CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD
BETWEEN:
JPS
Applicant
-and-
Catholic Children’s Aid Society Toronto
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Catherine Bickley
Indexed As: JPS v Catholic Children’s Aid Society Toronto (CYFSA s.120)
Introduction
1This is an Application filed with the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) under section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, SO 2017, c.14, Sched.1 (the “Act”).
2This decision explains why the Application is not eligible for review by the CFSRB.
background
3The Applicant is a former foster parent. On April 3, 2019, the Respondent made a decision verifying that the Applicant caused physical harm to a former foster child.
4In answer to Question 6 (Tell us why you are applying to the CFSRB), the Applicant checked the following items:
The Society did not give you a chance to be heard when you raised your concerns.
The Society did not give you a chance to be heard when decisions that affected your interests were made.
The Society refused to proceed with your complaint.
The Society did not follow its complaint review process or timelines.
5The Application requests the CFSRB quash the April 3, 2019 verification decision. During a July 6, 2020 case management teleconference, the Applicant confirmed that quashing of the verification decision is the remedy she is seeking in the CFSRB proceeding.
the law
6Section 120 of the Act provides that, if a person has “a complaint in respect of a service sought or received from a society [and the complaint] relates to a matter described in subsection (4), the person who sought or received the service may decide” to make a complaint to either the society or the CFSRB.
7Section 120(4) lists the matters which may be reviewed by the CFSRB:
Allegations that the society has refused to proceed with a complaint made by the complainant under section 119(1) as required under subsection 119(2).
Allegations that the society has failed to respond to the complainant’s complaint within the timeframe required by regulation.
Allegations that the society has failed to comply with the complaint r3view procedure or with any other procedural requirements under this Act relating to the review of complaints.
Allegations that the society has failed to comply with section 15(2).
Allegations that the society has failed to provide the complainant with reasons for a decision that affects the complainant’s interests.
8Section 15(2) states:
Service providers shall ensure that children and young persons and their parents have an opportunity to be heard and represented when decisions affecting their interests are made and to be heard when they have concerns about the services they are receiving.
9Section 120(7) of the Act sets out the CFSRB’s remedial authority:
- After reviewing the complaint, the Board may,
(a) order the society to proceed with the complaint made by the complainant in accordance with the complaint review procedure established by regulation;
(b) order the society to provide a response to the complainant within a period specified by the Board;
(c) order the society to comply with the complaint review procedure established by regulation or with any other requirements under this Act;
(d) order the society to provide written reasons for a decision to a complainant;
(e) dismiss the complaint; or
(f) make such other order as may be prescribed.
analysis
10It is unclear whether, as a foster parent, the Applicant has sought or received a service from the Respondent.
11The right to be heard is limited by section 15(2) to “children and young persons and their parents”. Thus, this right does not apply to the Applicant as a foster parent and cannot be the basis of an application to the CFSRB.
12The CFSRB has no jurisdiction to conduct a review of the substantive decisions of the Respondent. Rather, the rights under section 120 are procedural in nature. Specifically, the CFSRB lacks jurisdiction to make a finding as to whether the verification decision was correct or not.
13Finally, the remedy sought by the Applicant is not a remedy within the remedial authority of the CFSRB under section 120(7) of the Act.
14For these reasons, the Application is not eligible for review by the CFSRB.
order
15The Application is dismissed.
confidentiality order
16Pursuant to Rules 9.3 and 9.4 of the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure, parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any CFSRB documents or decisions or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application with anyone, including through the media or online. The CFSRB prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the CFSRB’s proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the CFSRB, as appropriate.
Dated at Toronto, July 08, 2020.
Catherine Bickley
Catherine Bickley
Vice-Chair