CM and WR v. Children’s Aid Society of Oxford County, 2026 CFSRB 45

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

CM and WR Applicants

-and-

Children’s Aid Society of Oxford County Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Karynn von Cramon Date: March 27, 2026 Citation: 2026 CFSRB 45 Indexed as: CM and WR v Children’s Aid Society of Oxford County (CYFSA s.120)

APPEARANCES

CM and WR, Applicants Self-represented

Children’s Aid Society of Oxford County, Respondent Self-represented

OVERVIEW

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, S.O. 2017, c.14, Sched.1 (the “Act”).

2On March 13, 2026, the CFSRB determined that the Applicants’ allegation that the Respondent has refused to proceed with a complaint made by the Applicants was eligible to proceed pursuant to section 120(4) of the Act, which states that the CFSRB may review an allegation that a society has refused to proceed with a complaint made by the complainant under subsection 119(1) as required under subsection 119(2).

3Rule 22.1 of the CFSRB Rules of Procedure provides that the CFSRB will either make its decision based on an application and response or decide to hold a hearing within twenty days of determining eligibility. I find that I have sufficient information before me to render a decision in this matter based on the application and response.

4The Applicants were being assessed as potential kinship caregivers for five children by the Respondent. The children are in the care of Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services (SMCYFS).

ISSUE

5The issue is whether the Respondent has refused to proceed with the Section 119(1) complaint made by the Applicant.

RESULT

6I find that the Respondent should not have refused to proceed with the section 119 complaint made by the Applicants, and I order the Respondent to notify the Applicants and establish an Internal Complaints Review Panel (ICRP) within 7 days of the date of this order. Additionally, the Respondent shall provide a date and time for meeting with the ICRP within 21 days of the date of this order.

ANALYSIS

The Applicants Received a Service

7The Respondent has explained to the Applicants that their complaint is not eligible for an ICRP because they did not seek or receive service from the Respondent. I disagree.

8The Applicants submit that they were contacted by SMCYFS regarding a kinship placement for five children on April 2, 2025, and that the Respondent conducted its first home study visit at their home on October 31, 2025.

9The Applicants submit that they were introduced to the children, two other siblings, and the children’s biological parents on October 18, 2025, and had access visits with the children on November 1, 2025, and January 8 and 9, 2026.

10The Applicants submit that they attended a planning meeting for the children with the Respondent and SMCYFS on November 5, 2025.

11The Applicants submitted an Affidavit that SMCYFS filed in their child protection proceeding, which stated that as of January 16, 2026, the Applicants’ home assessment had been completed and that they had been approved, with no child protection concerns being identified. The Applicants were subsequently advised by SMCYFS to buy beds for the children and to set up rooms for them. Weekend visits were scheduled for the children, including Jan 23 – 25, 2026 with the oldest child and Jan. 30 – Feb. 2, 2026, for all five children.

12Section 119(1) of the Act states that a person may make a complaint to a society relating to a service sought or received by that person from the society.

13Subsection 120(1) of the Act states that a person may complain about a service they sought or received from a society and that complaint may be made to either the society or the CFSRB, or both.

14For a complaint to be eligible for review by the CFSRB under section 120 of the Act, an Applicant must meet two threshold tests. First, an Applicant must demonstrate that they have sought or received a service, as defined under subsection 2(1) of the Act, from a children’s aid society or Indigenous child and family well-being agency. Once that is established, then the CFSRB must determine whether the Applicant’s complaint set out in their application relates to the service they sought or received.

15Section 2(1) of the Act defines “service” to include:

(a) a service for a chid with a developmental or physical disability or the child’s family,

(b) a mental health service for a child or the child’s family,

(c) a service related to residential care for a child,

(d) a service for a child who is or may be in need of protection or the child’s family,

(e) a service related to adoption for a child, the child’s family or others,

(f) counselling for a child or the child’s family,

(g) a service for a child or the child’s family that is in the nature of support or prevention and that is provided in the community,

(h) a service or program for or on behalf of a young person for the purposes of the Youth Criminal Justice Act (Canada) or the Provincial Offences Act, or

(i) a prescribed service. (This refers to services prescribed within the Regulations to the Act. No other services have been prescribed within the Regulations).

16The CFSRB has found that an individual being investigated by a children’s aid society is in receipt of a service: SD v Children’s Aid Society of Toronto (CYFSA s.120), 2023 CFSRB 6. In that case, the CFSRB found that the services at issue are set out in the Child Protection Standards, which are prescribed by O. Reg. 156/8 and that these services, therefore, fall within the definition of a “prescribed service” in section 2(1)(i) of the Act.

17Similarly, I am satisfied that a kinship assessment is a service in keeping with section 2(1)d of the Act. The services at issue are set out under section 40 of O. Reg. 156/18 which applies if a society proposes or is apprised of a plan to place a child with a relative of the child or a member of the child’s extended family or community before placement. The regulation prescribes the services required to complete a kinship assessment, including an assessment of the home environment and the completion of police records checks and child protection records checks. I am satisfied that these services fall within the definition of a “prescribed service” in section 2(1)(d) of the Act.

The Respondent Did Not Address the Applicants’ Complaint

18The Respondent submits that prior to the completion and formalization of the initial assessment several concerns emerged which required further consideration by the Respondent. The Respondent submits that these concerns were shared with the Applicants during a meeting on February 6, 2026. I note that the Applicants and SMCYFS have cited this date as February 4, 2026.

19The Applicants filed a letter dated February 6, 2026, from the Respondent to the Applicants, which states, “the decision has been made by the Society to not approve your kinship assessment and recommend that placement of the children not proceed.”

20Both parties submit that on February 16, 2026, the Applicants provided the Respondent with a Formal Complaint to a Society’s Internal Complaints Review Panel (ICRP) form, which the Applicants attached to their application. That complaint details the history of the Applicants’ involvement with the Respondent and SMCYFS and states that they felt that they had been misunderstood at the meeting which occurred on February 4, 2026, which led to the rejection of them as kinship care providers. The Applicants state in their complaint that they would like their kinship assessment to be reviewed and to be reinstated as kinship caregivers for the children.

21The Applicants submitted a letter dated February 20, 2026, from the Respondent to the Applicant CM which states, “On February 16, 2026, the (Respondent) received a Formal Complaint to a Society’s Internal Complaints Review Panel (ICRP) form. The Society has determined that your complaint is not eligible for review pursuant to Section 119 of (the Act) as you did not seek or receive a service from the Society. Although the matter is not eligible for the ICRP process, we appreciate you taking the time to bring your concerns forward. We would welcome the opportunity to meet with you to better understand these concerns and discuss how we may be able to address them.”

22I have found that the Applicants both sought and received a service from the Respondent, specifically the service of a kinship assessment. Their complaint directly relates to that service. Therefore, the Respondent was obliged to deal with the complaint in accordance with the complaint review procedure established by regulation as set out at section 119(2) of the Act.

23O. Reg. 156/18 provides that if the complaint is eligible for review the society shall establish an ICRP and shall notify the complainant in writing, providing a date and time for meeting with the ICRP.

ORDER

24The Respondent shall notify the Applicants and establish an ICRP within 7 days of the date of this order and shall provide a date and time for meeting with the ICRP within 21 days of the date of this order.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

25Pursuant 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.