent across workers and service providers, and youth are not always clear on how their data might be used. Youth explained that their personal information is their story. It is intimate, private, and meaningful. Participants flagged that, currently, personal information is treated as a corporate record belonging to the organization.

We received feedback that enhancing data usage could improve service quality, with participants advocating for clearer guidelines on data collection and reporting requirements. Given the intimacy of personal information, youth advised that the ministry should be transparent about why their data is collected and how the data is used to improve service delivery. We heard that having stronger rules to guide the informed consent process would help to build trust with children and youth and increase their willingness to consent to the use of their personal data.

In addition, many sector partners mentioned that access to identity-based data enables them to address overrepresentation, provide culturally appropriate care, and ensure accountability. It was also recognized that children and youth may have intersecting identities (e.g., race, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation) and data collection should work toward capturing this intersectionality. Strengthening the guidelines for the collection of identity-based data, for example, by updating the identities listed and increasing consistency in the collection, would enhance the quality of data and allow for evidence-based decision-making.

Streamlining reporting and focusing on tracking, measuring and driving performance

Participants shared concerns that the current approach to performance management is not doing enough to improve accountability or quality outcomes of services. We heard a desire for more requirements that may create consistency in the collection and assessment of data relating to key performance indicators for the sector – including by Indigenous child welfare agencies. Monitoring the experiences and outcomes for children, youth and families receiving services under the Act would allow the ministry to assess the effectiveness of services. Feedback also suggested that the ministry ought to re-evaluate funding and accountability mechanisms to drive service providers toward important targets that would improve the quality of outcomes.

We heard that many would like to see mandatory public reporting of outcomes for children, youth and families who receive services under the Act. Feedback emphasized that reporting should be on an ongoing basis and suggested facilitating this through new mandatory requirements in the CYFSA.

Improving the access of children, youth and families to their personal information

Youth shared that they have difficulties accessing their personal information such as case files, adoption records and documents for immigration processes. They suggest that changes are needed to allow current and former youth in care to obtain their personal information more easily. A need was expressed for requirements that would enable a clearer and more streamlined process for youth to request and gain access to their information. We heard that changes to the rules governing the adoption disclosure regime should be considered to increase access to identifying information.

Access to information on identity and the ability to connect with community are especially important for Indigenous children, youth and families. We heard that requirements should ensure that Indigenous children and youth have full access to their information and records, even after being adopted.

Protecting the privacy of children and youth in, and formerly in, care

Participants expressed concerns that privacy protections that guide the storage, disclosure, use and destruction of personal information need to be improved. Youth shared that sometimes their privacy was not respected by frontline workers and foster parents and that there were instances, for example, where their care information was disclosed without their consent. They specifically noted that access to personal information should be limited and available only when they give their consent.

Some youth also noted that their personal information was used against them in a punitive way, making them distrustful of their care providers. Moreover, we heard that youth who applied for a Voluntary Youth Services Agreement, who were adopted, or who were formerly in care, may need additional protections under the Act.

Overall, youth are advocating for requirements that ensure a clearer process and greater accountability, such as proactive compliance audits. They also want stricter penalties for privacy violations, including mandatory reporting of serious breaches to the ministry.

However, service providers advised that it may be necessary at times to share information for purposes of coordinating quality services. They advocated for more guidance through the CYFSA on how personal information is managed, stored and shared in case, financial and document management systems.

Conclusion

This report reflects the thoughtful contributions of a broad range of participants on potential changes to the CYFSA. The advice we have received will be thoroughly reviewed, assessed and considered as future changes to child and family services legislation are explored.

The ministry will also continue to engage collaboratively across government, with Indigenous representatives, service providers, sector stakeholders, families and youth, as well as people with lived experiences, as we consider future changes to strengthen the legislation.

Moving forward, the ministry is committed to ensuring that the CYFSA continues to meet the needs of children, youth and families in Ontario and promotes the best interests and well-being of those receiving services under the Act.